[WikiEN-l] Surveys and consensus

Tue Nov 25 16:40:50 UTC 2003

There's been too much discussion about this one point, so I'll just say
one last thing, and then shut up until the dust clears.

Look at the survey quoted in this article: 

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

It asks a number of questions. Answers are scored numerically, then
averaged.

The scale of answers ranges is:

1 = agree
.
.
.
7 = disagree

I would venture to say that any question with an average (i.e., "mean")
of 2 or less indicates a consensus of agreement, and an average of 6 or
higher indicates a consensus of disagreement. I think everyone on this
list is with me, so far.

But what about scores between 2.0 and 6.0? Okay, I'll be nice and even
grant that 2.0 indicates stong enough agreement for consensus, and even
2.5 -- but at 3.0 the 'consensus' is less than complete, and really
anything between 3.5 and 4.5 can't be called anything other than a 50-50
split.

So let's take another look at the survey. What is each question, and
what is its average (or "mean") answer? Which questions indicate a
consensus, and which a "near consensus", and which a "split leaning one
way" and which a "50-50 split"?

You tell me what are your criteria for judging survey results, and I'll
meekly abide by them.

Humbly and peacefully,

Uncle Ed

-----Original Message-----
From: Poor, Edmund W. 
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:22 AM
To: 'English Wikipedia'
Subject: Surveys have been taken (was: William Connolley no longer
neutral contributor)

> >Now if someone did a survey, and 95% of scientists agreed on a point,

> >we could arguably call that a "consensus" (as we have done on
> >evolution: 95% of all scientists (not just biologist) surveyed 
> >support
> >Darwin's theory, and well over 99% of biologists.
> 
> Another sneaky tactic; it's unlikely anyone will survey scientists
> about global warning, so you can safely say "we have to be open-minded

> until then".

Stan, this is simply incorrect. There have been at least 2 different GW
surveys, and one of them was added to the Wikipedia by someone other
than me:

The survey shows an even split among scientists on whether the GW theory
is true. This is far from the "consensus" that some GW theory proponents
claim exists.

The fact that a survey contradicts the political views of the Clinton
administration and of the UN climate panel, should be in the Wikipedia.

...unless, of course, someone genuinely feels that a mean score of 4.8
on a scale from 1 (agree) and 7 (disagree) represents a "consensus" of
agreement!

Uncle Ed