[Micele]

Oorspronkelijk geplaatst door zonbron

Niet zo hysterisch doen, slecht voor de gezondheid hoor.

Er bestaat gewoonweg geen enkele vorm van consensus terzake noch zijn wetenschappers het eens dat manmade CO2 een gevaar voor het klimaat betekent, geen 99, 97, 90, 80, 70... Enz %tjes.

Toch nog een prettige examenperiode toegewenst. Focus.

Manmade CO2 hét gevaar ? dat was toch een consensus van 0,5 % of 0,3 %. LOL

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/1...ot-97-its-100/

The algorithm counted the number of abstracts Cook had allocated to each level of endorsement. When the computer displayed the results, I thought there must have been some mistake. The algorithm had found only 64 out of the 11,944 papers, or 0.5%, marked as falling within Level 1, reflecting the IPCC consensus that recent warming was mostly man-made.

I carried out a manual check using the search function in Microsoft Notepad. Sure enough, there were only 64 data entries ending in “,1”.

Next, I read all 64 abstracts and discovered – not greatly to my surprise – that only 41 had explicitly said Man had caused most of the global warming over the past half century or so.

In the peer-reviewed learned journals, therefore, only 41 of 11,944 papers, or 0.3% – and not 97.1% – had endorsed the definition of the consensus proposition to which the IPCC, in its 2013 Fifth Assessment Report, had assigned 95-99% confidence.