« NRCC Picks a Loser | Main | The Tory Politics Of The Obama Administration »

Cooler Heads Prevailing About Global Warming

For years, a blind belief in "global warming" has occurred in American society.

Radical "global warming" hysteria, fear-mongering and guilt-filled propaganda have been drilled into our collective conscience, used to advance an agenda to control our life styles and bleed us of more money.

But now, finally, it seems that the American people are starting to develop a pragmatic, skeptical awareness of this junk science.

From The Boston Globe (Yes, you read that right) (Emphasis mine):

"The number of Americans who believe there is solid evidence that the earth is warming is at its lowest point in three years, and the number who see the situation as a serious problem has also declined, according to a survey released yesterday.

In the poll of 1,500 adults by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, the number of people saying there is strong scientific evidence that the earth has gotten warmer over the past few decades is down to 57 percent from 71 percent in April of last year.

Only 36 percent of poll respondents said they believe that human activities - such as pollution from power plants, factories, and automobiles - are behind a temperature increase. That's down from 47 percent from 2006 through last year's poll.

The priority that people give to pollution and environmental concerns and a whole host of other issues is down because of the economy and because of the focus on other things,'' suggested Andrew Kohut, director of the research center, which conducted the poll from Sept. 30 to Oct. 4."

Right, Mr Kohut. 'Cause it certainly can't be that the American people are a little smarter than you and your elitist prophets of doom believe them to be.

However, from the President to our elected buffoons in Congress, our growing beliefs appear to be on their pay-no-mind list.

From Rueters:

"President Barack Obama said on Friday he saw consensus building in the U.S. Congress on climate change and energy legislation that is considered critical to international talks on a new global warming pact."

"Everybody in America should have a stake in legislation that can transform our energy system into one that's far more efficient, far cleaner, and provide energy independence for America," he told an audience at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, urging bipartisan support for a new law."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but, I thought these slugs were supposed to act on behalf of the interest of the American people?

The petulant arrogance of these crooks is astounding in the abject dismissal of the desire of their constituents.

This is a huge development.

For years, a great portion of our population has been duped into believing absurd claims of future global climactic apocalypse. They have elected charlatans who have wanted to promote a leftist, international conspiracy to control and change our way of life. For the concocted guilt of our success, they want to spread the wealth generated by the United States as some form of global reparations, and to punish the capitalistic system by enacting draconian environmental and economic controls over our industries and lifestyle.

We are now wising-up to their lies and scare tactics.

The tide is turning, not rising.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/37119.

Comments (23)

The number of people say... (Below threshold)
Tina S:

The number of people saying there is strong scientific evidence that the earth has gotten warmer over the past few decades is down to 57 percent from 71 percent in April of last year.

For strong evidence of global warming just look at the melting of the polar ice caps.

Actually the Ice caps have ... (Below threshold)
Wayne:

Actually the Ice caps have been growing in the last couple years

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517035,00.html

Problem with many of the man-made global warming crowd is their use of old data and refusal to acknowledge new data.

I also have issues with how some uses surveys a what part they emphasize. There is a difference in believing the earth is warming in any set of years and believing it is primarily due to man's activities. 36% is quite a bit different then 57%. The man-made global warming debate should emphasize the 36% that believe it is cause by man. Emphasizing the 57% is being dishonest.

But...but....but....The Gor... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

But...but....but....The Goracle says the Polar bears are drowning! Oh, wait, studies indicate that Polar bear populations are UP! Well, maybe it could be they're pro-creating faster than they're drowning.

I'd believe Al Gore IF he'd start conducting his own life style as if there was global warming.

tina s do you post anything... (Below threshold)
Marc:

tina s do you post anything that isn't refuted within a nano-second?

There was always a case for... (Below threshold)
RicardoVerde:

There was always a case for CO2 offsetting the normal surface temperatures by a few tenths of a degree (I fall into the "lukewarmer" category), but there was never any evidence for runaway/catastrophic warming from a few dozens of PPM CO2. The catastrophic warming scenario was basically speculation that resulted in computer models that just so happened to back up the speculation and also conveniently increased influx of research cash. The law of supply/demand apply to scientific research like any other enterprise.

Of course the Administratio... (Below threshold)
Burt:

Of course the Administration and the congress critters have finally reached a consensus in AGW. The have finally realized that this will give them cover to raise taxes on their constituents.

"tina s do you post anythin... (Below threshold)
914:

"tina s do you post anything that isn't refuted within a nano-second?"

You learn to post without thinking when your freezing to death.

Man if it gets any warmer around here Im going to put My winter jacket back in the closet.

"The law of supply/demand a... (Below threshold)
GarandFan:

"The law of supply/demand apply to scientific research like any other enterprise."

Yep, hasn't hurt the Goracle's wallet any either. He's worth MILLIONS more than when he left government. Who says "Crime Doesn't Pay"?

Don't be a troll Tina. Educ... (Below threshold)
Nancy's Nazi:
Since the human-caused glob... (Below threshold)
Adjoran:

Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis still, nearly 20 years from the first efforts, has not been replicated by any computer model in back-testing, and the almost 4 billion year history of our planet is a record of constant temperature fluctuations, most of which even the most drastic forecasts of our next century seem small and fleeting, using this unsettled question as firm data with which to form policy is insane.

One of my late father's last lucid observations before his death in 2002 concerned this: "How I can believe it when they tell me we will be 3 degrees warmer in 50 years, when they cannot tell me with certainty if it is going to rain tomorrow?"

:-D

It's not surprising that mu... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

It's not surprising that much of the public thinks AGW stands for Al Gore Whining. When Obama cites overwhelming scientific evidence for AGW he's referring to the IPCC's fourth assessment, but the IPCC is a political organization, not a scientific organization. As such it does not follow well established scientific methodologies nor even it's own charter.

