Before Copernicus, 97 percent of "learned scholars" believed that the Earth revolved around the Sun. I guess that was compelling then too.
Before Copernicus, 97 percent of "learned scholars" believed that the Sun revolved around the Earth. I guess that was compelling then too.
See how easy it is to screw this up?
What percent of Soviets believed in Communism? Or at least those who went on record?
There has been a blacklist of thought. Challenges from within the scientific community where silenced. This was in the leaked memos.
Oh, the 97% figure again. Just so we're all on the same page, that 97% figure was determined by a pollster who asked 10,000 scientists the question, got 3,000 responses, then included only 77 respondents in the population. The 75 out of 77 who agreed became the 97%.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/
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.
And those 97% would be right, the earth DOES revolve around the sun. ;)
Don’t forgot those flat earthers either.
The most telling part of his statement is that he flat out states that a poll of scholars is compelling data.
Why isn’t the climate data itself compelling, Mr. Branson?