Letter: Global warming statistic on scientists is unreliable
The letter by Jason Joseph in the Aug. 25 Coloradoan concerning global warming statistics (“It’s necessary to look closer at global warming statistics”) was helpful in revealing the facts behind the oft-heard claim that 97 to 98 percent of “scientists” believe in human-caused global warming.
I have heard that number bandied about, most recently in a TV attack ad against U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman. As an engineer and scientist, I wondered about the number because I was not aware that there was that much unanimity in the scientific community. Reading comments in scientific journals, I see enough debate over the issue to make me believe there is far less agreement than the 98 percent figure would lead us to conclude.
People who use these statistics are clearly banking on the general public’s ignorance of science, and of the way in which the numbers were arrived at, to mislead us.
Cook was banking on Obama’s ignorance of statistics. Either that or Obama’s eagerness to have some fraudulent statistics generated for him.
As Joseph points out, the 98 percent came from 79 respondents of the 10,257 surveys that were sent out. That is hardly a number I would rely on.
James Ling, Ph.D., Fort Collins
Letter: Global warming statistic on scientists is unreliable | The Coloradoan | coloradoan.com
I wonder what Dana Scootertelli thinks about this revelation.
“Evangelical Warmist John Cook is a Fraud”
“First, it was the claim that 2,500 IPCC-related scientists agreed with the 2007 IPCC report. Soon afer it was discovered that the actual number of scientists who actually agreed with the report contents was only 25.
“Next, when the 2,500 shrunk to 25, a couple of University of Illinois researchers conjured up a 2-minute online, anonymous survey that they hoped would deliver some big numbers to crow about. They solicited 10,257 earth scientists and only 77 chose to answer the online survey (yes, only 77). 75 of those “climate scientists” agreed with the survey’s two questions (yes, only 2 questions).
“Voila, the infamous and widely publicized “97%” of climate scientists (75 divided by 77) who thought man was the cause of global warming turned out to be a numeric joke.”
http://toryaardvark.com/2011/09/12/climate-scam-97-of-climate-scientists-are-in-consensus-is-a-lie/
“…
“Now comes another devastating analysis of Cook’s cooked data from a big name in the climate science community: Professor Richard S. J. Tol. Dr. Tol is a professor of the economics of climate change at the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, Netherlands, and a professor of economics at the University of Sussex, England. He has also served on the UN’s IPCC.
“Dr. Tol has statistically deconstructed the 97 percent consensus myth of Cook et al.
“Professor Tol utilizes four graphs to demonstrate the biased methods utilized by the Cook team to skew the results of their “research.” One of the major “errors” of the study (whether intentional or the result of incompetence) was the use of the term “global climate change” to search the scientific database for papers that were included in the 12,000 tabulated by Cook and his co-authors.
“In his first graph, Dr. Tol points out that by including “global” before “climate change,” Cook et al “dropped 75% of papers and changed disciplinary distribution.” …….”
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/15624-cooking-climate-consensus-data-97-of-scientists-affirm-agw-debunked
Reblogged this on Edonurwayup's Blog and commented:
What’s in it for him.