|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
Oreskes responds to Schulte
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Issue
|
| Contributor | ArmyDem |
| Last Edited | ArmyDem Sep 01, 2007 10:59am |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Blog Entry |
| News Date | Friday, August 31, 2007 04:00:00 PM UTC0:0 |
| Description | Category: Earth and Planetary Sciences • Politics
Posted on: August 31, 2007 1:50 PM, by John Lynch
Many readers will no doubt know the 2004 paper in Science by historian of science Naomi Oreskes, a paper which discussed the consensus position regarding anthropogenic climate change. Predictably, the paper received much vitriol from the climate contrarians and denialists. Now, a medical research (Klaus-Martin Schulte, who appears to be a consultant in endocrine surgery) has claimed that Oreske’s paper is not only outdated but also wrong. This claim has been extensively crowed over not only by Inhofe’s EPW Press Blog but by other Right wing sites and, indeed, our own beloved Uncommon Descent.
Naomi kindly shared with me her response to Schulte’s work and below the fold I provide her reply in full.
Reply to EPW Blog: New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears:
Naomi Oreskes, University of California, San Diego
1) The Schulte piece is being published in Energy and Environment, a known contrarian journal. It was posted on the minority blog of the Senate Environment and Public Works committee, whose leader thinks that global warming is a "hoax." It was circulated on the internet by Marc Morano, a long-standing contrarian and former reporter and producer for the Rush Limbaugh Show, and who was involved in the "swift boat" campaign against John Kerry.
2) The Schulte piece misrepresents the research question we posed. It was, "How many papers published in referred journals disagree with the statement, "...most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations"? This statement came from the IPCC (2001) and was reiterated explicitly by the 2001 NAS report, so we wanted to know how many papers diverged from that consensus position. The answer was none. The Schulte claim does not refutes that.
[Continued...] |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
