Recent Comments
Rachel Squirrel- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- Rabett Run
- More Hydrogen Less Methane about the Same HO July 24, 2022
- HotWhopper
- Email went down, now it's back August 12, 2021
- Variable Variability
- One more reason I dislike linking climate change and extinction August 23, 2022
- RealClimate
- Watching the detections September 25, 2022
- Open Mind
- A High Schooler’s Take on the Climate Crisis August 5, 2022
- Climate denial crock of the week
- Flood Insurance? Many Floridians Don’t Have it September 30, 2022
- robertscribbler
- Moyhu
- GISS August global temperature up by 0.02°C from July. September 15, 2022
- Real Sceptic
- Choosing Alternative Medicine To Treat Cancer Is Deadly October 25, 2017
- Musings on Quantitative Palaeoecology
- Resampling Assemblage Counts September 13, 2021
- James’s Empty Blog
- Chess September 21, 2022
- More than just data
- EGU 2022: Back in person May 29, 2022
- Mallemaroking
- A comment piece on the SROCC September 26, 2019
- Symptons of the Universe
- When is a bird not a bird? When it’s a brand July 19, 2022
Tag Archives: Scientific consensus
TBH, I don’t really like consensus messaging either
Originally posted on …and Then There's Physics:
I might have to give Dan Kahan some credit. Even though I’m not convinced that consensus messaging is toxic and polarising in general, there are certainly circumstances in which it can be,…
Consensus enforcers
I’ve been engaging in some discussions over at cliscep (yes, yes, I know). It included Ben Pile, who seems to think that the phrase is play the man, not the ball. Ben’s mantra appears to be that there is a … Continue reading
Posted in Climate change, Research, Science, The scientific method
Tagged 97% consensus, cliscep.com, Consensus enforcer, Scientific consensus
97 Comments
TBH, I don’t really like consensus messaging either
I might have to give Dan Kahan some credit. Even though I’m not convinced that consensus messaging is toxic and polarising in general, there are certainly circumstances in which it can be, as I discovered – again – on Twitter … Continue reading
Consensus on consensus
Richard Tol’s consensus paper has finally been published. Richard’s paper can probably be described as taking all possible sets of numbers from all the various other consensus studies, and plotting graphs showing various possible levels of consensus, but without paying … Continue reading
Persistence!
Richard Tol has another article about how claims of a scientific consensus don’t stand up (you can read it here if you really want to). It’s the standard message that he’s been promoting for quite some time now and I … Continue reading
Posted in ClimateBall, Global warming, Satire
Tagged Consensus, Richard Tol, Scientific consensus, TCP, The Australian, The Consensus Project
578 Comments
Defending the consensus, again!
I find myself defending the consensus project again, and it’s getting both rather tedious and rather confusing. In particular, because some of those who are critical of the consensus project appear to completely accept that the scientific consensus associated with … Continue reading
Web of “lack of” Knowledge?
There is another post over at Watts Up With That (WUWT) claiming that John Cook’s consensus paper is falling apart. They seem rather fixated by this paper, which is interesting in itself. Anyway, it’s based on a post on Bishop … Continue reading
Watt about the 32.6%?
Watts Up With That (WUWT) has new post called Fuzzy math: In a new soon to be published paper, John Cook claims ‘consensus’ on 32.6% of scientific papers that endorse AGW. It’s about a recent paper published today by John … Continue reading
Watt about consistency?
A recent Watts Up With That (WUWT) highlights various reports and articles that discuss scientific consensus and controversies. There is a general tendency within the skeptic community to regard a scientific consensus as unscientific. I believe the implication is that … Continue reading
...and Then There's Physics 