Originally Posted by Perfect Fit
Now to the next question in the tables that pops out at me.

This poll asks about knowledge, apparently referencing Zimmerman's / Doran's poll and study that came up with about 97 % agreement from about 75 publishing climate scientists, on these 2 questions, thus a "consensus" that people might be aware of.

Quote
1. When compared with pre-1800s levels,
do you think that mean global temperatures
have generally risen, fallen, or
remained relatively constant?

2. Do you think human activity is a significant
contributing factor in changing
mean global temperatures?

Quote
Only in the Alarmed and Concerned groups were a majority aware that most scientists think global warming is occurring. Majorities in the other four groups said that either there was a lot of disagreement among scientists or that they didn't know. Even among the Alarmed and Concerned, however, awareness of the strength of scientific agreement is low: While approximately 97% of publishing climate scientists agree that climate change is occurring and that it is caused primarily by human activities, this high level of scientific agreement is recognized by
only 44 percent of the Alarmed, 18 percent of the Concerned, 12 percent of the Cautious, and 5 percent or fewer of the Disengaged, Doubtful and Dismissive.

Showing that there is a divergence of terminology between the source and the pollsters', and more, there is a divergence of understanding.

Doran says "significant contributing factor", and our guys now say "caused primarily by".
Now let's see if it's Doran or his student's paper that is being cited.


If I'm right, of course, then what this kind of error may demonstrate most clearly, is that these scientists are dealing from a position of ignorance themselves, and compounding the problem by sloppy or not even attempted research, and so have slightly fouled the poll here.
This must be a very tenacious joke being perpetrated here. PF is trying to debunk the raw information from a survey that has no message or bias, even before reading it. Hmm"Sup with that?

I am reminded of a test in a junior high school class that began with the instruction, "Read the entire set of test questions before beginning your answers", and ended with the instruction, "Now that you have read all the questions, you are finished and must not provide any answers, or you will fail the test."

I posted the link to this survey because I found the information to be rather calming, in the midst of all the uncertainties of climate science and politics, because you can see and assess what the rest of humanity is thinking about it. I found no proof of any position, or even bias towards any particular belief set in the document. I saw no way to use the survey to support my "beliefs" about climate issues.

PF is apparently demonstrating to us the typical behavior of a "climate position evangelist" as someone who cares so little about information and data that documents don't even need to be read before pulling out the scalpels and red pens.


You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller