Why Don’t the Contrarians Have Studies – Reaffirming that Climate Change is Bunk – Repeatedly Published in Academic Journals?

By June 21, 2010 February 21st, 2013 Deniers and Delayers

A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science (here) says that, overwhelmingly, contrarians scientists are underwhelming qualified to be influencing anyone on climate change issues. But to give them credit, they do have their flagship: 30,000 scientists says that climate change is bunk: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. http://www.oism.org/ They are more embarrassing than the misspellings on this website. See for yourself. Their website seems to have one link to a scientific work, a few links to climate non-science, a link to homeschool curricula, one to children’s books, one to spiritual music and six links to Civil Defense and Nuclear attack survival.  This is the Institute and three of the seven faculty, one of whom listed is dead. Don’t get me wrong. I am not knocking anything these folks Why Don’t the Contrarians Have Studies – Reaffirming that Climate Change is Bunk – Repeatedly Published in Academic Journals?do. I do find it exceedingly difficult to understand how their work can be used as a fundamental part of the contrarian denial platform.

The Anderegg study of "…1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field surveyed here support the tenets of ACC (anthropogenic climate change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and  the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers."  The author states "…the bulk of (skeptical) researchers on the most prominent multisignatory statements about climate change have not published extensively in the peer-reviewed climate literature."

Anderegg et. al., Expert credibility in climate change, PNAS June 2010