Gareth,
Please do not call me dishonest. At worst, I might be mistaken.
In this case, I believe it is you who are mistaken.
There were several questions on the survey.
You are presenting one question, then giving the score for the answer to another question. Assuming good faith, you are simply making an honest error.
Later on today, I will explain this further.
But for now, please do not accuse me of dishonesty over this. If you think I'm mistaken, just explain the mistake. Accusations of dishonesty are in poor taste, as Jimbo recently said.
Stunned,
Ed Poor
"Poor, Edmund W" Edmund.W.Poor@abc.com writes:
Gareth,
Please do not call me dishonest. At worst, I might be mistaken. In this case, I believe it is you who are mistaken. There were several questions on the survey.
You are presenting one question, then giving the score for the answer to another question. Assuming good faith, you are simply making an honest error.
I shall quote the page you gave
the mean of the entire sample of 4.6 for the ability to make reasonable predictions of *inter-annual variability* tends to indicate that scientists feel that reasonable prediction is not yet a possibility... mean of 4.8 for reasonable predictions of 10 years ...mean of 5.2 for periods of 100 years...
You said: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The survey shows an even split among scientists on whether the GW theory is true. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The numbers you cited (mean 4.8) were *specifically* about the accuracy of *model predictions* on annual and inter-annual variability.
Got that? Model predictions and inter-annual variability. You represented as a statistic about "Is global warming true" Thats totally dishonest.
When asked whether they believed in GW / GWH they said:
the mean response for the entire sample was 3.3 indicating a slight tendency towards the position that global warming has indeed been detected and is underway.... Regarding global warming as being a possible future event, there is a higher expression of confidence as indicated by the mean of 2.6.
You said : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The survey shows an even split among scientists on whether the GW theory is true. This is far from the "consensus" that some GW theory proponents claim exists. The fact that a survey contradicts the political views of the Clinton administration and of the UN climate panel, should be in the Wikipedia. ...unless, of course, someone genuinely feels that a mean score of 4.8 on a scale from 1 (agree) and 7 (disagree) represents a "consensus" of agreement! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't care that you find it unpalatable. Your representation of those figures is flagrantly dishonest.