Total Pageviews

Thursday, March 14, 2019

Fake Consensus Survey (A) -- Oreskes 2004

Oreskes, 2004

A 2004 essay for the journal Science 
was written by science historian 
Naomi Oreskes, who is not a scientist.

Oreskes reported 
examining abstracts 
from 928 scientific papers, 
listed in the Institute for 
Scientific Information database,
published in scientific journals 
from 1993 and 2003, 
using the key search words 
“global climate change.” 

She concluded 75% 
of the abstracts 
either implicitly or explicitly 
supported IPCC’s view 
that human activities
were responsible for 
most of the observed warming 
over the previous 50 years, 
while NO ONE dissented.

It is now widely agreed 
Oreskes did not distinguish 
between articles that assumed 
some human impact on climate, 
however small, and articles that 
supported IPCC’s specific claim 
that human emissions are 
responsible for most of the 
global warming observed 
during the past 50 years. 

Oreskes’ also deliberately overlooked 
hundreds of articles by prominent 
global warming skeptics, including 
John Christy, Sherwood Idso, 
Richard Lindzen, and Patrick Michaels. 

Oreskes’ methodology
assumed a nonscientist like her 
could determine the findings 
of scientific research 
by quickly reading abstracts 
of the published papers. 

Even trained climate scientists 
are unable to do that,
because abstracts routinely 
do not accurately reflect 
their articles’ actual findings. 

Abstracts routinely overstate 
the actual research findings, 
and contain claims 
that are irrelevant to 
the underlying research. 

Most articles simply 
assume IPCC claims 
are true, and then 
go on to address 
a different topic, 
such as correlations 
between the temperature 
and outbreaks of influenza. 

Oreskes’ use of
the search term 
“global climate change” 
instead of “climate change,” 
resulted in her finding 
fewer than one-thirteenth 
of the estimated total count 
of scientific papers 
on "climate change" 
over the stated period. 

Medical researcher 
Klaus-Martin Schulte 
used the same database 
and search terms as Oreskes, 
to examine papers published 
from 2004 to February 2007 
and found fewer than half 
endorsed the “IPCC consensus”, 
and only 7% did so explicitly.