Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

[jem]

out of a survey of thousands... there will always be some paid nutters and some drone nutters.

Hey asshole, what is 75 out of 77? Yup ...................97%.

All the science orgs in the world. None deny it. None...zero. One out of thousands of climate papers. One.


To deny AGW is to be an idiot.

 

[drownpruf]

Hey asshole, what is 75 out of 77? Yup ...................97%.

All the science orgs in the world. None deny it. None...zero. One out of thousands of climate papers. One.


To deny AGW is to be an idiot.

+1


lol and the idiot had previously used Doran and Zimmerman to make his case.

 

[jem]

this is the reported stats from the doran study drownpruf and fraudcurrents are citing.

75 nutters out of thousands of scientists surveyed are nutters who support the agw nutter consensus.

you mean the .3% of the papers
or the 75 out of 3100 scientists in the doran paper

 

[drownpruf]

this is the reported stats from the doran study drownpruf and fraudcurrents are citing.

75 nutters out of thousands of scientists surveyed are nutters who support the agw nutter consensus.

Noooo... YOU first cited the Doran and Zimmerman paper. On THIS thread. Word of the day: irony.

 

[jem]

what did I say? I have written about that study numerous times on previous threads as well.
I was referring to the fact you were the one just playing fan boy or cheer leader for fraudcurrents use of the study.
I would quote your fan boy statement next.

Noooo... YOU first cited the Doran and Zimmerman paper. On THIS thread. Word of the day: irony.

 

[drownpruf]

what did I say? I have written about that study numerous times on previous threads as well.

you were the one just playing fan boy or cheer leader for fraudcurrents use of the study.

You can't possibly be this stupid. You can't use Doran's paper to suit (pathetically flawed) argument.

 

[jem]

here the first quote I found on this thread that is relevant to this discussion.... it seems I responding to fraudcurrents misrepresentations.

now stop being a troll drownpruf and provide a link or explain what the hell you are talking about.

The doran survey is a joke....
it was another 75 out 77 agw nutter survey.
And it does not claim that man made co2 is causing the warming

you are getting very low fc... very low.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/about-that-overwhelming-98-number-of-scientists-consensus/

So where did that famous “consensus” claim that “98% of all scientists believe in global warming” come from? It originated from an endlessly reported 2009 American Geophysical Union (AGU) survey consisting of an intentionally brief two-minute, two question online survey sent to 10,257 earth scientists by two researchers at the University of Illinois. Of the about 3.000 who responded, 82% answered “yes” to the second question, which like the first, most people I know would also have agreed with.


Then of those, only a small subset, just 77 who had been successful in getting more than half of their papers recently accepted by peer-reviewed climate science journals, were considered in their survey statistic. That “98% all scientists” referred to a laughably puny number of 75 of those 77 who answered “yes”.

That anything-but-scientific survey asked two questions. The first: “When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?” Few would be expected to dispute this…the planet began thawing out of the “Little Ice Age” in the middle 19th century, predating the Industrial Revolution. (That was the coldest period since the last real Ice Age ended roughly 10,000 years ago.)

The second question asked: “Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?” So what constitutes “significant”? Does “changing” include both cooling and warming… and for both “better” and “worse”? And which contributions…does this include land use changes, such as agriculture and deforestation?

Read the whole article: That Scientific Global Warming Consensus…Not! – Forbes

 

[Lucrum]

Calling the Global Warming Charlatans “Nazis”
By: Alan Caruba Published On: March 5, 2014

On February 20th, the noted meteorologist, Dr. Roy W. Spencer, fed up with being called a “denier” of global warming, posted a commentary on his blog titled “Time to push back against the global warming Nazis.” “When politicians and scientists started calling people like me ‘deniers’, they crossed the line. They are still doing it,” said Dr. Spencer...

http://www.tpnn.com/2014/03/05/calling-the-global-warming-charlatans-nazis/

 

[jem]

I am repeating this chart again for fraudcurrents over on his thread.

you mean the .3% of the papers
or the 75 out of 3100 scientists in the doran paper

 

[drownpruf]

here the first quote I found on this thread that is relevant to this discussion.... it seems I responding to fraudcurrents misrepresentations.

now stop being a troll drownpruf and provide a link or explain what the hell you are talking about.

I did 20 or so pages ago. You brought up Doran's paper in this thread and Doran-himself states that he was fraudulently misrepresented and is categorically in the AGW camp. So either you have retrograde amnesia, or...

You're a fool.

Page(s) 250, 251

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?t=278244&page=250