Post 2 of 3
Three respected scientists have independently complained that
their climate studies have been misrepresented by sceptics in order
to bolster a list of papers thrown together to challenge the
consensus on global warming.
The authors of the list claim it includes more than 900
scientific papers which question human forced climate change, an
assertion which has been repeated on blogs and the Global Warming
Policy Foundation website. As we have already reported, nine
of the ten most prolific authors have links to oil giant
Some of the papers cited have been published in prominent peer
review journals, including 34 from Nature and 33 from Science.
However, our analysis also shows that many of the papers do not
focus on human-induced climate change - and so have little
relevance to the theme of the list.
Furthermore, some of the authors featured on the list surprised
us, so we contacted a selection to see whether they supported this
interpretation of their work - the responses confirmed their work
is being misappropriated by inclusion in lists such as this.
Professor Peter deMenocal, of the Earth Institute, Columbia
University, told the Carbon Brief when asked about the inclusion of
his paper on the list:
"I've responded to similar queries
over the years. No, this is not an accurate representation of my
work and I've said so many times to them and in print.
"I've asked Dennis Avery of the Heartland Institute to take my
name off [another similar] list four times and I've never had a
response. There are 15 other Columbia colleagues on there as well
... and all want their names removed."