“Lawrence Solomon on consensus statistics“. Lawrence Solomon, a famously stubborn Canadian conservative pundit, tries to reinvent the science of conducting surveys so he can claim the statement that “97% of the world’s climate scientists accept the consensus” is an embarrassing lie. Read his Comment at the Financial Post. Doran and Zimmerman (2009) surveyed 10,257 “earth scientists” but only reported the opinions of 77 of them! What a cheat!
Hmmm. That would be the most expert group: actively publishing climatologists. Anderegg et. al. (2010) also found 97% support based on publicly signed declarations, while a few years back Oreskes (2004) found no relevant papers rejecting the consensus, with 25% not taking a position. Read impartial coverage of Doran and Zimmerman’s findings on ScienceDaily, and perhaps ponder for a moment how any voluntary survey is conducted.
Solomon’s research seems to come straight out of a denialist think tank “original paper” by the Science and Public Policy Institute back in December, Harold Ambler’s Climate “Consensus” Opiate, The 97% Solution. These are the same guys who proudly published Anthony Watts’ own lame high-school project, the results of his surfacestations.org survey. Solomon’s argument was recycled a few days later by his Australian doppleganger, Andrew Bolt. Deltoid link does a good job of dismantling the arguments in both newspapers.
Coincidental? Solomon’s opinion piece turned up a day after a press release from the fake “National Association of Scholars” announced Fred Singer’s similar claim that an “Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming“.
So what is scientific opinion on climate change? Well you could try Wikipedia (Scientific opinion on climate change and Climate change consensus) or Skeptical Science.
In blog science, 100% of non-respondents are coded as agreeing with whatever position fits your biases best.