The 68% figure came from how many of them disagreed with the question “the debate on the scientific causes of recent climate change is settled”, that’s a bit different, isn’t it?

Also the term scientist is a very loose term, there are many thousands of types of scientists involved in biology alone, how many of those ‘scientists’ questioned were in regular contact with relevant data or indeed involved in any way with a climate related science? It’s a little like asking a JCB driver to give an opinion on Jenson Button’s driving, or visa versa.

Should also add, even in trying to find anything on your above info, the only places I found explanations were rather right wing political sites. Harldy unbiassed.

You wrote (I’ve added the 3% as it’s missing from your piece)…
A recent review of 1,117 abstracts of scientific journal found only 13 (1%) ‘explicitly’ endorse the consensus view while 34 (3%) reject or cast doubt that human activity has been the main driver of climate change over the past 50 years.

OK, you do realise that even by your own stats above, It still leaves a whopping 97% of scientific journals that DO NOT reject man being the driving force of climate change over the last 50 years.

http://eclipptv.com/viewVideo.php?video_id=8308

Here, educate yourself for christs sake

http://www.ipcc.ch/

http://www.realclimate.org/

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v445/n7128/full/445567a.html

and the most pertinent passage from nature

“The IPCC report has served a useful purpose in removing the last ground from under the sceptics’ feet, leaving them looking marooned and ridiculous.”

I know a renowned climatologist and expert on cow farts like yourself obviously knows infinitely more than one of the most repected prestigious peer reviewed Science Journals in the world, but try not to condescend to them to much when you write to shame them your wonderful ‘ideas’ and ‘notions’ no scientist could ever have adressed or realised.

P.S. Cameron’s a Planet killer labour producing wonk science for third way politcal purposes ! who’d have thunk it

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1227827/Anger-students-soldiers-guard-stars-terror-threat-2012-London-Olympics.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1227879/Singing-soldiers-anger-BBC-snubs-charity-hit.html