Anthony Watts has put up an article today from American Thinker (archived here). Apparently they are wanting to find six point six five people who either dispute mainstream climate science or are undecided. Specifically, it has been tallying PBS discussions of climate matters. The article is a bit unclear, but it looks as if it counted 350 people on PBS who accept mainstream climate science and only four who dispute it.
The latest research shows that going back over the past twenty years or so, 1.9% of scientific abstracts that attribute a cause to global warming reject the mainstream science that it's primarily caused by greenhouse gases. There was another 1% of abstracts that attribute a cause to warming that claim it's undecided.
American Thinker looking for 6.65 contrarian climate scientists
So - American Thinker is wanting a "balanced" representation. PBS could go for 6.65 people who reject mainstream science to add to the four and that would be the correct balance to the 350. Probably overcompensating these days but who am I to quibble. Maybe they could have them all do it all in one session. That would be fun. We'd maybe get one person arguing "it's the sun", another arguing "it's cosmic rays", another arguing "it's natural", another arguing "it's cooling", another arguing "it's ENSO", another arguing "it's the AMO" and the 0.65 of a person arguing "it's the PDO". There are other arguments they could pick from. Whatever, they could argue it out among themselves and see who comes out the winner!
What about Fox Television and American Thinker?American Thinker hasn't said so, but they must also be approaching several thousand climate scientists who know that humans are causing global warming asking them to appear on Fox Television and to write articles for American Thinker - to explain climate change and its impacts. They would want to have an awful lot to make up for all the climate science denial articles and segments at Fox and American Thinker.
Or they could be applying double standards. (Does American Thinker have any standards?)
Leo Hickman argues that the era of climate science denial is over. About time, too.