Re: [Phys-l] Scientists speaking outside theirfields.Was...The Cause of Global Warming...

[John Mallinckrodt <ajm@csupomona.edu>]

I wrote:

> Daryl L Taylor wrote:
>
> > According to Peiser ... "34 abstracts reject or doubt the view  
> > that human activities are  the main drivers of the "the observed  
> > warming over the last 50 years"" Oreskes claimed that number was  
> > zero. I'd call that an error. Not an error of assembling the data,  
> > but an error in the data interpretation itself. 34-0?
>
> If it is true that, among the abstracts Oreskes examined, 34 of  
> them "reject or doubt" human activities as a cause, then I'd call  
> that an error too.  Indeed, I'd call THAT an inexcusable error.  I  
> don't know, however, whether or not that is the case ...

Those interested in pursuing the question of whether it is Oreskes or  
Peiser who is in error may be interested in reading the 34 abstracts  
that Peiser identifies as rejecting or doubting the consensus view.   
Tim Lambert collected them from Peiser and you can read them yourself  
on his blog at

<http://timlambert.org/2005/05/peiser/>

It is also very much worth your while to read the lively comments in  
which Peiser himself participates.  (The comments begin way down the  
page after the abstracts themselves.)

John Mallinckrodt

Professor of Physics, Cal Poly Pomona
<http://www.csupomona.edu/~ajm>

and

Lead Guitarist, Out-Laws of Physics
<http://outlawsofphysics.com>