BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MJB" data-source="post: 3495039" data-attributes="member: 88928">Thank you for your efforts in your two posts. As far as I can ascertain, the majority of items in your first post are media items, not in any way original sources, and do not (unless they cite peer-reviewed papers from reputable journals) represent evidence. As for the books, I can point out, for example, that John Gribbin has agreed that his basic premises were mistaken, and in subsequent popular writing, he accepts that evidence (yes, peer-reviewed evidence) changed his view.Regarding your second post, your link has on its home page an admiring comment of support by Willie Soon, who was dismissed his post for falsifying data. It also has a marvellous theatrical-type review quotation from John Cook (who is excoriated on other pages as an AGW fanatic): "I do confess a degree of fascination with Poptech's list...", but of course doesn't include any reference to what he actually said in his post shredding the Popular Technology articles on climate change and their claim to be based entirely on peer-reviewed literature (I note you prudently put the that term in parentheses in your second post).In addition, it attributes his views as 'Skeptical Science's cartoonist', which neatly aligns with deniers' propensity to sneer, condescend and name-call as an opening gambit. Yes, he co-founded the Skeptical Science website. However, he is a staunch defender of the scientific method and the need for tight scrutiny of evidence, to the effect that:"In May 2013, Cook and other contributors jointly published a paper in the journal Environmental Research Letters (ERL) examining the scientific consensus on global warming in peer reviewed papers published between 1991–2011. The paper was the most downloaded paper for that week across all Institute of Physics' journals, and was widely cited across hundreds of newspapers, magazines, blog posts, and scientific papers from around the world. It also ranked as the 11th most-discussed scientific paper of 2013. The paper was awarded the 'Best article of 2013' prize by the editorial board of ERL." (Citation from Wikipedia, but that information in much longer form is still available on the US Institute of Physics' website.)I do hope that was helpful for any future correspondence.MJB</blockquote>

Verification