I have an article up in the Australian based on my GWPF report on the Cook et al "Consensus" paper.
A close examination of what was done shows the paper is built of straw. The authors’ basic approach was to review the abstracts of scientific papers on the subject of climate change, assessing the extent to which they endorsed the global warming “consensus”. However, this first required a definition of what that consensus was about: there is widespread agreement, including among sceptics, that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and that humankind is therefore capable of warming the planet, so the main focus of debate is over how much warming may take place.
You can read the whole thing here.