Saturday, May 18, 2013

About that 97% - Not a "Great Moment" for WUWT

Sou | 5:30 PM Go to the first of 7 comments. Add a comment

Great WUWT moments in 97% 'beliefs'

Anthony Watts and his followers are up in arms.  They deny science and won't accept the consensus.  Cook et al (2013) found 97% scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming.

It's got to Anthony so much that he's telling outright lies.  Now he's put up a 'funny' asking his readers to add to his list of 97%. He's called his article: Friday Funny – great moments in 97% beliefs

My contribution to WUWT's "great (ahem) moments"

Here's my contribution, taken from Anthony's own website.  At the time he was protesting another piece of research: 'An anatomy of the motivated rejection of science'.  He took a poll of his readers, with twofold ironic symmetry.

Cook et al (2013) found that of 4,014 scientific abstracts that took a position on the cause of global warming, 3,896 papers or 97.1% attribute global warming to humans, 78 or 1.9% disputed that and 40 or 1.0% indicated the cause was 'uncertain'.  It turned out that the 97.1% represented 98.4 % of authors of those scientific papers who, based on the irrefutable evidence, attribute global warming to human activity.

Remember those numbers: 97.1% and 98.4%.

Now look at the results of Anthony's poll from a snapshot I took at the time:

Another 97% - how WUWT is upside down and back to front

97.01% of Anthony's readers reject AGW and declare themselves as 'skeptics' (climate science deniers' euphemism for rejection of climate science) and did not participate.  Add to that those who did take part and say they are 'skeptics' and you get 98.4%.

Now add the WUWT respondents who declare they accept that human activity is driving global warming and you get 1.6%.  Not that far from the percentage of the 4,014 papers that took a position and disputed the cause of global warming - 1.9%.

  • 98.4% experts find humans are causing global warming
  • 98.4% Wattsonians reject human-induced global warming

Anatomy of the motivated rejection of science, 97%, 98.4% - too much ironic coincidence to cope with - eh?

WUWT vs Science

I'd offer to add this to Anthony's 'great moments' but along with most normal people who've tried to comment there, I've been banned.


  1. 98% of willards readers reject science. What a shock.

    1. Would be fun to break them down into categories:

      Paranoid conspiracy theorists (general)

      Climate hoax conspiracy theorists

      Ice age alarmists

      Thunderstorm warmists

      Jumping ENSO warmists

      It's natural therefore we can't do anything alarmists

      CO2 has no effect on temperature (Is that what Don Easterbrook is now saying?)

  2. We skeptics are intelligent people who question the canard of global warming. Remember when scientist believed in the ether. Or more closer to home, the cooling of planet during the seventies and the dire warning of the impending disaster of a frozen planet plagued with starvation.
    All I see is a group of scientist who have a political agenda and try to fit the data to their beliefs. If they want to get money from the Washington funding trough, they have to follow the religion of their peers. Examples, the ocean reefs are dying.. blame it on global warming… the mountain in Peru are melting… blame it on global warming. The glaciers in Europe are melting.. blame it on global warming. Causation does not mean correlation period. Let’s call this priesthood what it really is… the vast ecoclimate complex. If you believe you get money, if you don’t you starve.
    Now with have10 years of cooling and the modeling – a – teers cannot figure why the models arent working. Maybe the initial premise is wrong. (Hey don’t believe the data… global warming is out there just wait… its coming soooooooooooon )
    Skeptic? you bet. We have a whole new generation that has been fed this garbage instead of training them to think analytically. No wonder why we will falter from our position in the world.

    1. "Causation does not mean correlation period"

      You have that back to front - it is "Correlation does not imply causation".

      "the mountain in Peru are melting… blame it on global warming. The glaciers in Europe are melting.. blame it on global warming. "

      Yes - temperatures rise, ice melts. Do you have some alternative physics?

      On this albeit small sample size, I would also have to take issue with the claim "We skeptics are intelligent people..."

    2. 97% ?
      31,000+ scientists signed the Oregon Petition vs. ~70 hardcore delusional fanatics behind AGW =
      0.22% - that's 1 in 450 - of scientists buying into AGW, a 450 to 1 majority of scientists who DON'T.

      And in any case the "scientists" who do are really neofascist politicians, not scientists. That would seem to be an infinite, unanmious consensus among REAL scientists, as opposed to wacko counterhuman politicians, that global warming ain't happening.

    3. More fruitcake to go with my cuppa tea. Yummy again.

      Oh, did you hear that one about the Oregon Petition? And this might help your affliction. So might this and this.


Instead of commenting as "Anonymous", please comment using "Name/URL" and your name, initials or pseudonym or whatever. You can leave the "URL" box blank. This isn't mandatory. You can also sign in using your Google ID, Wordpress ID etc as indicated. NOTE: Some Wordpress users are having trouble signing in. If that's you, try signing in using Name/URL. Details here.

Click here to read the HotWhopper comment policy.