Benny Peiser, member of the faculty of science at LJM University in the United Kingdom, reported the following in January of 2005 as a response to Naomi Oreskes’ Science article from January of 2005:
- The scientific abstracts were not based on a search of the keywords “climate change,” but on the keywords “global climate change”
- In the years 1993 to 2003, there were 1247 documents listed, not 928. Of those 1247, “only 1117 included abstracts (130 listed only titles, author(s)’ details and keywords)”
- Of the 1117 abstracts, 13 (or 1%) explicitly endorse the scientific consensus view that climate change is beeing affected by humans
- 322 abstracts (or 29%) implicitly accept the consensus view
- “34 abstracts reject or doubt the view that human activities are the main drivers” of global warming over the past 50 years
- 470 (or 42%) abstracts that included the keywords “global climate change” did not “include any direct or indirect link or reference to human activities, CO2 or greenhouse gas emissions, let alone anthropogenic forcing of recent climate change”
- Benny Peiser concluded, “In light of the data presented above (evidence that can be easily verified), Science should withdraw Oreskes’ study and its results in order to prevent any further damage to the integrity of science.”
To read the entire article and communication, click on Dr. Benny Peiser’s Letter to Science Magazine and the Story of Its Rejection.
Zeke Hausfather wrote in October of 2007 in the Yale Forum on Climate Change and the Media that after Benny Peiser’s work was criticized by a number of climate scientists, Peiser later retracted his critique. The other climate scientists said that most of those 34 papers did not actually reject the IPCC consensus. Peiser eventually said that only one of the 34 papers had actually rejected the IPCC position. The paper was from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, was not peer-reviewed, and had not been included in Oreskes’ original analysis. To read the entire article, click on Upcoming Critique of Oreskes Findings on ‘Consensus’ Unlikely to Prove Convincing.
The retract referred to by Zeke Hausfather that Benny Peiser performed was also described in Media Watch, part of the Australian Broadcasting Company:
- Peiser wrote, “Only [a] few abstracts explicitly reject or doubt the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) consensus which is why I have publicly withdrawn this point of my critique.”
- “And when we pressed him to provide the names of the articles, he eventually conceded – there was only one:” Ad Hoc Committee on Global Climate Issues: Annual report, by Gerhard LC and Hanson BM, AAPG Bulletin 84 (4): 466-471 Apr 2000
- AAPG stands for American Association of Petroleum Geologists
To read additional communication with Benny Peiser and Media watch, click on Media Watch.
Graham Tibbetts in The Telegraph in May 2008 reported that 31,000 scientists, 9,000 of which have Ph.D’s, have signed a petition from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine stating that there is no conclusive evidence that global warming is due to human activities. To read the entire article, click on Scientists sign petition denying man-made global warming.