Did you hear the one about the reporting in BioScience? Over 11,000 of the world’s “scientists” signed on to a statement warning about a climate emergency. There were 11,224 to be exact. But they left something out. Only 5 of those were climate scientists.
It’s like a bad joke that tells itself. Five climate scientists walk into a bar. Four of them are bad at predicting next week’s weather.
But you said 11,224 ‘scientists’ signed on!
- A vast number did not even state Ph.D. or professor as their professional title/discipline.
- Only 2,796 (24.9%) had “professor” in their title.
- 1,481 (13.2%) of the signatories stated some form of Ph.D., including Ph.D. “candidate.”
- A total of 1,021 had “doctor in their title, i.e., only 9.1%. Many in an unrelated field.
- 302 of the signatories listed no professional title at all!
- 34 names had to be discarded altogether because they were invalid.
The media jumped on the news as will Democrat climate cultists, but they might want to take a pause. After a detailed investigation,
The vast majority were active in fields totally unrelated to climate science, such as “philiogist”, psychologist, CEO, political scientist, pharmacist, medical doctor, primatologist, physiopathology of the mitochondria, sociologist, industrial systems, nanoscientist, genetics, nephrologist, economist. biotech engineer, foreign language teacher, etc.
Waitresses, busboys, welders, electricians, and plumbers are respectable and necessary jobs too. But none of them classifies as an expert on the weather or climate either. Heck, a considerable portion of the folks claiming to be experts on climate (especially, politicians and journalists) know less than nothing.
In other words, it’s a list hyperinflated by unqualified climate activists. Others were affiliated with environmental activist groups.
In (other) other words, the same sort of shoddy and desperate techniques used in every previous act of so-called climate alarmist science was applied to the matter of obtaining signatures to give this latest scam credibility.
Lucky for them, the same media outlets that trumpeted the news will not cover this aspect of the story. That’s okay, we did.