I do not know how I missed this article on TreeHugger which mentioned an

interesting turn of events.  Basically, the tale begins more than a month ago, when the well-known pop science publication Scientific American launched an online poll asking its readership various questions about climate change and related policy issues. As so often happens when well-known publications publish online polls on controversial topics, less-known ones took the opportunity to skew the results.

Long story short, the poll got hijacked. To the query “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [the nonpartisan international group that helps synthesize climate science] is …” the majority of respondents said it’s “A corrupt organization, prone to group think, with a political agenda.”

And lo behold, at  a congressional hearing,  Patrick Michaels, a leading climate skeptic and member of the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute, presented testimony. Among the evidence for his recommendation that Congress ignore the threat of climate change? Not one, but two of the results from the Scientific American poll.