I noticed the following on the climate change consensus talk page:
Anderegg et al
A recent paper mostly based on prior work by Prall has been published in PNAS. Like most academic analyses this one finds that support for the conclusions of IPCC in public statements made by scientists strongly correlates with experience and eminence within the field. Tasty monster (=TS ) 14:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
The study has been put into Scientific opinion on climate change which has a section about it here. I’m not sure that particular study will have much effect at all or is particularly notable in the context of the public perception. Dmcq (talk) 16:08, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
So why is this super genius type thinking? This study has apparently “discovered” the obvious fact that the small group of climate “scientists” who work so hard to promote their own message via the IPCC and seek to keep conflicting papers out of both the IPCC reports and the peer-reviewed literature (see the Climategate emails for examples of such) happen to agree with their own papers.
Golly, who would have guessed that? The mutual admiration society that is the peer-reviewed literature on climate change agrees with themselves, and everyone else doesn’t. Hmmm.
Experience and eminence within the field? Bah. Humbug.
Self-importance of the first order, nothing more. What makes this so funny is that they are completely blind to this reality. 🙂