When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World(RUH ROH!)

[OKTexas]

Last line of the abstract:

Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

What do you fail to understand that there are no research grants for people with opposing views. You only need to follow the money. AWG is bought and paid for.

No grants for people with opposing views? Please. If you're going to debate the subject, try do it intelligently and not by insulting us with your silly lies.

How could I possibly argue with all those links you provided showing federal funding for people who oppose AWG.
There might be some private money but it pales in comparison to the billions in tax payer money spent by you regressives, even then you have to manipulate the data they collect to maintain the scam. Like I said, just follow the money.

 

[bripat9643]

Last line of the abstract:

Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

What do you fail to understand that there are no research grants for people with opposing views. You only need to follow the money. AWG is bought and paid for.

No grants for people with opposing views? Please. If you're going to debate the subject, try do it intelligently and not by insulting us with your silly lies.

Can you show some evidence of government grants to researchers who are skeptical of AGW?

 

[bripat9643]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Breitbart is far more credible than any of the sources you cite.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Smart people always knew this was a con. Anyone who parrots the "97%" claim only proves that he's a lying douche bag.

When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World - Breitbart

But the “97 percent of scientists believe in global warming” mantra became gospel on May 16, 2013, when President Obama tweeted “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.”

What the president was referring to was a 2013 paper by the University of Queensland’s John Cook. In his research, Cook studied 11,994 papers published between 1991 and 2011 that mentioned the search words “global warming” and “global climate change.”

Guess what Cook actually found? Only 32.6 percent of the papers endorsed the view of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. But of that group, 97 percent said that “recent warming is mostly man-made.”​

I saw this about a year ago. But not from Breitbart.

 

[rightwinger]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Breitbart is far more credible than any of the sources you cite.

Who?

The Onion?

 

[bripat9643]

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Breitbart is far more credible than any of the sources you cite.

Who?

The Onion?

The New York Times, for one.

 

[rightwinger]

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Breitbart is far more credible than any of the sources you cite.

Who?

The Onion?

The New York Times, for one.

Funny you would select the NYTimes

Most honored and respected publication in America......But, Hey
You got Breitbart don't ya?