RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @RasmusBenestad: Impressive. 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' has been downloaded 100,000 times. @KHayhoe @johnfocook @hohyg…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
RT @KHayhoe: We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in eac…
We re-analyzed 38 studies that questioned whether climate is changing and/or humans are responsible, and found an error in each that, when corrected, brought them in line with the scientific consensus. Our study's been downloaded >100k times now!
RT @RasmusBenestad: Impressive. 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' has been downloaded 100,000 times. @KHayhoe @johnfocook @hohyg…
RT @RasmusBenestad: 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' er nedlastet 100k ganger, noe som er helt vilt for vitenskapelig publikasj…
RT @RasmusBenestad: Impressive. 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' has been downloaded 100,000 times. @KHayhoe @johnfocook @hohyg…
'Learning from mistakes in climate research' er nedlastet 100k ganger, noe som er helt vilt for vitenskapelig publikasjoner. Oppslag i Scientific American & https://t.co/XnrlQ95PXc, men ingen norske medier. https://t.co/i72xxErL10
RT @RasmusBenestad: Impressive. 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' has been downloaded 100,000 times. @KHayhoe @johnfocook @hohyg…
RT @RasmusBenestad: Impressive. 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' has been downloaded 100,000 times. @KHayhoe @johnfocook @hohyg…
Impressive. 'Learning from mistakes in climate research' has been downloaded 100,000 times. @KHayhoe @johnfocook @hohygen https://t.co/i72xxErL10
@StrayanDrongo @AngusTaylorMP @ScottMorrisonMP @sussanley @zalisteggall @Mark_Butler_MP @SBSNews Ha I have read up on it & no it’s not activists. You assume & look like a denier fool. I’d be an idiot if I stood up for something so staunchly that’s
@pudgenet @chrisvcsefalvay Here's the Guardian's coverage: https://t.co/xosM2BJWyv And here's a direct link to her paper: https://t.co/hyBzRHmqHx
@JoshuaJameson @MaximeBernier Read this carefully: every single peer-reviewed study in climate science supports the anthropogenic climate change thesis. Every. Single. One. And what about the small percentage that allegedly don't? Read this: https://t.co/
@rwpopulist @rlee166 @MyTruthStorm @ATree87571299 @AOC and this one about the small percentage of objections in general https://t.co/NaFb6aRZfd
המחקר https://t.co/R6weqv5MXP
@devans143831 @AOC Funny thing about the ones saying no. About 3 percent of peer reviewed papers about climate change dissent from the consensus that humans are causing climate change via CO2 emmissions. A recent study found serious flaws in almost all
@GerBaron @SvenVerbruggen @frenkie4allll @CynischMantsje @StraverFrank @trouw @Infocadl2015 Dat klopt. Er zijn wel _enkele_ wetenschappelijke publicaties van klimaatsceptici, maar bij nadere analyse blijken die dan te leiden onder allerlei fouten. Hier ge
@John_Poelwyk @tan123 @KHayhoe >You haven’t produced any actual evidence. See below. https://t.co/CNUJrJDw5r Are you really that ignorant? https://t.co/6rbbpM6NOG
@John_Poelwyk @tan123 @KHayhoe You apparantly don't understand what a theory is. Or the nature of the evidence. Can you point to something incorrect in the article? https://t.co/CNUJrJDw5r
@tan123 On the 1500: “Every single one of those analyses had an error—in their assumptions, methodology, or analysis—that, when corrected, brought their results into line with the scientific consensus,” @KHayhoe Right here https://t.co/CNUJrJDw5r At lea
@pet932 @CecileDuflot Il ne faut pas se fier aux personnes (beaucoup de grands scientifiques ont dit n'importe quoi) mais aux faits publiés. Et en réanalysant réanalysantles données des publications sceptiques, on trouve systématiquement des erreurs https:
@bennoba @ArnieAussie @Concern2004 @JimMolan @JohnRuddick2 These two for a start; The Cook et al. (2013) 97% consensus result is robust https://t.co/RLyzUmlFrk More like 100% of Scientists https://t.co/ZVhCcmQtcK
@bennoba @ArnieAussie @Concern2004 @JimMolan @JohnRuddick2 Ha. More denier mantra that has been debunked. The Cook et al. (2013) 97% consensus result is robust https://t.co/RLyzUmlFrk It’s actually much closer to 100% of Scientists https://t.co/ZVhCcmQt
@Michal_Bilewicz @lkwarzecha Mocno komentować nie zamierzam, bo na szczęście na tt są profesjonalni klimatolodzy: @DoskonaleSzare, ale Cook et al. (2013) pokazuje konsensus wśród _naukowych_klimatologów (97% za AGW). Z kolei Benestad et al. (2016) wskazuj
RT @jdasovic2: @MaximeBernier You're sort-of right. It's greater than 99.9%. Those alleged 3%? Errors found in all of their papers. Read an…
@MaximeBernier You're sort-of right. It's greater than 99.9%. Those alleged 3%? Errors found in all of their papers. Read and learn: https://t.co/fJ4iPSNe1e
@UlaLomu @SimonMaxfield8 @GeraldKutney @NaomiOreskes @FrankLuntz @newtgingrich @SpeakerPelosi Yet, you cannot actually offer any? Hmm. Telling! Oh, and I agree, there are some claiming the opposite. A tiny number. And they are all incorrect... More peer
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
@Tigerfan05a @AstralCowboyz @Bobanliz @Stevesage13 @AlanParsons111 @slpng_giants_oz @BudgetDirect @SkyNewsAust The Victorian Police do not think there is so no. You are flat out wrong about Climate Change. I don’t subscribe to the 97% it’s actually much hi
@AlvaroAsela Te invito a leer este paper https://t.co/EfvLLgoESY
Journalists who report on climate need to read this https://t.co/GK9Md6TE9q and then stop providing a platform to bad scientists who can't hide their biases.
