I note of late a tendency to refer to the “growing” number of AGW skeptics in the scientific community and am a bit puzzled by this.
If, like myself, you are not a scientist much less an expert in a climate related discipline, then the relative proportions and credibility of genuine experts is an important factor in making your mind up about the significance of AGW.
So who are the skeptics and is their number growing?
It might be useful to keep an up-to-date list of the genuine experts who are skeptical about either/or the existence of AGW and the seriousness of the threat it poses.
Highlighting recent “defections” either way might indicate a change in sentiment in scientific opinion if one really exists?
Of course, some principles would have to be adopted and applied rigorously if such an exercise was really to be of any use.
For example, many would argue that scientists who received funding from a source which may have an agenda served by a particular finding should be excluded.
This includes scientists who have been funded by oil and mining companies, environmental organizations , NGO’s or scientists who have received research grants specifically linked to AGW.
There is a link at Wiki which lists skeptics and provides details of their qualifications:
But who are the recent converts?
I can only think of two – Allegre and David Evans.
I don’t know of any defections the other way.
Should we be expecting to see more if scientific sentiment is really changing?