Lewandowsky et al 2012 – Data Analysis part 1

Katabasis offered in the comments at Jo Nova’s blog to provide the raw data for the paper

“NASA faked the moon landing  — Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax:

An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science”

  Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, C. E. (in press) Psychological Science

I took Katabasis up on the offer. Here are some preliminary results.

Please see DR_UK’s comment below

The CONSENSCO2 question was

Out of 100 climate scientists how many do you think believe that human CO2 emissions cause climate change?

In other words is it a questions about what you believe about what others believe. The comparison should be with the results of the four questions on the respondent’s own beliefs in Climate Science to be found on Page 27 of the paper. The results I hope to post up later today. The sample skew is the similar. 75% of the respondents have strong beliefs in climate science, 14% have weak beliefs and just 11% – 125 respondents – reject the science. I will post later on the revised tables. 

Q. Was the sample size sufficient?

Lewandowsky et al 2012 say

We report a survey (N > 1100) of climate blog users to identify the variables underlying acceptance and rejection of climate science.

However they do not state the proportion of respondents on which they based the results – that is those who reject the science. The data summarizes the climate results as “Consensus C02” on a scale of 0 to 100. That is 0 is complete rejection through to 100 as complete acceptance. The CONSENSCO2 question was

Out of 100 climate scientists how many do you think believe that human CO2 emissions cause climate change?

I divided the results into 5 bands to see the skew.


Fully 86% of responses largely accept the C02 consensus respondents believe that the vast majority of climate scientists believe that human CO2 emissions  and just 3% (32) strongly reject it. believe that a the vast majority are concealing the truth or lying.

This is not surprising, as the survey was only published on militant alarmist blogs such as SKEPTICALSCIENCE, TAMINO and DELTOID. Jo Nova has so far contacted 24 “skeptic” blogs, not one of whom says they received a request to publish the link to the survey.

Some of the raw results

Some quick pivot tables against the results.

Moon Landings


Comment: “Alarmists” are just as much conspiracy theorists as “Skeptics”

JFK Assassination


Comment: Not much difference here either between “Alarmists” and “Skeptics”

Martin Luther King Assassination


Comment: Not much difference here either between “Alarmists” and “Skeptics”

Diana “Assassination”


Comment: A slight much difference here between “Alarmists” and “Skeptics” – by 5 or 6 skeptic responses.

9/11 Conspiracies


Comment: Not much difference here either between “Alarmists” and “Skeptics”

Pearl Harbour Conspiracies


Comment: Not much difference here either between “Alarmists” and “Skeptics”

SARS Conspiracies


Comment: Not much difference here either between “Alarmists” and “Skeptics”

Preliminary Conclusion

Readers the climate alarmist blogs are full of weird conspiracy theories. Where people that frequent these blogs rate themselves on acceptance of the CO2 Consensus makes little difference to this conclusion. Given that these blogs exist to discourage any views but their own, it is not surprising that their readership:-

  1. Share a similar, unbalanced, way of evaluating evidence to the blogs authors.
  2. Are predominantly in agreement with the views promoted.
Leave a comment

2 Comments

  1. DR_UK

     /  01/09/2012

    Thanks for this analysis.

    But I think you may be mistaken about the variable ‘ConsensusCO2’ which you describe as:
    “The data summarizes the climate results as “Consensus C02″ on a scale of 0 to 100. That is 0 is complete rejection through to 100 as complete acceptance.”

    From my reading of the paper (Table 2), this column is the open-ended answer to the question: “Out of 100 climate scientists how many do you think believe that human CO2 emissions cause climate change.”

    Anyway, this variable does no doubt correlate closely with beliefs about climate change (but of course even skeptics may believe that most climate scientists believe in climate change – just like they believe that most homeopathic doctors believe in homeopathy).

    Reply
  2. geoffchambers

     /  01/09/2012

    DR_UK s right. I can’t see what criteria L used to differentiate sceptics from warmist – probably a combination of the four questions labelled GHIJ in the q’aire. Q.AF has lots of 97s, reflecting Doran & Zimmermann. There’s also a conspiracy question on CO2 (question Y)
    A most useful function for those like Professor Phil Jones and myself who can’t handle Excel would be to give us some basic percentages. What % of warmists and sceptics believed each conspiracy theory, for example.

    Since the discussion of the paper is continuing at many sites, I enclose a list of relevant addresses
    http://rankexploits.com/musings/2012/tweet-your-permission-for-lewandowsky-to-out-you/
    http://rankexploits.com/musings/2012/multiple-ips-hide-my-ass-and-the-lewandowsky-survey/
    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/08/lewandowsky-shows-skeptics-are-nutters-by-asking-alarmists-to-fill-out-survey/
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/01/paging-dr-stephan-lewandowsky-show-your-invitation-list/
    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2012/8/31/lewandowskys-data.html
    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2012/8/29/lewandowskys-conspiracy-paper-goes-mainstream.html
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/AGU-Fall-Meeting-sessions-social-media-misinformation-uncertainty.html#comments
    http://talkingclimate.org/are-climate-sceptics-more-likely-to-be-conspiracy-theorists/

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: