Alongside Skeptical Science, AGW Observer is one of the best resources for actual climate science research on the web.
Written and maintained by Ari Jokimäki in Finland, it is a collection of the most relevant papers on climate science organised by topic. Thus, if you want to see the actual science on CO2’s absorption properties, Ari has brought together the most relevant piece of research together.
The great thing is he provides links to the papers which are mostly freely available from other sources on the web.
But it’s not just a list of the most recent papers: Ari brings together historical research papers to clearly show how science has refined it’s understanding of a particular aspect of climate science. On the issue of CO2’s absorption properties (i.e it’s heat trapping effect) he lists the famous 1896 paper by Arrhenius.
Climate scepticism under the microscope
His most recent post includes provides an excellent list of papers on the phenomena of climate change denialism. Research by historian, sociologists and anthropologists studying the reasons for “denial” is listed, most of which is free. I spent yesterday lunch time reading through most of these papers and was further informed on “denialism”.
Two papers I’d note in particular:
- “Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?” by Diethelm & McKee (2009) – places climate change denialism in context with other forms of denial such as creationism, HIV-denial and the possible causes and discussion on how the scientific community can respond
- “The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism”, by Jacques et al. (2008) – a brilliant piece of work that traces just how effective think tanks have been in disseminating misinformation and shaping public perception on climate change.
Debunked sceptic research
Another great list Ari has created is a list of “anti-AGW” papers (i.e. research from climate change sceptics) that has been decisively “debunked”. This is a great resource for countering various claims made by those scientifically qualified sceptics such as MIT’s Richard Lindzen, creationist Roy Spencer and others.
This is important, as it shows how clearly the science really is settled.
There is no conspiracy to silence dissenting views: those scientists with a sceptical mindset have published work for review by their peers.
The simple truth is that there work has been found to be wanting.