Actually many climate scientists acknowledged the comments of M&M but then went on to show that they made little difference to the hockey stick and had even less
impact on the anthropogenic global warming consensus.
The current
hypothesis on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), as presented by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is that CO2 emissions should be directly and indirectly trapping a certain amount of heat in the earth's atmosphere and preventing it from escaping into space.
Long Postscript: I am working on a powerpoint presentation for next
week on anthropogenic global warming, but here are two charts from that presentation that get at the «we can't think of anything other than man that might be causing late 20th century warming.»
But, there's always the possibility that we'll end up with it only producing new ways for some of the participants to provide another faux report with faux information, provided by faux science in an effort to keep the
pressure on that anthropogenic global warming is real.
In particular, I was struck by the fact that global warming contrarians commonly explain the overwhelming support of climate scientists for the consensus view
on anthropogenic global warming in terms of careerism.
The fact of the matter is, while the world is
focused on anthropogenic global warming, warming induced by humans, what could potentially be a more serious and real matter is that of the coming ice age as the cycle suggests.
The 97 % consensus
on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) reported by Cook et al. (2013)(C13) is a robust estimate.
Quote: «We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus
on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer - reviewed scientific literature, examining 11944 climate abstracts from 1991 — 2011 matching the topics «global climate change» or «global warming».
Around one third (4,000) of these staked out a position
on anthropogenic global warming.
In addressing the fact that two thirds of papers expressed no opinion, the study's authors write, «Of note is the large proportion of abstracts that state no position
on anthropogenic global warming.
A paper by John Cook and colleagues published in May 2013 claimed that of the 4,000 peer - reviewed papers they surveyed expressing a position
on anthropogenic global warming, «97.1 % endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming».
The publication of the paper that I co-authored, Quantifying the consensus
on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature, in May 2013 caused quite a splash.
Eminent retired physicist Freeman Dyson is perhaps the most prominent scientist to oppose publicly the scientific consensus
on anthropogenic global warming.
In a recent article in Skeptical Inquirer, geologist and writer James Lawrence Powell, claims that there is a 99.99 % scientific consensus
on Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).
He finally succeeded, with the paper Quantifying the consensus
on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis published in the journal Energy Policy,.
Table 1: «Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human - caused global warming» «Does it matter if the consensus
on anthropogenic global warming is 97 % or 99.99 %?»