The invented political notion that 99% of climate scientists believe humans have caused all or most recent global warming has been dealt another significant blow. A group of Israeli scientists has examined the widely-publicised claim by the climate activist Mark Lynas that there is a 99% ‘consensus’ that humans cause most warming. Led by Yonatan Dubi, Professor of Chemistry and Physics at Ben Gurion University, the scientists found that massive flaws and biases riddled the Lynas work, implying the conclusions of the study do not follow from the data.
This work matters. The claims of a 99% consensus, along with an earlier 97% figure, are widely used in political and media circles to shut down debate over anthropogenic global warming (AGW). Sceptical scientists – even those as distinguished as last year’s Nobel Physics Prize winner Dr. John Clauser – can be dismissed as cranks and deniers. Of course consensus is not proof, which is notably lacking in the model-driven climate science field. However the Israeli authors observe a consensus claim is “influential in bolstering the reception of a particular thesis within the broader public sphere”. This leads to “less quantifiable statements”, such as humanity is facing an imminent climate crisis, and is followed by global calls for action. Not to put too fine a point on it, the collectivist Net Zero project relies on a fake scientific consensus that crumbles when exposed to the most basic scrutiny.
The Lynas et al. paper, which examined the ‘abstracts’ of 3,000 papers, is riddled with errors. It assumes that all papers taking ‘no position’ on AGW are in support of the hypothesis. The Israeli authors note that sceptical scientists tend not to emphasise scepticism in the opening abstract as work not supporting the political narrative on climate is now almost impossible to get published in the major science journals. Careful analysis of how sceptical papers diplomatically “fit the consensus” suggests the actual number of scientists agreeing with AGW may be on the “low side”, conclude the examining authors.
The dictionary definition of consensus is a “general agreement” or “the judgement arrived at by most of those concerned”. The authors are clear in their judgement: “No claim for consensus can be made from the data presented in Lynas et al.”
This is not the first time such outlandish ‘consensus’ claims have been critically examined. In 2013, John Cook asserted that 97% of 11,944 peer-reviewed science papers explicitly endorsed the opinion that humans had caused the majority of the warming over the last 150 years. But, 7,930 of those papers took no position on anthropogenic change and were excluded from the 97% claim. It was subsequently revealed that only about 0.5% of the papers explicitly stated that recent warming was mostly human caused.
At the time, a former IPCC author Professor Richard Tol said that Cook’s nonsense paper showed the climate community still had a long way to go in weeding out bad research and bad behaviour. For their part, the Israeli scientists note that their criticisms also apply in general to earlier consensus studies based on abstract scanning, and it is to be regretted that they were “not taken into consideration” by Lynas et al. “It is thus crucially important to understand the limitations of, and the good practices required of, these types of consensus studies”. The matter is said to be too important to be left “blurry and subjective”.
These days, Mark Lynas is the Communication Strategist and Climate Lead for the Alliance of Science, a non-profit operation linked to Cornell University. Its primary source of funding is said to be the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In the past, his career has taken a number of colourful turns. He first drew attention to himself in 2001 when he threw a cream pie into the face of the sceptical climate economist Bjorn Lomborg. He was behind the PR stunt in 2009 when the Government of the Maldives met under water to raise fears about rising sea levels. Happily this is not a problem for the Maldives, since overall the islands have grown in recent years. In 2007 he wrote an article in the Guardian reporting on the possibility of global warming producing fuel air bombs caused by oceanic methane eruptions. These would be equivalent to 10,000 times the world’s stockpile of nuclear weapons.
Always the activist and politician, Lynas has also entered the recent debate around the deaths caused by onshore wind turbines of millions of bats and large numbers of raptors such as eagles. As the Policy Director of Audubon California, he said we needed renewable energy, and eagle deaths should not be “used to push against clean energy”.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Scapegoat for the corrupt and incompetent NHS…
It’ll be us tax payers paying for he huge compensation when she’s released…
I thought you were leaving DS?
That was posted before the multi parrotting of the bs narrative.
So stfu..
There’s absolutely nothing on this site that I can’t find on msm.. It’s nothing but pretence.. Day after day, week after week, year after year of nothing but parrotting of the forced narrative by the same old people, saying nothing new, all while the likes of you think you’re being a Sceptic…… Clueless
“So stfu.”
Your rudeness amply displays the thugish level at which you seek to engage with the members of this site but I can assure you it is not considered acceptable by the vast majority.
“There’s absolutely nothing on this site that I can’t find on msm.. It’s nothing but pretence.”
Which naturally begs the question, ‘why are you here?’
If you can find the same information in the Main Stream Media as DS provides then surely your shekels would be better spent in a local town centre boozer where perhaps opinions might not be so nuanced as are found here. That is not meant to wish you good riddance as I am sure DS Editorial welcome contributions from whatever sources, no matter how humble, but surely some self reflection is warranted, no?
The Daily Sceptic has developed over the four years I have been a member / subscriber and I believe it is a site which supports lively, informed, opinionated but always well mannered discussions. We do not all share the same opinions, fortunately but surely in these frankly dark and dangerous times the ability to talk freely but politely is to be welcomed and supported.
At least you have provided a degree of low level comedy via your postings but I really do think you should be looking elsewhere for people with whom you can vociferate. There must be outlets available somewhere.
Toodle pip.
Epic.
Evidently the kind of person whose picnic is totally devoid of sandwiches.
It’s the fact he’s literally spent money to come on a site he’s previously ( in different guises ) and continuously moans about, saying “I’m done” then just comes back with a different name time and again…What rational person goes on like that?
Thanks Mogs.
She’s as guilty as hell.
The transcripts I have read indicate that Ms Letby is wholly innocent but there are two or three doctors who appear to have been negligent and that’s a generous assessment.
And you know this how?
Her guilt was shown by the fact that she was always on duty when the babies died, except when she wasn’t… something a little inconsistent there.
Statistical rounding error…
Yes didn’t Norman Fenton carry out some analysis about various doctors and nurses attending the ward and basically showed anyone could have been responsible? Looks like a cover up to me of NHS incompetence.
The modelling shows that this could never happen – so that proves it.
(whatever it is)
Experts. Don’t you just love them. Poor Sally Clark all over again perhaps.
The NHS seem certain she’s guilty though –
https://www.england.nhs.uk/2023/08/commenting-on-the-verdict-in-the-lucy-letby-trial/
Ruth May needs to keep her trap shut.
The NHS are still pushing the bloody C1984 “vaccines.” So far I have received two text messages “inviting” me and a further email.
Two days ago I had to attend A & E. The tannoy is still pumping out messages telling people to wear masks, socially distance and wash hands – unbelievable given the damages the first two have caused.
One thing’s for sure. It’s quite certain that particularly with their jab rhetoric the NHS has caused and will continue to cause the death of thousands more than Lucy Letby ever has.