Dodgy climate study and the bans which result

This is the same principle dealt with last evening with the Louisiana backwoodsmen.

There is a political mindset – let’s not call it left or liberal or progressive – it posits a theory, e.g. everything was above board in 911 or man made global warming is underway and any counter-argument is banned, especially that backed by evidence.

American Thinker:

First the Los Angeles Times, and now the popular website Reddit have banned critical comments on global warming orthodoxy in responses to their articles. Giuseppe Macri of The Daily Caller reports:

A content editor on Reddit’s science forum wrote Monday that the site has banned climate-change skeptics, and asks why more news outlets haven’t done the same.

“About a year ago, we moderators became increasingly stringent with deniers,” Reddit content editor Nathan Allenwrote in Grist.

He claimed 97% of scientists agree with man-made global warming.   97%?   Here is the Forbes survey:

Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

So there it is.   Besides, a 97% return is very dodgy and suggests leading questions or wonky collection and interpretation.   Where did the 97% survey appear?   The Guardian – Q.E.D.   And here it is:

Based on our abstract ratings, we found that just over 4,000 papers took a position on the cause of global warming, 97.1% of which endorsed human-caused global warming.

97% of those which took a position – many didn’t.

Abstract ratings means they included explicit and implicit, i.e. if they think the scientist meant that, they included it.   Making a huge song and dance about how “scientific” the study was, in fact it was shoddy methodology which misdirected.   “Abstract” indeed!

And there is the little matter of more papers pro-MMGW than against having been published.

Here is a more detailed treatment of that dodgy study:



One Response to “Dodgy climate study and the bans which result”

  1. Mark in Mayenne December 20, 2013 at 09:59 Permalink

    Banning free speech. That’ll work, stands to reason, doesn’t it?

Leave a Reply

Please copy the string YVTqH0 to the field below: