Massive, shameless climate fraud

From “Where Did ’97 Percent’ Global Warming Consensus Figure Come From?” in the Daily Caller:

“Ninety-seven percent of scientists, including, by the way, some who originally disputed the data, have now put that to rest,” President Obama said last year announcing his climate plan. “They’ve acknowledged the planet is warming and human activity is contributing to it.”

But Cook’s 97 percent consensus claim was rebutted in subsequent analyses of his study. A paper by five leading climatologists published in the Journal Science and Education last year found that Cook’s study misrepresented the views of most consensus scientists.

The definition Cook used to get his consensus was weak, the climatologists said. Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate studies examined by Cook explicitly stated that mankind caused most of the warming since 1950 — meaning the actual consensus is 0.3 percent.

“It is astonishing that any journal could have published a paper claiming a 97% climate consensus when on the authors’ own analysis the true consensus was well below 1%,” said Dr. David Legates, a geology professor at the University of Delaware and the study’s lead author.

Read the rest.

About Jacques Delacroix

I write short stories, current events comments, and sociopolitical essays, mostly in English, some in French. There are other people with the same first name and same last name on the Internet. I am the one who put up on Amazon in 2014: "I Used to Be French: an Immature Autobiography" and also: "Les pumas de grande-banlieue." To my knowledge, I am the only Jacques Delacroix with American and English scholarly publications. In a previous life, I was a teacher and a scholar in Organizational Theory and in the Sociology of Economic Development. (Go ahead, Google me!) I live in the People’s Green Socialist Republic of Santa Cruz, California.
This entry was posted in Cultural Studies, Facts Matter and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Massive, shameless climate fraud

  1. Jim N says:

    These stories would be humorous were it not for the disastrously destructive destination these guys have in mind for us. Any objective analysis of their modi operandi quickly belies any claim of scientific objectivity: a true scientist observes, then creates a hypothesis to explain the observation, then attempts to DISprove that hypothesis. These guys have it totally backwards. In addition, the Church of Climatology actively pursues all heretics and infidels with a vengeance usually reserved for the meanest and most base of creatures. I fear for the future of civilization (such as it is) …
    I’m sure you’re aware of all of these, but here are a few of my favorite resources:

    regards, Jim

  2. Bruce says:

    I heard on the news today that Governor Jerry Brown is blaming the recent fires in Southern California on…you guessed it…climate change. He went on to say that California was on the leading edge of coming to grips with the phenomenon, and added that it was going to be very expensive to keep up with it going forward. Two things here. First, of course California has taken the lead, it’s the most progressive state in the country. Second, the only way to tackle a crisis is through government intervention, even though it’s costly. It’s just the big government blueprint template for whatever the crisis might be. Real or manufactured. It’s all about government control. IF there was in fact something to man made climate change of any magnitude due to greenhouse gases, etc., then it would be coming out of China. What sanctions have we put on China to clean up their act? None to my knowledge. I reckon it only qualifies as being a “global” concern when the United States is the bad guy.

  3. Jim. Thanks for the sources. Bruce: The consolation is that the fraud is losing traction in public opinion.

  4. Pingback: Climate Change and Flat Earthers | FACTS MATTER

  5. Pingback: Climate Change and Flat Earthers | Notes On Liberty

  6. Pingback: Scholarly Conspiracies, Scholarly Corruption and Global Warming: Part One | FACTS MATTER

  7. Pingback: Scholarly Conspiracies, Scholarly Corruption and Global Warming: Part One | Notes On Liberty

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s