Record of lots of of peer-reviewed papers opposite to the man-made local weather disaster narrative

https://www.cuttingthroughthenoise.net/intro

By David Siegel  – My name is David Siegel. I’ve been studying environmental science since the mid-1980s and published my first book on climate change in 1991. I’ve made dozens of videos and written many essays, some of which are on this site. I curate two lists — PhD scientists who believe more CO2 would be better, and a list of peer-reviewed papers.

Number of peer-reviewed papers listed on this site: 314

Use the links on the left to navigate.

I’m glad you’re interested in science. However, I don’t think peer review is the signal of scientific rigor you think it is. Simple statistical analysis shows that the majority of peer-reviewed findings are false or meaningless, and the press will take any paper and blow it up into a headline. But people often ask me for peer-reviewed papers refuting the standard dogma of climate alarm, and there are many. Keep in mind that all atmospheric data before 1980 is suspect, and all ocean measurements before 2005 are worthless.

When I ask people who are sure that humans are having an alarming impact on the earth’s climate, I ask them to name one single paper that convinced them. So far, I have never gotten a paper. (Actually, I finally got one – it was based on models, not real-world data.)

No one reads papers, but I do. Some of them I don’t think are worth sharing, but a few are, and I present them here. I’ll write summaries, because I know people won’t click through. If you are convinced humans are causing climate change, you might want to understand the science a bit more; these summaries are designed to help you do that.

For starters, in 2009, a group called Popular Technology assembled a database of over 1350 peer-reviewed papers contrary to the anthropogenic global catastrophe narrative. There are others. I’ve done my own research and have chosen the papers here for their relevance and recency. Use the submenus to navigate by topic.

Featured papers

A recent surge in global warming is not detectable yet— Nature 2024

“Our results show limited evidence for a warming surge; in most surface temperature time series, no change in the warming rate beyond the 1970s is detected despite the breaking record temperatures observed in 2023. As such, we estimate the minimum changes in the warming trend required for a surge to be detectable. Across all datasets, an increase of at least 55% is needed for a warming surge to be detectable at the present time.”

The scientific case against net zero: falsifying the greenhouse gas hypothesis — Journal of Sustainable Development, 2024; Simpson

“With such wide-ranging policies and enormous costs for pursuing an all-electric approach, eliminating fossil fuels, excessive investment in and subsidy of unreliable, intermittent, and variable output from renewables and Net Zero by 2050 one would have thought the science would be overwhelming and readily available in the public domain. The ‘science’ has never been discussed by UK politicians to our knowledge, but one would have thought this would be essential before embarking on such a high-cost project as Net Zero.”

…

Over 9,000 scientists with PhDs take issue with climate claims