AGW – Peer-reviewed paper list supporting skeptics viewpoints.

Papers which are at least as meaningful as those used for the IPCC conclusions. In fact much more so because they are actually on the ball!

I thought it might be relevant to include here an excerpt from the source article:

Purpose: To provide a resource for peer-reviewed papers that support skeptic arguments against ACC/AGW or ACC/AGW Alarm and to prove that these papers exist contrary to widely held beliefs,

You realize that there are something like two or three thousand studies all of which concur which have been peer reviewed, and not one of the studies dissenting has been peer reviewed?

– John Kerry, U.S. Senator and Failed 2004 U.S. Presidential Candidate

There was a massive study of every scientific article in a peer reviewed article written on global warming in the last ten years. They took a big sample of 10 percent, 928 articles. And you know the number of those that disagreed with the scientific consensus that we’re causing global warming and that is a serious problem out of the 928: Zero. The misconception that there is disagreement about the science has been deliberately created by a relatively small number of people.

– Al Gore, Former U.S. Vice President and Failed 2000 U.S. Presidential Candidate

I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been told by AGW voices that there are NO qualified skeptics or peer reviewed/published work by them. Including right here by RC regulars. In truth there is serious work and questions raised by significant work by very qualified skeptics which has been peer reviewed and published. It should be at least a bit disturbing for this type of denial to have been perpetrated with such a chorus. It’s one thing to engage and refute. But it’s not right to misrepresent as not even existing the counter viewpoints. I fully recognize the adversarial environment between the two opposing camps which RC and CA/WUWT represent, but the the perpetual declaration that there is no legitimate rejection of AGW is out of line.

– John H., Comment at

The following papers support skeptic arguments against Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) or ACC/AGW Alarm.

View original post 108 more words

About Ken McMurtrie

Retired Electronics Engineer, most recently installing and maintaining medical X-Ray equipment. A mature age "student" of Life and Nature, an advocate of Truth, Justice and Humanity, promoting awareness of the injustices in the world.
This entry was posted in AGW, carbon tax, climate change, ENVIRONMENT, World Issues and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to AGW – Peer-reviewed paper list supporting skeptics viewpoints.

  1. Dan Pangburn says:

    Application of the first law of thermodynamics, the time-integral of sunspot numbers (a proxy for energy retained by the planet) and a generalization of ocean thermal cycles explains average global temperature anomalies since 1895 with an accuracy of 88%. Accounting also for the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide increases the accuracy by about 0.5%.

  2. Pingback: AGW – WUWT – A Monckton reply to Eos censorship. | The GOLDEN RULE

  3. Pingback: The GOLDEN RULE

  4. Pingback: The GOLDEN RULE

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s