I didn't realize someone cited the Cook report. That was debunked. The WSJ reported that:
Mr. Cook's work was quickly debunked. In Science and Education in August 2013, for example, David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook and found "only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse" the claim that human activity is causing most of the current warming. Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work.
Also, the Cook study foudn the majority of PAPERS endorsed the view, not scientists, and again, it wasn't specific to climate scientists or studies.
Why is it bad to ensure the scientists you've polled have had at least half their papers published in scientific journals?
1: You are completely missing the point. The point is that it is simply incorrect to say that "97% of climatologists believe in anthropogenic warming." That is simply a lie. You can say that "97% of climatologists that get lots of their papers published believe it" but that's not what NASA said, is it?
2: The reason it makes no sense to only count people who have most of their papers published is, as hammy pointed out, scientific journals don't WANT to publish anti-global warming stuff, because it's not popular.
This. Zimmerman/Dolan's methodology makes perfect sense; actually, if you read the paper, they breaks out respondents into a lot of different categories - which basically show that the more experience people have with actual climatology, the more likely they are to believe in anthropogenic global warming.
So, only 77 out of 3,000 climatologists actually has experience in climatology? Sounds a bit sketchy to me.
Excluding people who did not get most of their papers published is a HORRIBLE measuring stick for whether they have "experience" or not. Lots of experienced scientists can't get their stuff published in mainstream scientific journals very easily, because again, the journals don't want to publish anti-global warming stuff.
Any way you slice it, the vast majority of climate scientists believe in anthropogenic global warming, and if you argue otherwise, you're fighting a losing battle.
18% don't believe it. That's almost ONE IN FIVE.
I've worked closely with climate scientists, and the overall ethos is definitely "yeah, there are a few doubters in the fringes, but anyone who actually knows what they're talking about believes this is a thing."
Problem is, that's simply incorrect. There are loads of scientists that actually DO know what they are talking about that doubt it.
For instance, I mentioned that Dr. Philip Lloyd, a former IPCC chairman, did a study that there's not enough CO2 emitted by human beings.
Also, William Kininmonth, a meteorologist and former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology: http://web.archive.org/web/200708282326 ... change.pdf
Also, John R. Christy, Department of Atmospheric Science and Earth System Science Center, University of Alabama: http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~douglass/ ... -color.pdf
Also, Dr. Roy Spencer, Ph.D in meteorology: http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=912
Also, Tim Patterson, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor: http://canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
Also, here are 16 VERY credible scientists cited by the Wall Street Journal who do not believe it. A lot of them are climate scientists too: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 21366.html
Also, the WSJ reported that
Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous.
EDIT: There are arguments that the above statistic is slightly sketchy, and that it was calculated wrong and should be 44.8%. Also, some people argue you simply can't determine a good statistic based on available data, because the survey questions were statistically dependent. However, regardless of how off the statistic is, one thing is clear: a very large portion of the AMS does not believe in anthropogenic warming.