Re: AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE'S MOVIE
- From: Earl <neptune@xxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jun 2006 22:40:49 GMT
Alvin Toda <aet@xxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:p1saa2tk8d6n7dijito19nab7ks3fmjp8h@xxxxxxx:
On 30 Jun 2006 16:31:25 GMT, Earl <neptune@xxxxxx> wrote:
"TC" <timclifton@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:1151681325.682706.8450@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
From another source we find----
"Science magazine analyzed 928 peer-reviewed scientific
papers on the subject published between 1993 and 2003. Not
one (zero percent) dissented from the international
scientific consensus that human activity is dramatically
increasing the earth's temperature, in ways that will
bring severe consequences. But because of promotion by
corporations like Exxon/Mobil of a handful of global
warming deniers, 57 percent of the news stories during the
same period presented the issue as if there were a serious
scientific debate. Energy industries admitted their
strategy to "reposition global warming as a debate." In
other words, our mainstream medias lied to us."
And to show how GWs mangle the truth:
More recently, a study in the journal Science by the social
scientist Nancy Oreskes claimed that a search of the ISI Web
of Knowledge Database for the years 1993 to 2003 under the
key words "global climate change" produced 928 articles, all
of whose abstracts supported what she referred to as the
consensus view. A British social scientist, Benny Peiser,
checked her procedure and found that only 913 of the 928
articles had abstracts at all, and that only 13 of the
remaining 913 explicitly endorsed the so-called consensus
view. Several actually opposed it.
Well a different procedure will get you different results.
Someone check Benny's. Chances are that you'll find big
differences.
Sure it will.
The database of articles was the same, and the total count was
the same. And the search string of three words was as she
specified.
But somehow our intreped GW proponent found 15 hidden abstracts
that were otherwise missing.
The difference between 13 articles explicitly supporting GW and
913 nust be a difference in reading ability.
Face it, someone was trying to pull a fast one. And in the vast
majority of cases a challenger has the numbers correct since it
is going to be a very public faceoff with reputations on the
line. My money would be on Peiser retaining the battleground.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE'S MOVIE
- From: Alvin Toda
- Re: AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE'S MOVIE
- Prev by Date: Re: Does Our Criminal Justice System Serve Us Well?
- Next by Date: Re: The New York Times at War With America
- Previous by thread: Re: Problem Solving 101
- Next by thread: Re: AP INCORRECTLY CLAIMS SCIENTISTS PRAISE GORE'S MOVIE
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
