The sample data is skewed by filtering.
If I were to extract data from football reports for ‘broken windows’ I might find there was some trouble after the local derby, that Police made some arrests after one or two windows were broken. I might also find that the Chelsea team bus suffered ‘broken windows’ as it arrived in Manchester.
What I wouldn’t find reported is ‘There was some trouble after the local derby but no windows were broken’ and similarly, ‘The Chelsea team bus arrived in Manchester and there were no broken windows’.
It follows that with Cook’s method (filtering key words) the result would indicate that broken windows accompany every football match.
So the scientific rigour of the study is flawed by the act of filtering the data. The fact that this was entertained by an organisation professing to be scientific is the biggest worry.
Cook’s survey singlehandedly conjures up much of what is wrong with climate science.
Climate science continues to sink into an abyss of political spin, religious zeal, teenage arrogance and misguided motives.
Of course, I can imagine that Barnstoneworth United had a few climate scientists in the team.
And don’t forget to take a peek at http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/03/the-tuesday-tittering-the-big-knobs-of-climate-control/