84% of statistics are made up.At least that's what my old mate tells me. So, how about the oft quoted 97% of climate experts agree humans are causing global warming.
At James Delinpole's recent Sydney address, he was asked about this statistic.
Where did this figure come from?
It came from a flawed "scientific" study.
The study was by Doran and Zimmerman 2009. It was unscientific in the questions and was unscientific in the way the results were obtained.
Doran, P. T., and M. Kendall Zimmerman (2009), Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change, Eos Trans. AGU, 90(3)
1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?The first question is designed to get a "YES - risen" from any scientist. It does not ask about runaway warming.
2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?
The second question broken down:
Do you think human activity is a contributing factor in changing temperatures.
|My house - Google Earth|
From Steve Goddard's Real Science
I ( Steven Goddard) just did an experiment in Fort Collins, Colorado at 1:30am. It is a full moon and the air is dead calm. I took a bike ride with a thermometer, which I have permanently affixed to the bike. It turns out that temperatures are 7F cooler in the open space region below, less than 0.2 miles away from the parking lot of a shopping center.Recently a paper has been published saying covering countryside with clamorous wind farms causes warming. Another example of human activity causing warming.
Significant? How do you scientifically measure significant?
As Lawrence Solomon wrote in the Financial Post:
This number will prove a new embarrassment to the pundits and press who use it. The number stems from a 2008 master’s thesis by student Maggie Kendall Zimmerman at the University of Illinois, under the guidance of Peter Doran, an associate professor of Earth and environmental sciences. The two researchers obtained their results by conducting a survey of 10,257 Earth scientists. The survey results must have deeply disappointed the researchers — in the end, they chose to highlight the views of a subgroup of just 77 scientists, 75 of whom thought humans contributed to climate change. The ratio 75/77 produces the 97% figure that pundits now tout.
Some statistics quoted from Scientific American by Ian Plimer in his book How to get expelled from school (p41):
- 81% thought the IPCC is corrupt;
- 77% do not want to pay to stop catastrophic climate change;
- 75% climate change caused by solar variations or natural causes;
- 65% thought we are powerless to stop climate change;
- 21% thought that climate change was due to human emissions.
SEE ALSO: 97% is not what you think.
There were nine questions in all but the two primary questions in the survey were these. Question number one: When compared to pre-1800 levels, do you think mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant? Of the 3,146 respondents 90% said risen. Herein lies one of the flaws in the survey. This is a loaded question. During the past 2,000 years the earth has had well documented swings in average temperature. At the beginning of the Roman Empire the earth was as warm or warmer than today. This warm spell is known as the “Roman Warmer Period” and extended from about 250 BC to 450 AD. Rome fell during an era when the temperature was turning colder, known as “The Dark Ages Cold Period” from about 450 AD to 950 AD. This cold spell finally gave way to a more agreeable temperature rebound known as the “Medieval Warm Period” from about 950 AD to1400 ADSEE ALSO: 97% of Climate Scientists Equals Only 75 Anonymous Persons
The small number of climate scientists actually supporting the Al Gore/IPCC claims of catastrophic global warming and the actual AGW "predictions" has always been a major embarrassment. As a result, the left/liberal/greens have been forced to fabricate bogus support that can't stand up to any form of scrutiny.
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.
H/t - Last two links - Climate Depot