Talk:List of scientists who dispute global warming
While these edits are a start, the article probably needs a rewrite.
This sentence has problems after the change:
These findings are recognized by the political science academies of all the major industrialized nation-states.(Emphasis added)
The highlighted word looks weird there and might be better as: These politicized findings ...
I also note that the reference is to a document from 2010, a lot has happened since then and the pause has grown longer.
--Crew (talk) 11:07, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Agreed it reads oddly, and that there are also boatloads of people to add to such a list. Rectified (talk) 11:56, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- Another thing- this is a milder example of a disingenuous or presumptive article title- not as blatant as "List of Conspiracy Theories" but bakes in a presumption of scientific consensus by another name. Rectified (talk) 12:00, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Not sure if a redirect will bring the talk page with it. Rectified (talk) 12:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
- No. They are different objects in the database. That is one of the deficiencies of the design. --Crew (talk) 12:26, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Post-fork changes to WP article
List of scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming[1]
Introduction
WP added a second sentence to P1: As approximately 97% of publishing climate scientists support the consensus on anthropomorphic climate change,[3] this list represents a minority viewpoint
(The 97% meme is on a rising trend.)
P2: The scientific consensus is that the global average surface temperature has risen over the last century. The scientific consensus and scientific opinion on climate change were...
Changed to:
The scientific consensus is that the global average surface temperature has risen over the last century. Scientific opinion on climate change was...
(Struck the extra "scientific consensus")
P3:
These findings are recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized nations.[7] The consensus has strengthened over time: James L. Powell analyzed published research on global warming and climate change between 1991 and 2012 and found that of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 rejected anthropogenic global warming.[8] His follow-up analysis of 2,258 peer-reviewed articles published between November 2012 and December 2013 found that only one of the 9,136 authors rejected anthropogenic global warming.[9]
Changed to:
These findings are recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized nations;[8] the consensus has strengthened over time[9][10] and is now virtually unanimous.[11] The level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science.[12]
(Retained the same Phil Plait/Slate refs, cut the peer reviewed business, added and is now virtually unanimous.[11] The level of consensus correlates with expertise in climate science. That's what inspired this memorial section. Also, "of the 13,950 articles in peer-reviewed journals, only 24 rejected anthropogenic global warming" could be read as an indictment of the peer review process.)
