Quote:
Originally Posted by DocIllinois
A team of experts (or anyone) promoting a position that runs counter to a scientific consensus doesn't reverse that consensus, no matter how experienced and authoritative those few individuals are.
The review result of 11,944 climate abstracts published over a 20 year time span in peer reviewed scientific literature:
Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature
"Through analysis of climate-related papers published from 1991 to 2011, this study provides the most comprehensive analysis of its kind to date in order to quantify and evaluate the level and evolution of consensus over the last two decades."
"The number of papers rejecting AGW is a miniscule proportion of the published research, with the percentage slightly decreasing over time. Among papers expressing a position on AGW, an overwhelming percentage (97.2% based on self-ratings, 97.1% based on abstract ratings) endorses the scientific consensus on AGW."
http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10...8/2/024024/pdf
The issue is currently well settled. This should be the last climate change thread, indeed, IMO. |
The reports came in raving about the success of autologous stem cell transplants for breast cancer - everyone wanted to jump on the band wagon and report their success. That is, until we ,as a medical community, let the data mature and critically looked at it....
__________________
"The dignity of man is not shattered in a single blow, but slowly softened, bent, and eventually neutered. Men are seldom forced to act, but are constantly restrained from acting. Such power does not destroy outright, but prevents genuine existence. It does not tyrannize immediately, but it dampens, weakens, and ultimately suffocates, until the entire population is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid, uninspired animals, of which the government is shepherd." - Alexis de Tocqueville
|