Disturbing review of the Cook et al. (2013) 97% paper

[NickB79]

8. Then do what every other scientific discipline does, and do a replicate study

Design one that avoids what is considered sloppy or fraudulent in the Cook study, run it, and see what results you get. That's how science works.

HOWEVER......

The most telling thing I've seen, in all the critiques of the Cook paper, is how, despite all the supposed flaws in methodology, it still pretty much jibs with previous papers out there that have studied the scientific consensus on AGW. Nowhere have I read of a paper published in the past decade that found ANY significant doubt within the scientific community that global warming isn't currently being driven by man. Are all the authors who've done such studies, often using widely differing methodologies, wrong? I think not.