JW wrote:
I figured someone would make an issue of that. That is why I put it that way. I used exactly the same criteria the climate alarmists used to get their famous 97% figure. No one ever said either number included all scientists. I said 100% of the scientists who signed the letter. The alarmists said 97% of scientists who wrote on the subject between 2000 and 2007. Both numbers are meaningless.
First of all its intellectually dishonest! The majority rules therefore 100% of scientists who signed the letter? That's cute. Its a prop for financial reasons as cannon fodder for Energy Conglomerates!