Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Hakan
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conten...306/5702/1686/
That hypothesis was tested by analyzing 928 abstracts, published in refereed scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and listed in the ISI database with the keywords "climate change" ( 9).
The 928 papers were divided into six categories: explicit endorsement of the consensus position, evaluation of impacts, mitigation proposals, methods, paleoclimate analysis, and rejection of the consensus position. Of all the papers, 75% fell into the first three categories, either explicitly or implicitly accepting the consensus view; 25% dealt with methods or paleoclimate, taking no position on current anthropogenic climate change. Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.
|
Imagine that.
I think this situation calls for an application of Ockham's Razor. What's likelier: that the scientific community at large has been duped into believing a fairy tale about global warming, or that the much smaller group of fringe scientists who believe otherwise (yet oddly don't seem to publish their research very often) has an axe to grind.