Pieser himself has withdrawn his argument because only one of the papers actuly supports his position.
Not true.
You know, when I see people go to lengths like this to distort and misrepresent the facts of the case, I know they're not engaging in an objective search for the truth.
It is demonstrably false to claim that only one of the 34 papers actually supports his position.
The correct claim is that only one of the 34 papers is listed in the abstract as an "article".
So it turns out that they only paper on that list that actuly challange the consensus was published in by the American Association of Petrolium Geoligists. Not exactly a valid source for peer reviewed papers on climate change
That's the article.
Other papers on the list which "actuly challange the consensus" include:
Review and Impacts of Climate-change Uncertainties
Fernau ME, Makofske WJ, South DW
Futures 25 (8): 850-863 Oct 1993
More and better measurements and statistical techniques are needed to detect and confirm the existence of greenhouse-gas-induced climate change, which currently cannot be distinguished from natural climate variability in the historical record.
High-Latitude Oceanic Variability Associated with the 18.6-year Nodal Tide
Royer TC
Journal of Geophysical Research-Oceans 98 (C3): 4639-4644 Mar 15 1993
The water column temperature variations presented here are the first evidence that the upper ocean is responding to this very long period tidal forcing. An enhanced high-latitude response to the 18.6-year forcing is predicted by equilibrium tide theory, and it should be most evident at latitudes poleward of about 50-degrees. These low-frequency ocean-atmosphere variations must - be considered in high-latitude assessments of global climate change, since they are of the same magnitude as many of the predicted global changes.
Atmospheric Greenhouse-Effect in the Context of Global Climate-Change
Kondratyev KY, Varotsos C
Nuovo Cimento Della Societa Italiana di Fisica C-Geophysics and Space Physics 18 (2): 123-151 Mar-Apr 1995
Great interest in the problem of the atmospheric greenhouse effect (not only in scientific publications, but also in mass media), on the one hand, and the undoubtfully overemphasised contribution of the greenhouse effect to the global climate change, on the other hand, motivate a necessity to analyse the role which the greenhouse effect plays as a factor of climate change.
The evolution of an energy contrarian
Linden HR
Annual Review of Energy and the Environment 21: 31-67 1996
Today, proponents of catastrophic anthropogenic climate change, again claiming scientific consensus, threaten to create even greater energy market distortions at large social and economic costs. The author traces his conversion to energy contrarian to the general failure of consensus and to his own misjudgments in these critical policy areas.
The suitability of montane ecotones as indicators of global climatic change
Kupfer JA, Cairns DM
Progress in Physical Geography 20 (3): 253-272 Sep 1996
Because of the difficulties involved with separating natural fluctuations in climatic variables from possible directional changes related to human activities (e.g., heightened atmospheric CO2 concentrations related to fossil fuel consumption), some researchers have focused on developing alternative indicators to detect hypothesized climate changes.
I'm not going to take the time to list each of the abstracts in that list which support Peiser's position, but I've satisfied myself that it's false to claim that "only one" does, or that most do not.
And claiming that Peiser himself has withdrawn his argument is misleading as well. He's modified it, to acknowledge that Oreskes' original study filtered out anything which wasn't listed in the abstract as an "article," while his own results did not include such a filter. Peiser still lists all the abstracts
on his website, and I have not seen Oreskes' response to his claim that only 13 of the 900+ articles she analyzed "explicitly endorse what she has called the 'consensus view'".
(I point this out for comedy purposes. I don't actually give a rat's ass about Peiser.)
