Brian Schatz is an embarrassment

Senator Brian Schatz is such an embarrassment, a tragedy really, to our state. He is a pawn of the entrenched climate fraud. Once again he quotes the 97% consensus number. But, scientists whose abstracts were used in the consensus study have refuted the study, Richard Tol for example. Professional statisticians long ago refuted the 97% number. And then there is the problem that only high school level science is necessary to understand that theory of human-caused global warming is a failed hypothesis under the rules of science. There are no experiments in the real world that support the hypothesis, and all of the hypothetical climate models fail to produce correct answers. But there is abundant repeatable evidence against the hypothesis. Yet here is our Senator, representing Hawaii in Congress and to the world, yet again repeating lies and offering no science to support his statements. Schatz is a tragedy for the state of Hawaii.
Schatz just wants to be invited to next week’s conference of the climate alarmists.
Dr. Richard Tol says, “Cook’s 97% nonsensus paper shows that the climate community still has a long way to go in weeding out bad research and bad behaviour. If you want to believe that climate researchers are incompetent, biased and secretive, Cook’s paper is an excellent case in point.”  http://richardtol.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/now-almost-two-years-old-john-cooks-97.html?view=classic
Here is Richard Tol refuting the 97% in the UK’s Guardian, in 2014:
And here is our tragedy of a Senator quoting 97% consensus in 2018:
97 Articles Refuting The “97% Consensus”

The 97% “consensus” study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogosphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook’s study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have publicly spoken out against it,

“The ‘97% consensus’ article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country [UK] that the energy minister should cite it.”

Mike Hulme, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of East Anglia (UEA)

The following is a list of 97 articles that refute Cook’s (poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed) 97% “consensus” study. The fact that anyone continues to bring up such soundly debunked nonsense like Cook’s study is an embarrassment to science.

Summary: Cook et al. (2013) attempted to categorize 11,944 abstracts of papers (not entire papers) to their level of endorsement of AGW and found 7930 (66%) held no position on AGW. While only 65 papers (0.5%) explicitly endorsed and quantified AGW as +50% (Humans are the primary cause). Their methodology was so fatally flawed that they falsely classified skeptic papers as endorsing AGW, apparently believing to know more about the papers than their authors. Cook et al.’s author self-ratings simply confirmed the worthlessness of their methodology, as they were not representative of the sample since only 4% of the authors (1189 of 29,083) rated their own papers and of these 63% disagreed with their abstract ratings.

” ..Increasing the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from 0.03 per cent to 0.04 per cent has not caused and is not causing catastrophic runaway global warming. Dishonest references to “97 per cent of scientists” equate a mild warming influence, which most scientists agree with and more importantly can demonstrate, with a catastrophic warming influence – which most don’t agree with and none can demonstrate.” ~ Alex Epstein, author of the Moral Case For Fossil Fuels.
 
“That’s it. If you accept the validity of that statement — and how can you not: it is unimpeachably accurate and verifiable — then it follows that the $1.5 trillion global warming industry represents the most grotesque misuse of manpower and scarce resources in the history of the world.” ~ by James Delingpole 8 Aug 2015

About budbromley

Life sciences executive, retired
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Brian Schatz is an embarrassment

  1. It’s frightening to think that someone this uninformed is in Congress voting on legislation that effects our lives. He is woefully ignorant of science himself. A prime example of yet another useful pawn of the socialists who will stop at nothing to place restrictions and controls on our lives for power and profit.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s