New polling data show the American public is growing increasingly skeptical of an asserted climate crisis. Alarmists have responded by claiming Americans are not smart enough to make proper decisions on climate policy.
The Yale University Project on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication released a survey showing only 15 percent of Americans are “very worried” about global warming, compared to 23 percent who believe global warming is not happening at all. A plurality of Americans — 38 percent — believe global warming is happening but are only “somewhat worried” about it. . . .
Survey author Edward Maibach bemoaned the results and claimed Americans do not understand global warming issues.
“Our findings show that the public’s understanding of global warming’s reality, causes, and risks has not improved and has, in at least one important respect, gone in the wrong direction over the past year,” said Maibach.
This explains everything. Once there is an Official Scientific Consensus, only stupid Americans remain skeptical.
He did not say stupid Mr. McCain did.
Then who is it that is using the word “stupid” to refer to Americans?
The more we do, and the sooner we do it, the less the negative effects will be.
Here’s what I want to know: Who’s the character voting down all the deniers?
Fess up, fella.
That’s not “Putting words in his mouth”, that’s called “reporting”.
Prove it.
Dr. Mailbach.
Oh, and you don’t understand what Dave Mears said, either… Proving his point.
Poe’s law.
The other idea catching a lot of attention is spraying sulfuric acid or dioxide into the atmosphere.
WAIT. Didn’t we just put industry-crushing standards on those things to get them OUT OF THE ATMOSPHERE?
Let’s just turn off the scrubbers, if that’s really what we need?
The science of global warming didn’t start in the late 20th Century. Were these scientists part of some conspiracy?
“In 1824, Fourier calculates that the Earth would be far colder if it lacked an atmosphere.
“In 1859, Tyndall discovers that some gases block infrared radiation. He suggests that changes in the concentration of the gases could bring climate change.
“In 1896, Arrhenius publishes first calculation of global warming from human emissions of CO2.
“In 1897, Chamberlin produces a model for global carbon exchange including feedbacks.”
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timeline.htm
“A hundred years will see an global economy somewhere between a hundred and thousands of times larger. “
If economies progressed as they did in much of the 20th century that’s likely the future. But now instead we see governments growing by leap and bound, the number of statists growing at a similar rate. Therefore stagnation brought on by a global “Detroitism” seems just a likely a future.
“Our findings show that the public’s understanding of global warming’s reality, causes, and risks has not improved and has, in at least one important respect, gone in the wrong direction over the past year,” said Maibach.
I do not see the word “stupid” in there, nothing even close.
It’s called “Climate Science” and it started before your examples. Which have nothing to do with the discussion.
Doesn’t even merit a “nice try.”
Some AGW wanker is probably dreaming up a planned asteroid collision to drive the Earth a few thousand more km away from the Sun. You know, to “cool us down.”
Hey, it’s science!(tm) what could possibly go wrong?
In other words, you’ve lost the argument. Thanks for admitting it.
Nor wut “edimatorial” meens.
Poes’s Law: “If you write stories that are really creepy, people will read them“
Well then that can’t really be science!(tm) can it?
I think the “zeroth” step of the scientific method is “Get your grant.”
Semantics is the last refuge of those without a valid argument.
Even that’s being overly generous to the AGW frauds. Most climate experts and scientists believe there is CURRENTLY a warming trend, but that over the long term, it is not yet provably significant as a deviation from the prior warming and cooling periods. Which so far seem to follow a pattern roughly equivalent to solar maxima and minima, and little else, other than statistical noise.
While there is scientific consensus that global heating over a certain amount absolutely will cause negative effects on net, lower amounts of heating may have net positive effects. This is not particularly controversial. Heat kills fewer people than cold and reducing cold deaths is a major positive.
Nobody in the scientific community disputes that global warming has some positive effects. Where they net out at present and at what point are negative effects outweighing positive ones is a matter of some debate in the relative field which is economics, not climate science.
So here you actually have to prove your case. Good luck, because nobody else seems to be able to do it.
Dr. Mailbach implied it, the headline writer (as was his job) got to the heart of the matter and made it explicit.
My first sentence should have read, “The science of anthropogenic global warming didn’t start in the late 20th Century.”
“Dr. Mailbach didn’t imply it, Mr. McCain inferred it.
“In 1824, Fourier calculates that the Earth would be far colder if it lacked an atmosphere.
…
“The science of anthropogenic global warming didn’t start in the late 20th Century.”
There wasn’t an atmosphere until humans started mucking up the works?
And you’re a AGW proponent.
It’s plain to see how observant you are, and judge your observations accordingly.
Then we’ll have a lot less CO2 emissions!
I will grant you the possibility that the motivations are playing out exactly as you say. I hope you will also grant that there are some honest souls out there who legitimately think there’s a problem and aren’t just frauds and felons milking the issue for money.
By making them all liars, you unite them. By admitting that there might be honest, mistaken scientists, you wedge their unity and divert more of their attention to hunting down internal heretics.
It’s a difference in approach, that’s all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1883_eruption_of_Krakatoa
Dropped worldwide temps for a decade. Decreased crop yields.
Ask a warmist what we do if 2 of those blow off in a single decade.
