You see, only about 3100 and change bothered to return the survey. (actually pretty good response if you ask me) However, of those only 157 self-identified as climate scientists. Our intrepid grad student somewhat arbitrarily decided that only 79 of these were fit to call themselves climate scientists, so those were the only ones he counted.
This is rather vague, as to where the 97% came from.
There were 81 respondents of the first question which were chosen to represent the original 10,000+ inquiries.
Of those, all 81 gave the desired response to the first question, but 2 failed to do so to the second question. The second question asked if the anthropogenic contribution contributed significantly to the "global warming."
Thus, 79 out of 81 climate "scientists" comes to 97%.
And the grand fraud was born.
Yes, we are expected to infer that the 97% refers to the original 10,000+ questionnaires, rather than the arbitrary 81 chosen to generate the answer the fraudulent graduate student desired..
And the claim even thus derived is mild. Is some “significant” element of this “anthropogenic.” That’s not “most.”