Unknown writes:

Roger Pielke Sr. at the University of Colorado, is also skeptical.

From http://www.logicalscience.com/skeptics/Lindzen.htm


The real consensus is quoted and sourced here . However,
Lindzen will often cite Benny s study which the peer review
journals Science and Nature refused to publish. Peiser then
released a press release saying there was a conspiracy against
his work.. The study claimed that there are 32 peer review
journals that refute climate change. However, when Tim
Lambert and William M. Connolley reviewed the abstracts he
found the following results:

[table deleted]

A quick look at Connolley's results shows that Peiser's study
is seriouly flawed. Only one of the papers disagreed with the
consensus and it wasn't even peer reviewed. Therefore Benny
found ZERO peer-reviewed papers that disagreed with the
scientific concensus. Several of the abstracts (#34) dealt
with carbon sequestration. Carbon sequestration has only one
purpose which is to fight global warming. So how Benny Peiser
came to the conclusion that a paper on carbon sequestration
refutes global warming is a bit of a mystery. Benny Peiser's
work has been refuted on numerous other sites as well. William
Connolley and many others debunked Peiser's study on May 6th,
2005 and Peiser admitted his mistakes on March 19, 2006.
Despite his study being refuted by numerous people, Peiser
continues to use his discredited study to say a scientific
consensus regarding climate change doesn't exist.



--
Sending unsolicited commercial e-mail to this account incurs a fee of
$500 per message, and acknowledges the legality of this contract.