In Leo We Trust

A sacrilegious question, perhaps, (now that Leo’s movie is out and all) but thankfully some are still asking: Is there really scientific consensus that anthropogenic global warming is leading us towards unmitigated devastation? Via Daily Tech, a new study finds that perhaps there is no such harmony of opinion.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus”

As Michael Asher points out, readers should remember that the “watered-down” definition of what consensus means in this study. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the “primary” cause of warming, but it doesn’t require any belief or support for “catastrophic” global warming. Only one paper published from 2004 to February 2007 makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

This comes on the heels of research by Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Lab, which concludes Earth’s climate is only about one-third as sensitive to carbon dioxide as the IPCC assumes. Schwartz study preprint here. From Planet Gore:

Indeed, if Schwartz’s results are correct, that alone would be enough to overturn in one fell swoop the IPCC’s scientific “consensus”, the environmentalists’ climate hysteria, and the political pretext for the energy-restriction policies that have become so popular with the world’s environmental regulators, elected officials, and corporations. The question is, will anyone in the mainstream media notice?

Answer: No. Or not until Leo DiCaprio says so.