@scalpoptions @tan123 Oh Peer review can get things wrong. Just look at all the peer reviewed papers arguing against AGW theory. 100% of them have been found to be flawed. https://t.co/RZKd0mpMuN It’s not your fault. You’re just not trained to avoid cogn
@CaseyParksIt There are thousands. But you choose not to look. I agree though that climate science does have many junk papers. Like the 100% of those that dispute AGW that are shown to be flawed... https://t.co/RZKd0mpMuN
"What is happening with the 2 % of papers that reject #AGW? Typical weaknesses include false dichotomies, inappropriate statistical methods, or basing conclusions on misconceived or incomplete physics." https://t.co/1oZF3hAeaR https://t.co/g549OdXXA1
Visserligen 2016: Ca 3% av artiklar kopplar inte den globala uppvärmningen till oss. En genomgång visade vanliga fel: Plockar sökta resultat. Bortser från fysiken Dåliga utvärderingar av modeller Tidningsartikel: https://t.co/d6DxgeEJV1 Genomgången: htt
Among papers stating a position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), 97 % endorse AGW. What is happening with the 2 % of papers that reject AGW? https://t.co/nLNe7OGkoO https://t.co/sdFe0SFNH6
@dcmoose @blaubok @Seismic_Newts @SteveSGoddard You’ve described exactly the anti-AGW argument. Not the actual science. Only one side is shown to have flaws in 100% of their studies. Relies on cherry-picking and fallacies. Hint, it’s not your side. https
RT @blaubok: Climate *science* blacklisted skeptics, and threatened to boycott those that dared to publish the papers of sceptics Don't wo…
@blaubok I see that you are an impartial judge. So, climate fraud and errors by 100% of denier scientists are fully acceptable to you (https://t.co/dbxWN1Qrgg). But a handful of out of context emails that have been cleared of wrong doing by 9 independent
RT @blaubok: Climate *science* blacklisted skeptics, and threatened to boycott those that dared to publish the papers of sceptics Don't wo…
RT @blaubok: Climate *science* blacklisted skeptics, and threatened to boycott those that dared to publish the papers of sceptics Don't wo…
RT @blaubok: Climate *science* blacklisted skeptics, and threatened to boycott those that dared to publish the papers of sceptics Don't wo…
RT @blaubok: Climate *science* blacklisted skeptics, and threatened to boycott those that dared to publish the papers of sceptics Don't wo…
@pjb438 @blaubok @SteveSGoddard Really, because anti-AGW science does get published. Indeed, it is nice example of the flaws in peer review, because 100% of all published science studies disputing anthropogenic climate change have been found to be flawed!
@hackenslash2 @UtilityAutonomy @glitterybug79 @AlbatrossNeck @Serabbi @IngrahamAngle This kind of primary literature? https://t.co/98hDh1JXwh
@tubaboyz @YouTube The3% made mistakes. https://t.co/cony7VzmTu
A must read when thinking about anthropogenic climate change. Especially in regards to the EPA's most recent opinions. https://t.co/d8a7zKHZzE
@ComradeVeidt @ClimSciDefense @MichaelEMann @TucsonPeck @NaomiOreskes In that case Seth, you will love this analysis, in which we replicated 38 papers that disagreed with either the fact that the planet is warming or the human contribution to that warming,
@ZaTingler @Cedders68 @luisbaram @algore @cathmckenna @LeoDiCaprio It would be foul if it were true. It is not, though - so please, be responsible and do not share fake info. Even with very elementary mistakes, they can still get published. Here is the pr
It gets better though because a group of experts combed through the 2% of papers that were published with conclusions contrary to the consensus and found that they were all flawed: https://t.co/IJYueD7HWO Here is a simpler summary of the article: https://
@ZeniaKjaersgard @jchillerup Jeg har været igennem min del af mærkelige klimateorier. Fælles for dem er, at selv skeptikerne er uenige indbyrdes, og deres studier er fyldt med huller og cherry-picking. Det er der faktisk lavet et studie om (som er publicer
RT @Arthur59611540: Learning from mistakes in climate research https://t.co/6AafYhYbmf https://t.co/0kUP3pzNJu
Learning from mistakes in climate research https://t.co/6AafYhYbmf https://t.co/0kUP3pzNJu
@TheSciBabe https://t.co/dX9l5X9yLK Learning from mistakes in climate research
https://t.co/O0fPz1PynU hmmmmmmm
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
Trump and republicans don’t “believe” in climate change and they want to kill clean energy in support of fossil fuels (see WashPo article). This is why money ruins politics and politics harms science. https://t.co/pldbAS3B9q
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
@Economissive {Deep calming breaths, Deep calming breaths} stuffit, bring out facts https://t.co/tcY6PdCFp5
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
Best part: “Had an error - that, when corrected, brought their results in line with the scientific consensus”. So not just errors, errors that directly led to the false conclusions, almost as if they were intentionally included. https://t.co/dXJPTJowmO
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…
Aaaand this is how science works. https://t.co/aprJ5Ex3HE
RT @LaurelCoons: Those 3% Of Scientific Papers That Deny Climate Change: 🌎A review found them all flawed 🌍Researchers tried to replicate…