AusGeoff wrote on Sep 27
th, 2022 at 11:25am:
[I used the data that Lee provided earlier (Reply #156) to determine
this 1% figure.
And a different methodology. Now lets look at those figures again, correctly.
"19 Explicitly supported AGW with quantification
413 Explicitly endorsed AGW without quantification.
460 Implicitly endorsed AGW (So they didn't actually say they supported AGW) Wink
2104 held no position
2 Explicitly rejected AGW without quantification
1Explicitly rejected AGW with quantification.
Now go back to their methodology.
Calculation = 1 − (4/2718)"
A total of 892 supported AGW at various levels. So if we use their total denominator of papers reviewed, the correct method, it becomes 892/2718. Or 32.8% similar to Cook's study. Nowhere near 98%