It is a deliberate lie, scripted by ExxonMobil - funded propaganda mills disguised as «conservative think tanks», that is demonstrably false and as such it does not belong in the debate about what to
do about anthropogenic global warming.
I think your
discussion about anthropogenic global warming is a little «off topic» in this blog entry, which is about due diligence in climate science, but with the permission of those running the blog, I'd like to explore it a little further.
This study from Science Online from 2008 titled «Northern Hemisphere Controls on Tropical Southeast African Climate During the Past 60,000 Years» also leaves me wondering
about the anthropogenic global warming claim and also seems to back up my thought that CO2 is not driving this.
They also believe in energy company conspiracies to confuse the
public about anthropogenic global warming, and that 911 and the Iraq invasion were right - wing excuses to get control over Middle - Eastern oil.
Peiser has long opposed mainstream science's
conclusions about anthropogenic global warming; in 2005 Peiser said he had data which refuted an article published in Science Magazine, claiming 100 % of peer - reviewed research papers on climate change agreed with the scientific consensus of global warming.
One well - known paper (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, 2013; referred to as LOG12 from here on) surveyed blog readers, finding a small but statistically significant link between
doubts about anthropogenic global warming and conspiratorial thinking.
A graph we posted back in April shows the danger of looking at ENO to substantiate claims made
about anthropogenic global warming.