Funny stuff: Should an alarmist Stanford biology grad student be the ultimate judge of climate science credibility?

BBC News - Study examines scientists' 'climate credibility'

Lead author William Anderegg, from Stanford University in California, US, said the findings suggested that not all experts were equal in what they claimed.

"The researchers who are convinced (by the IPCC's assessment reports) have a lot more experience in climate research and have published a lot more papers in the scientific literature and are generally well respected in their field," he said.

"And it also demonstrates the converse that those who are sceptical of the IPCC's claims, in general, know a lot less about the climate system."
...
[Professor Hans von Storch, from the Meteorological Institute of the University of Hamburg] "It's typical of this broad-brush study to make such wide ranging claims similar to the infamous 'the debate is over'."

Dr Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, from the University of Hull, UK, added: "Who judges expertise and prominence? It looks to me that the authors belong to an IPCC supporting group that must count as believers and belong to the beneficiaries of the man-made warming scare."

Study questions credentials of climate-change skeptics

The paper was authored by William Anderegg, a graduate student at Stanford University's biology department