Has several blog posts on Consensus on Climate Science and is shocked by the obvious bias lack of proper control in the Cook et. al 97% paper. Apparently he is just waking up to the shoddy statistics, ethics, and conflicts of interest in the main stream climate science. But we would never use human raters who have an obvious bias with respect to the subject of their ratings, who desire a specific outcome for the study, and who would be able to deliver that outcome via their ratings. Thats completely nuts. Its so egregious that I dont think it even occurs to us as something to look out for. It never happens. At least Ive never heard of it happening. I guess he has never heard of Michael Mann and YAM061, creative use of multi-component Analysis to stack the deck. Or of James Hansen who warns the world of Global warming, makes half million a year giving speeches, while running GISS and adjusting the historical temperature records, cooling the past and warming the present. I bet he cannot believe such conflicts of interest and shoddy science go on so long that he isnt tuned to receive the signal. But he is ready.
Posted on: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 16:50:52 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015