@KHayhoe would agree. I think she was one of the people who checked those papers to see if majority of climate scientists had missed something. Nope.
@FernandoLeanme @monsieurmean @jhgates1 @GeraldKutney @tjslager @nationalpost The small number of published papers (2%) that reject climate change science are full of mistakes. https://t.co/hz1C4Sl0HK
RT @DanielHenstra: @TJ_TomJ @GeraldKutney @nationalpost The small number of published papers (2%) that reject climate change science are fu…
@Fermarort @Hjorvik @Abejaruco2 Datos y fuente https://t.co/ruP132f0px
@TJ_TomJ @GeraldKutney @nationalpost The small number of published papers (2%) that reject climate change science are full of mistakes. https://t.co/hz1C4Sl0HK
Learning from mistakes in climate research | SpringerLink https://t.co/sPe0Tag4s8
@stefan_franz @_HeadCrash @Markus_Krall Hier hat sich übrigens jemand die Paper angesehen, die den Klimawandel ablehnen (also die restlichen 2% bis 3%). https://t.co/hW8qjqCaAf
RT @Mariefranceroy: @MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring informat…
@pdonkim @atRachelGilmore @GretaThunberg The small number of published papers (2%) that reject climate change science are full of mistakes. https://t.co/hz1C4Sl0HK
@iowenjones @andrewzed3 @Nikko42556632 @Mark_Butler_MP It’s way more than 99% now. https://t.co/ZVhCcmQtcK https://t.co/9JsCOnJGSi
@JacksonZman @FinsUpSailor @novakglobal @PlagueofProgs Stop it. The confidence is beyond doubt. https://t.co/9JsCOnJGSi https://t.co/ZVhCcmQtcK https://t.co/2AZerK6Uon
RT @Mariefranceroy: @MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring informat…
@GeraldKutney Something like this https://t.co/geejSPFkXK but more complete, not just a small sample.
RT @cubantobacco: @Education4Libs This is what misinformation looks like. Nearly all peer-reviewed publishing climate scientists (~97%) sup…
@Education4Libs This is what misinformation looks like. Nearly all peer-reviewed publishing climate scientists (~97%) support the consensus on anthropogenic climate change, and the remaining 3% of contrarian studies either cannot be replicated or contain e
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/HuLkNT7vIH #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/YlMcu6Xf9a #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/hVnSWZRMKp #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/6qrvruDRbk #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/L0m50ij72Z #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/dU6A02c69Q #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/7Z0v7Y4H2w #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/y7VJorw5tK #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/agOWuSRgT4 #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/IQo4nnbN0q #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/6gM3Pq62Om #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/G30Xvilnpg #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/PZMfeqB5FJ #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/FfGVqJJNOk #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/jy29i7AaKb #FactBack @protectwintersc https
RT @sarcameron_: @MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information…
RT @Mariefranceroy: @MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring informat…
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/19qoeGrjRz #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/HQYm3f1mhL #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/bYmb252xRV #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/CvVTVu6WgQ #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/4bE3cWh97X #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/SRXlgw88Os #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/OnkB1P4BjD #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/VliW12tTo5 #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/qYyUlJUWv2 #FactBack @protectwintersc #Clim
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/kDh39aMUTs #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@MaximeBernier A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/h6ZEGXZiAd #FactBack @protectwintersc https
@Tafkao @ChrisBBacon3 @simonahac @ScottMorrisonMP @jacindaardern Came across this paper in my travels and thought you might be interested @ChrisBBacon3 : https://t.co/jgqRsLaxc7 - IMO that trumps your 15yo paper co-authored by a highly partisan mining exe
@Paulfarrant01 @JoeMoyle21 @Ellis_Good Climate scientists have NOT left out information from a lot of [their] data gathering. Climate change deniers left critical analysis out of their work. https://t.co/8piGsPx6aZ
RT @sarahruthflynn: @safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring informa…
RT @reneerosteius: @safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring informat…
STUDIARE ANCORA PREGO! https://t.co/0jcVzfZBy0 https://t.co/0jcVzfZBy0
@Chiper817 @Estepansaur @Friendo_MugClub @Menkvi @dog_rates @FarrOutTales you are right, >97% depending on the study. But also <3% have all mistakes in their publications: Benestad et al. 2016, "Learning from mistakes in climate research" in Theoret
RT @Liz_Hylton: @JHPrince4 @jonesjay @kerrydougherty A 2016 analysis found that the small % of papers that deny global warming were rife wi…