“We’re screwed, we don’t have the technology to fix that.”
There is thermal lag built into the Earth’s system such that if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases tomorrow, the sea would still rise many feet. Note, that if you put an ice cube on the kitchen counter, it doesn’t melt right away, thermal lag.
A four-county area of south florida has been feeling the effects of sea-lelvel rise, looked at the proesent and future costs, and is developing the political and engineering responses to deal with them.
“Climate Change in Coastal Florida: Economic Impacts of Sea Level Rise”
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/FL%20Climate.pdf
Video of non-weather related flooding and remediation measures.
Video: South Florida’s Rising Seas | Watch Issues Online | WPBT2 Video
http://video.wpbt2.org/video/2365148517/
Discussin of how to deal with sea-level rise. in south Florida.
Video: Sea Level Rise Panel Discussion | Watch Issues Online | WPBT2 Video
http://video.wpbt2.org/video/2365156580/
Look at these two discussions on the myth of the 1970s climate-change communitiy’s prediction of a immenent ice age.
“The Old Ice Age Myth Put to Rest”
“In the 1950s the upward trend in global temperatures unexpectedly halted and temperatures declined somewhat. This led some to become concerned about global cooling, and, in turn, newspaper headlines proclaimed an imminent ice age. Climate skeptics often point to that period as evidence that climate scientists are not to be trusted – warnings of global cooling back then, warnings of global warming now. (It is ironic that many climate skeptics are now beating the warning drums of an imminent new ice age.)
“What the skeptics fail to admit is that within the scientific literature — as opposed to the mainstream press — there was no consensus that global cooling would be a long-term trend and global warming remained a serious concern.”
http://blogs.nicholas.duke.edu/thegreengrok/aerosolsandcooling/
“The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus”
“…the following pervasive myth arose: there was a consensus among climate scientists of the 1970s that either global cooling or a full-fledged ice age was imminent (see the “Perpetuating the myth” sidebar). A review of the climate science literature from 1965 to 1979 shows this myth to be false. The myth’s basis lies in a selective misreading of the texts both by some members of the media at the time and by some observers today.”
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1
That’s just the problem. Scientists have come to so many “settled” conclusions and solutions that were later found to be inaccurate. Weren’t DDT, CoreExit, nuclear power, Freon TMS, GMO seeds and Roundup some great scientific achievements which were good right up until another scientific study concluded they were bad?
There is thermal lag built into the Earth’s system such that if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases tomorrow, the sea would still rise many feet.
You never said _the words_, “I don’t understand any of the science, technology, issues, or math”, like the good Doctor never _said_ “stupid”….
But that is what you just said, just as the doc said.
lol….dear, I don’t have to read about them, I’m old enough to remember that personally and all of the zero population hype they were already teaching in high school.
Who’s going to build the Gulags? The actors from HGTV? Repeat after me: ‘kids, this is a hammer, and like the IRS, you use to strike and bend things. Who can spell IRS? Jimmy, stop crying and texting your lawyer, it’s just a spelling word…’
My granddaddy used to joke that next thing you know the politicians will find a way to tax the air we breathe. He wasn’t a prophet or a scientist, just a pretty good student of human nature and mans penchant to exploit people any way he can. Glad he’s not around to hear about carbon credits or see how right he was.
Some of us believe in climate change every bit as much as we believe if we like our health insurance we can keep it. Maybe we’re just tired of getting lied to and told what to believe. I’ll start worrying when climate quits changing.
“First, is this a good thing?”
Alternatives are welcome.
Second, is all climate research “basic?”
Most of it.
Third, how does Lysenko feel about it?
Denial?
My comment was on the “climate-change community’s prediction.” I accept that that you remember talk about global cooling, I am just saying that it has nothing to do with what the climatologists were predicting.
“But that is what you just said, just as the doc said.”
Yes, as in not at all.
Unless we’re right at climactic optimum (and I doubt that we are) we should adjust the climate if we can in order to improve things on net. That means developing a planetary thermostat with enough capacity to overcome Milankovich cycles (the big orbital eccentricity effects that cause ice ages and interglacials). That’s a tremendous benefit over letting the climate remain unregulated.
If any of our great grandparents showed up, they’d snatch us baldheaded for what we’ve done to this nation.
Yep.
Third, how does Lysenko feel about it?
His viewpoint is evolving.
It depends on a number of things. If we get cheap lift (reaaally cheap lift) the most likely solution is a sunshade.
So if I say you are mentally deficient, you can’t object because I didn’t use the word “stupid?”
True but that 2/3 that is privately funded tends to want results. Now if those results are big subsidies from govements, companies like Siemens and GE will not look a gift horse in the mouth. But otherwise, they tend to have low tolerance for vanity projects.
Another volcanic eruption that profoundly effected the climate for years was the Laki eruption in Iceland in 1783/4. http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2013/06/local-and-global-impacts-1793-laki-eruption-iceland/
And of course, the Pinatubo eruption in 1991 had an effect on climate for a year or two.
Like I’ve always said, mans’ effect on the climate/weather is naught but a fart in a wind storm.
Cavorite!