@NathanBrett10 @TyotoRiffle @theprojecttv Hahaha! Not even close. I'll let people read the articles. But just to summarise it's 97% agreement that human created climate change is a fact (not 50/50 but 97/3). The 3% have also been recently reviewed and foun
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
Learning from mistakes in climate research https://t.co/uWqzmiusAF #ClimateCrisis #ClimateChange #GlobalWarming https://t.co/uWqzmiusAF
RT @DrVortex24: @jlhulford1 @plutosavior @rix_trevor Fine, here's the article qz cited. https://t.co/udZfhOMXks
@jlhulford1 @plutosavior @rix_trevor Fine, here's the article qz cited. https://t.co/udZfhOMXks
@MVirtanen @isosavi @Riikka_Suominen Edellisessä jutussa mainittu artikkeli: "Learning from mistakes in climate research" https://t.co/CKBImkHvFg https://t.co/PEKzXwyXuV
@ProfByron @NikolovScience I’d be more interested in your thoughts on the review than the article. Linked here: https://t.co/2NPFtouUPF
@Speak535 It’s more like 100%. Of the 3% they found errors which when corrected they then pointed towards Climate Change being real. https://t.co/ZVhCcmQtcK
@PaprikaLady @StealthFlyBy I've 'checked out' what that tiny number of "scientists" have to say. Why haven't you? Are you even aware that many of them aren't even climate scientists? eg here's a paper looking at some examples of the flaws found in 'contr
@PAlterBoy1 @MassiMassian @and_drew272 @EcoSenseNow Well that was certainly a bizarre knee-jerk denier response from @MassiMassian when you challenged him/her/it with a simple question. Here's an article and a published paper looking at the flaws of "con
@Dcoronata @JoeWill83716990 @DavidAHoward @AppleheadEmma Here's the review of the 38 papers with errors noted, that represent the 'skeptical' 3%: https://t.co/2uLy66cebX
Not an entirely new paper, but quite revealing about the 2%(!!) of climate research papers that reject that there is anthropogenic global warming going on... https://t.co/r0UEFGfgBR
@nicolasDenver @StealthFlyBy @JimFish56837379 @GeraldKutney @MaxDragonard @Latebird2013 @GeorgePembroke @tan123 Yes, reviews of the supposed 3% who reject the consensus found they’re all flawed. The consensus is essentially 100% of climate scientists. Here
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
@rkeslerwest @KeithRees3 @LaurelCoons Click on the link to the paper Dr. Coons posted. Read it and then click on the papers that the scientist cited. Read those. Those in turn will refer to more reports, and so on. Science is a constant conversation betwe
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @PhD_Q8i: ورقة علمية: فقط 3% من الاوراق المنشورة تنكر التغييرات المناخية, و جميع تلك الاوراق بعد الفحص العلمي فيها اخطاء https://t.co/…
Visar sig att alla egentligen är överens om att det är vårt fel. Resten har helt enkelt slarvat eller fuskat.
ورقة علمية: فقط 3% من الاوراق المنشورة تنكر التغييرات المناخية, و جميع تلك الاوراق بعد الفحص العلمي فيها اخطاء https://t.co/ijGifPDROp
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…
RT @LaurelCoons: The 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A study found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate the…