![]() | ||
2011-12-11 03:11:10 | Is there a case against human-caused global warming in the peer-reviewed literature. More on Part 3. | |
Jim Powell jpowell@usc.edu 207.154.96.100 |
This post has been put to one side for various reasons but I believe we are ready to publish it after your suggestions. (We are still working on a couple of links to arguments.)
Is there a case against human-caused global warming in the peer-reviewed literature? Part 3 Part 1 in this series introduced a database of global warming skeptics and the number of peer-reviewed papers each has published. Part 2 examined the “takeaways” from these papers. To generate these lists we identified some 120 global warming skeptics, searched the Web of Science for their peer-reviewed papers, then read the abstracts and sometimes the entire paper to flag those that denied or attempted to cast substantial doubt on human-caused global warming. We have now sorted the papers by argument and by year. The list sorted by argument has links to the rebuttals, allowing these conclusions:
| |
2011-12-12 01:20:43 | ||
Jim Powell jpowell@usc.edu 207.154.96.100 |
Talking off-line with Dana, we agreed that I should add a final summary of the main takeaways from the three posts. Here is a new version with that added. ************************ Is there a case against human-caused global warming in the peer-reviewed literature? Part 3 Part 1 in this series introduced a database of global warming skeptics and the number of peer-reviewed papers each has published. Part 2 examined the “takeaways” from these papers. To generate these lists we identified some 120 global warming skeptics, searched the Web of Science for their peer-reviewed papers, then read the abstracts and sometimes the entire paper to flag those that denied or attempted to cast substantial doubt on human-caused global warming. We have now sorted the papers by argument and by year. The list sorted by argument has links to the rebuttals, allowing these conclusions:
To reiterate the principal conclusions of this series:
The answer to the question of this series is resounding no: there is no case against human-caused global warming in the peer-reviewed literature. | |
2011-12-12 06:07:38 | ||
Rob Painting Rob paintingskeri@vodafone.co... 118.92.83.229 |
Nice summary and work! Thumbs up here. | |
2011-12-14 03:22:29 | ||
Jim Powell jpowell@usc.edu 207.154.96.100 |
I have made a couple of edits below, the main one being to add a sentence about how this differs from Naomi Oreskes's work:
Is there a case against human-caused global warming in the peer-reviewed literature? Part 3 Part 1 in this series introduced a database of global warming skeptics and the number of peer-reviewed papers each has published. Part 2 examined the “takeaways” from these papers. To generate these lists we identified some 120 global warming skeptics, searched the Web of Science for their peer-reviewed papers, then read the abstracts and sometimes the entire paper to flag those that denied or attempted to cast substantial doubt on human-caused global warming. (This study differs from the one by Oreskes (2004) who did not count papers that "cast substantial doubt.") We have now sorted the papers by argument and by year. The list sorted by argument has links to the rebuttals, allowing these conclusions:
To reiterate the principal conclusions of this series:
The answer to the question of this series is resounding no: there is no case against human-caused global warming in the peer-reviewed literature. |