More Hooey from the Union of Concerned (Non-)Scientists

By January 31, 2007Global Warming

Those wacky non-scientists from the Union of Concerned Scientists are at it again, spinning their yarns. The press gives them a total pass and the name implies that they are scientists, which they’re not. Like they say, anybody can get a business card. We gotta come up with a counter group of non-scientists, call ourselves, “Climate Scientists for the Truth” or something. Oh, gotta add, “Concerned.” No, better yet, “Really Concerned.” Yeah, that’ll work.

Any-hoo, they’re quoted — without skepticism — in this article which fosters the canard that somehow scientists are cowed into not talking about climate change. Given what you read in the papers, do you believe anybody’s being muzzled? Crikey, it’s a parade! Well the Union of not really Scientists have outdone themselves this time. Their study of 1600 scientists yielded 279 responses. (Check our math, but this is about 12%, right?). Of that 12%, fewer than half said — get this — that they “perceived or personally experienced changes or edits to their research that changed the meaning of scientific findings.”

The mind wanders: First, we’re down to 6% of those surveyed, a pretty small group. Second, these are folks who even perceived it, didn’t have to actually be true. Know how many people perceive that there are aliens living in their stomachs? About 6%. Finally, is it possible that any of this less than 6% — the actual, not the perceived — might have warranted a change in their findings?

It’s amazing how the press can just report this with all due hysteria. However this debate unfolds, as we’ve said repeatedly, it ought to be with facts and not hysteria. If 6% is the best these non-scientists can do, they darned well oughta be concerned.

Join the discussion 2 Comments