A Concensus Eroding

In the cannon of the Church of Global Warming, Al Gore made some very bold claims. One of them was a claim that no honorable scientist disagrees with Global Warming. Well, to quote Glen Beck on this subject, "Warning: You are about to meet people who are not really real!"

In Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth, he quoted history professor Naomi Oreskes, who had done a survey of scientific papers from 1993 - 2004, and had found no disagreement with Anthropomorphic Global Warming.

Well, that has changed. According to the DailyTech, medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte has done an examination of papers ranging from 2004-February of 2007, and submitted the results to the journal Energy and Environment, with results that frankly, do not surprise me.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."

48% neither accept nor reject the consensus. That is startling, and shoves the claim right down the Prior's throat. However, it gets even better.

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

Only ONE claimed that there would be any kind of catastrophic climate change. Guess that guy is probably an Arch Prior in the Church of Global Warming.