I have no complaints about Wikforss's reasoning. However her premises are often mistaken. She says that global temperatures are rising and that 95% (or perhaps more, if I understood) of researchers say that it is from burning fossil fuels (ie AGW). I have read her Alternativa Fakta and there are more errors of fact (including about AGW again, where she quotes the IPCC as a source of information) there too although I agree with her that truth is objective and not what you want it to be. Now, are global temperatures still rising? Were they higher in the past, eg the medieval warming period? Do 95% of climate scientists, or scientists in general, essentially agree with AGW? For the last question my guess is that most do but nothing like 95% or 97%, and there are many well qualified sceptics who have explained why they don't accept it (as opposed to holders of degrees in any scientific speciality you can name who just happen to hold an opinion about it). Her assertion that we must rely on what the experts say should hold true in general (or at least one would hope so) but we are living in quite extraordinary times where many things they say are not only wrong but utterly wrong. This is a problem of mass psychology in my opinion.
I have no complaints about Wikforss's reasoning. However her premises are often mistaken. She says that global temperatures are rising and that 95% (or perhaps more, if I understood) of researchers say that it is from burning fossil fuels (ie AGW). I have read her Alternativa Fakta and there are more errors of fact (including about AGW again, where she quotes the IPCC as a source of information) there too although I agree with her that truth is objective and not what you want it to be. Now, are global temperatures still rising? Were they higher in the past, eg the medieval warming period? Do 95% of climate scientists, or scientists in general, essentially agree with AGW? For the last question my guess is that most do but nothing like 95% or 97%, and there are many well qualified sceptics who have explained why they don't accept it (as opposed to holders of degrees in any scientific speciality you can name who just happen to hold an opinion about it). Her assertion that we must rely on what the experts say should hold true in general (or at least one would hope so) but we are living in quite extraordinary times where many things they say are not only wrong but utterly wrong. This is a problem of mass psychology in my opinion.