The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) recently published a flashy headline that reads, '900+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism Of "Man-Made" Global Warming (AGW) Alarm' . The article links to a blog post on Populartechnology.net  listing more than 900 papers which, according to the GWPF, refute "concern relating to a negative environmental or socio-economic effect of AGW, usually exaggerated as catastrophic."
The "900+ papers" list is supposed to somehow prove that a score of scientists reject the scientific consensus on climate change. One might be persuaded by the big numbers. We're not.
Oh, where to begin? First, a note of caution about the Global Warming Policy Foundation . It's a UK group opposing climate change action. Sourcewatch 's digging reveals links to right-wing libertarian climate change deniers. According to the UK Charity Commission , GWPF's mandate is to "advance the public understanding of global warming and of its possible consequences, and also of the measures taken or proposed to be taken in response to it". Actually, they're a heck of a lot more interested in sowing seeds of doubt than in disseminating knowledge. The GWPF's director is the Heartland Institute 's* Benny Peiser , climate change denier extraordinaire. Other notable members include Canada's Ross McKitrick  of the Fraser Institute .
Curiously, the GWPF was launched just as the Climategate  emails were released. An op-ed by Chairman Nigel Lawson  announced the GWPF, predicted the (hopeful) failure of the Copenhagen climate talks, and called for an inquiry  into the content of the stolen emails.
Using a screen-scraping process to analyze the data on the "900+" list, the folks over at Carbon Brief  dug up some pretty incriminating information. Turns out nine of the ten most cited authors on the list (representing 186 of the 938 papers) have links to ExonMobil-funded organizations. The tenth has co-authored several papers with Exxon-funded contributors. Anyone familiar with these kinds of lists ("More than 500 scientists  dispute global warming" or "more Than 1000  International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims") knows that if you've seen one, you've seen them all. Many familiar climate skeptic names appear over and over again.
Dr. Sherwood B Idso is the most cited author on the list, having authored or co-authored 67 of the papers. Idso is president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change , a think tank funded by ExxonMobil  and the Sarah Scaife Foundation .
When you really crunch the numbers, all you really find is a small echochamber of the same individuals who pop up on every denier list and petition around. James W. Prall at the University of Toronto has put together a fantastic analysis of the names that appear on these lists , and shows how most of them share funding ties to the oil industry.
Now a note on the most cited journals on this list. Articles from trade journal Energy and Environment  are cited 137 times on the list. Energy and Environment is edited by Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen  and Benny Peiser . Numerous known climate skeptics sit on the editorial staff including Sallie Baliunas , Patrick Michaels, Ross McKitrick, and Richard Lindzen . The journal has become a go-to resource for policymakers and politicians who are skeptical of the scientific consensus of climate change.
Michael Ashley of the University of New South Wales has described it as “the climate sceptic’s journal of choice” . The Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge is considered a key resource for establishing the credentials and influence of key academic journals. It does not list Energy and Environment.
A further 24 papers come from the journal Climate Research which is perhaps best known for publishing a 2003 paper by Sallie Baliunas and Willy Soon that received funding from the American Petroleum Institute . In response to the paper’s publication, the editor in chief, Hans Von Storch, and five of ten members of the editorial board, resigned in protest.
Let's contrast this "900+ list" with the real facts. Expert Credibility in Climate Change , which appeared in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, examines over 2,400 climate scientists and authors who have signed public statements on climate change. Their research says that 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field believe that global warming is happening, and that we must respond to it.
A note to deniers: if you keep publishing these lists, we'll keep debunking them . Long lists might look convincing, but they're no substitute for research that is free of fossil fuel industry bias and is taken seriously by the scientific community.
*Updated: Peiser is listed as one of the global warming 'experts' by the Heartland Institute, but does not work there.
Image Credit: Prospect Magazine