@JHPrince4 @jonesjay @kerrydougherty A 2016 analysis found that the small % of papers that deny global warming were rife with problems like false dichotomies, inappropriate statistical methods, or basing conclusions on misconceived or incomplete physics. O
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/QUuik3oJiG #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/qDaJJ1pPtP #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/Gyok9dlBq3 #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/dQpGMHoxnv #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/VERtjl2dBR #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/JZeJPGIge0 #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
RT @reneerosteius: @safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring informat…
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/IO6XfqdVtq #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/c62GblxVpT #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/eM4mJIr1s7 #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/ZQ0rD4ANaw #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/obAjzv0KYx
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/CoPjFly7yB #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/w8Yy5IlMGX #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
@EcoSenseNow A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/S2W9VRyzcO #FactBack @protectwintersc https:/
Pozostałe 3% zrobiło błędy w publikacjach, które po poprawieniu dają wnioski zbliżone do reszty. Źródło: https://t.co/AivkRfZNPB
@gatobombay @DonWeasDoctor @Legalmenteverd1 oiga, antes que siga con su negacionismo respecto al papel o influencia del hompre en el cambio clinático, puede contrastar lo que encuentra en “principia scientific” con esto: https://t.co/uBOwrMXxbX
@KraMGG @rsanchezlamoso @Electroshock00 @slcuervo @AlvSauras @RiveKids @SebasFC @AutoFmRadio @pasa_electrico @SinergiaElctric @taybar78 @ecologistas @CalvAmb @JesusSoriaD @JulioBasulto_DN @gominolasdpetro El 97% de los 12000 estudios sobre cambio climático
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
@safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/HwllnFbEiS #FactBack @protectwintersc http
RT @GenreResearch: @BosseStine Af videre interesse er det værd at notere, som @RasmusBenestad @KHayhoe mfl. og andre har påvist, at der oft…
@safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/HquOVJlLIA #FactBack @protectwintersc http
@Miguel_Matthew @juanmabollingen @elmo_elisa @mumcoment @DeblerVon @VogueSpain https://t.co/0QrI8xaol7 Aquí habla de cómo el 97% de la comunidad científica coincide en culpar al ser humano del cambio climático. Pero vosotros a lo vuestro, que, ¿Que malo pu
@safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/0mb82vwpVR #FactBack @protectwintersc http
@safety_canada7 A study of the 2% of papers rejecting climate change found they all had common errors: ignoring information that didn't fit the conclusion, inappropriate statistics, incorrect physics. https://t.co/BK5aB5agwh #FactBack @protectwintersc http
Si vous êtes face à un climatosceptique qui dit "non, tous les scientifiques sont pas d'accord", là l'arme fatale : Une review des papiers qui prennent position ; La quantité qui est d'accord (97-98 %) ; Une analyse des 3% avec leurs failles méthodo https
@BosseStine Af videre interesse er det værd at notere, som @RasmusBenestad @KHayhoe mfl. og andre har påvist, at der oftest er videnskabelige sammenbrud i de få formodet fagvidenskabelige publikationer, der ligger uden for den videnskabelige konsensus. h
RT @orca_no: Not an entirely new paper, but quite revealing about the 2%(!!) of climate research papers that reject that there is anthropo…
Em tempo, tou com a Greta e essa galera aqui... https://t.co/BLFYB92ihv
@DSchauber @fxcoudert @Grau_Etienne Ne vous inquiétez pas : les (très rares) articles des climatosceptiques ont été aussi discutés : leurs données sont fausses, leurs interprétations erronées, etc. https://t.co/vVpLZpvsSW
@m_avaria @GiorgioJackson @GretaThunberg Aunque también hay estudios que dicen que teorias “no antropogénicas” del cambio climático tienen errores metodológicos. También vale la pena ver esto: https://t.co/uBOwrMXxbX
RT @alexaraujoc: E sabe o que esses 24 papers continham? Erros. É o que mostra a análise feita neste artigo, que tentava reproduzir os resu…
@DaveJoh45967312 @GreenpeaceCA @kirstiealley And here is the actual paper the Guardian article was about. I suggest you read it. Again if you refuse to accept the scientists doing the research then....(shoulder shrug). https://t.co/Raa6el1fDd
RT @alexaraujoc: E sabe o que esses 24 papers continham? Erros. É o que mostra a análise feita neste artigo, que tentava reproduzir os resu…
RT @alexaraujoc: E sabe o que esses 24 papers continham? Erros. É o que mostra a análise feita neste artigo, que tentava reproduzir os resu…
RT @alexaraujoc: E sabe o que esses 24 papers continham? Erros. É o que mostra a análise feita neste artigo, que tentava reproduzir os resu…
RT @alexaraujoc: E sabe o que esses 24 papers continham? Erros. É o que mostra a análise feita neste artigo, que tentava reproduzir os resu…
@gunnvald1966 @Landsbroderen @olavtorvund @Partiet @Venstre @Raudt Akkurat den artikkelen finnes bare på norsk. Når det gjelder blant annet Humlum sine arbeider kan denne arikkelen være opplysende: https://t.co/Q23qZWhJ1f