Comments on: The Lewandowsky Census http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/ by Steve McIntyre Tue, 21 May 2013 15:32:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Lewandowsky Timeline | Geoffchambers's Blog http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-407127 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 00:37:05 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-407127 [...] http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/ [...]

]]> By: Richard Drake http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-353703 Mon, 17 Sep 2012 11:58:32 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-353703 My conjecture about the local anchor was correct, given the post’s current URL of

http://bishophill.squarespace.com/unthreaded/?currentPage=650#post1219618

]]> By: Keith Sketchley http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-353440 Sun, 16 Sep 2012 17:52:28 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-353440 Anthony’s effort will produce a huge number of responses from people who are skeptics but quite unlikely to be on any list Lewandowsky and fellow incompetents come up with.

]]> By: Barry Woods http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-353156 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 23:26:02 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-353156 I don’t think you could progress in the survey, unless you answered each question (so lots bailed)

]]> By: Adam Gallon http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-353041 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 19:53:27 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-353041 I’m getting a 404 error for the kwiksurvey.

]]> By: foxgoose http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-353037 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 19:47:00 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-353037 I checked Supermandia’s blog.

His last five posts have averaged 2.2 comments each.

I think the next ice age will be well under way before his 1,400th visitor is seen.

Time for a bit of direct action now, think of those poor defenceless questionnaires mouldering in the dark recesses of Lew’s filing cabinet…

……. “Free the Lew 1400!”

]]> By: Shub Niggurath http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-352984 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 17:43:03 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-352984 The question arises: Are there 1400 people who visit Scott Mandia’s blog?

]]> By: foxgoose http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-352977 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:53:51 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-352977 It’s fascinating that Anthony’s latest census, of people who attempted the survey, is still in low double digits.

The Lewpaper has now had more exposure on sceptic blogs than anything since climategate.

It’s had multiple, high traffic posts at WUWT, BH,Jo Nova, Andrew Bolt, Lucia, ClimateDepot and here – as well as at least one post on pretty well all other sceptic sites.

In other words, there can hardly be an active sceptic blog visitor who isn’t au fait with the story………. and yet……..and yet……. Anthony has only found a dozen sceptics who even started the survey.

So where did those c1,400 initial responses come from????

]]> By: RoyFOMR http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-352961 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 16:07:34 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-352961 Thanks for your answers Roman and tlitb1.
Given the current, albeit low number, responses on the WUWT thread for responders who overwhelmingly claim not to have finished the survey I find the number of results (60 or less?) disregarded for incompleteness surprisingly small.

]]> By: tlitb1 http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/14/the-lewandowsky-census/#comment-352924 Sat, 15 Sep 2012 14:59:30 +0000 http://climateaudit.org/?p=16775#comment-352924 From the paper and other discussions I am pretty sure that only fully complete responses were used in the final study.

]]>