This is part 4 in a series on the Heartland Institute's supposedly rigorous study (pdf) on the state of global warming science. This flawed paper has been distributed to 10,000 Utahns by the Utah-based Sutherland Institute, a "sister" of the Heartland Institute.

Paul T. Mero, the president of the Sutherland Institute claims that, "for skeptics, we went out of our way to include a special analysis of the methodology used to create this study. This report is an honest reflection of the international scientific community..."

Let's see how that holds up.

Flaw #1: Heartland's study makes incorrect assumptions about levels of agreement and disagreement

This is part 4 in a series on the Heartland Institute's supposedly rigorous study (pdf) on the state of global warming science. This flawed paper has been distributed to 10,000 Utahns by the Utah-based Sutherland Institute, a "sister" of the Heartland Institute.

Paul T. Mero, the president of the Sutherland Institute claims that, "for skeptics, we went out of our way to include a special analysis of the methodology used to create this study. This report is an honest reflection of the international scientific community..."

Let's see how that holds up.

Flaw #3: Heartland's study uses leading questions

This is part 3 in a series on the Heartland Institute's supposedly rigorous study (pdf) on the state of global warming science. This flawed paper has been distributed to 10,000 Utahns by the Utah-based Sutherland Institute, a "sister" of the Heartland Institute.

Paul T. Mero, the president of the Sutherland Institute claims that, "for skeptics, we went out of our way to include a special analysis of the methodology used to create this study. This report is an honest reflection of the international scientific community..."

Let's see how that holds up.

Flaw #2: Heartland's study is based on opinions from 4 years ago

This is part 2 in a series on the Heartland Institute's supposedly rigorous study (pdf) on the state of global warming science. This flawed paper has been distributed to 10,000 Utahns by the Utah-based Sutherland Institute, a "sister" of the Heartland Institute.

Paul T. Mero, the president of the Sutherland Institute claims that, "for skeptics, we went out of our way to include a special analysis of the methodology used to create this study. This report is an honest reflection of the international scientific community..."

Let's see how that holds up.

Flaw #1: Heartland's study is not based on a random sample.

Part 1 of "Ew, I just stepped in a Heartland study!"

A headline on Utah's KCPW public radio exclaims "Conservative Think Tank Says Global Warming Needs More Study," originates from a news release issued by a group calling themselves the "Sutherland Institute."

Sutherland president Paul T. Mero argues that there is so much uncertainty surrounding the science of climate change that it is just too early for government to form any public policy.