by Frank Hobbs (franktoo)
At the Senate Hearing on “Dogma and Data”, dogma about the 97% consensus went unchallenged. Democratic Senators constantly recited the phrase “97% consensus”, but it is not clear whether they – or their Republican opponents – had the slightest idea what the phrase meant: 97% of what group support a consensus about exactly what?
by Andy West
A frequent topic at Climate Etc. is the ‘consensus.’ An argument is presented here that the climate consensus is as much about culture as it is about climate science.
by Judith Curry
The limits of judicial competence and the risk of taking sides
Several recent posts have discussed the involvement of courts in climate science disputes:
by Judith Curry
A British academic wants an international court to declare climate skeptics wrong, once and for all.
by Judith Curry
Any attempt to impose agreement will “promote confusion between consensus and certainty”. The goal should be to quantify uncertainty, not to remove it from the decision process. – Willy Aspinall
by Judith Curry
Among the best indirect indicators available to nonexperts is the overwhelming numbers of scientists testifying to anthropogenic climate change. Yet the evidential significance of such clear numbers turns substantially on our nonexpert assessment of these scientists’ trustworthiness. Absent trust, even without active distrust, the numbers’ evidential weight drops considerably. – Ben Almassi
by Judith Curry
We polled 130 environmental attorneys and law professors from around the country about the legality of the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed Clean Power Plan. The results might surprise you. – Brian Potts and Abigail Barnes
by Andy West
Lewandowsky and Oreskes raise the prospect that via the agency of memes, the climate Consensus with its high certainty of danger, could be a socially generated artifact and not a scientific fact.
by Judith Curry
The authority of a scientific body is not undermined by questioning, but rather depends upon it – Beatty & Moore