Congress should order the GAO to investigate the methodologies the IPCC used in producing it's fourth assessment and report on those methodologies that don't follow well established scientific methodologies or the IPCC's charter. Congress is shirking it's oversight responsibility if it doesn't do such an investigation before it votes on cap and tax legislation.

Such a GAO investigation would show the IPCC's fourth report is junk science full of studies for which there is no data available or which used undocumented methodologies. They'll also find that the IPCC ignored peer reviewed studies that ran counter to their political goals. In the end what the IPCC produced was overwhelming bullshit disguised to look like science in order to further the political purpose of environmental zealots.

Mann's "hockey stick" broke... (Below threshold)
recovering liberal democrat:

Mann's "hockey stick" broke a long time ago. Leave it to the enviro-wackos to try to glue it together and the politicians that believe them.

I thought Tina was being sa... (Below threshold)
howcome:

I thought Tina was being sarcastic. If not wow.

Between 1961 and 1... (Below threshold)
Tina S:
Between 1961 and 1997, the world's glaciers lost 890 cubic miles of ice. The consensus among scientists is that rising air temperatures are the most important factor behind the retreat of glaciers on a global scale over long time periods. Some glaciers in western Norway, Iceland and New Zealand have been expanding during the past few decades. That expansion is a result of regional increases in storm frequency and snowfall rather than colder temperatures -- not at all incompatible with a global warming trend.

In Greenland, a NASA satellite that can measure the ice mass over the whole continent has found that although there is variation from month to month, over the longer term, the ice is disappearing. In fact, there are worrisome signs that melting is accelerating: glaciers are moving into the ocean twice as fast as a decade ago, and, over time, more and more glaciers have started to accelerate. What is most alarming is the prediction, based on model calculations and historical evidence, that an approximately 5.4 degree Fahrenheit increase in local Greenland temperatures will lead to irreversible meltdown and a sea-level rise of over 20 feet. Since the Arctic is warming 2-3 times faster than the global average, this tipping point is not far away.

The only study that has shown increasing ice mass in Greenland only looked at the interior of the ice sheet, not at the edges where melting occurs. This is actually in line with climate model predictions that global warming would lead to a short-term accumulation of ice in the cold interior due to heavier snowfall. (Similarly, scientists have predicted that Antarctica overall will gain ice in the near future due to heavier snowfall.) The scientists who published the study were careful to point out that their results should not be used to conclude that Greenland's ice mass as a whole is growing. In addition, their data suggested that the accumulation of snow in the middle of the continent is likely to decrease over time as global warming continues.

http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1011

Tina, why are you using 10 ... (Below threshold)
Rodney:

Tina, why are you using 10 year old data? What is the current data?

Tina please go to spaceweat... (Below threshold)
Phil:

Tina please go to spaceweather.com and look at the solar data charts it will change everything you think you know . We have had a series of above average solar maximums since the 60s.

It's lucky then that scienc... (Below threshold)
DavidC:

It's lucky then that science and reality are not determined by polling ignorant people. See acceptance of evolution for how dumb large swathes of the American population are.

As for getting hysterical over one poll, try another one: http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS223047+22-Oct-2009+PRN20091022

> The tide is turning, not rising.

You sound like King Canute commanding the tide to not come in.

DavidC,What you li... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

DavidC,

What you linked to is not a poll at all, but rather the results of a "democratic deliberation" using a methodology that's scientific only in the sense of engineering the results desired by the organizers. In other words it's just environmental zealots using more junk science in an attempt to gain political advantage.

Senator Inhofe has a list of over 700 international scientists who dissent from AGW claims. Show me a similar list of scientists who dissent from evolution or drop your stupid comparison between the two fields.

Nice data Tina. Wh... (Below threshold)
Nancy's Nazi:

Nice data Tina.

Why not use something from oh, say, 1922?


"Consensus" does not prove ... (Below threshold)
twolaneflash:

"Consensus" does not prove a theory, it just determines what toppings go on the pizza. AGW is no longer a myth. It is a superstition. Chicken feathers required. Human sacrifices optional.

My first job out of college in 1975 was as an environmental biologist for a company that did environmental impact studies at such places as Cape Canaveral, fossil fuel and nuclear power plants, etc. From my experience, the data points used by teh AGW purveyors, when connected, do not make the image of Christ, only Al Gore. A con is a con is a con. Pay up, suckers!

ShawnThe earth's t... (Below threshold)
Jim:

Shawn

The earth's temperature is risng; whether this is attributable to natural causes or man's influence is still cause for debate. However given Mans utter disregard for his environment over the last couple of hundred years, one would have to believe that the earth is flat, if one did not take into account Mans impact on his environment.

The earth's temper... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
The earth's temperature is risng; whether this is attributable to natural causes or man's influence is still cause for debate.

Who says? NOAA had to drop satellite data from their temperature measurements in order to avoid showing significant global cooling. The artic has fully recovered it's ice mass. Even the IPCC has admitted there's a global cooling trend, they just dismissed it as some natural phenomena.

Funny thing about the natural phenomena is that it follows the solar cycle just a competing theory predicts. In the world of real science a theory that correctly predicts the occurrence of a natural phenomena gains prominence. In the faux science of climate change the failed theory is clung to at all costs. This is really about Environmental zealots using junk science for political leverage in order to impose their religious views on the world. However, Mother nature didn't get the memo and she's going into global cooling.

PEAK OIL & OIL DEPLETION = ... (Below threshold)

PEAK OIL & OIL DEPLETION = ANCIENT OLD COW PRINCIPLE
The oil companies, governments, auto industry and news media refuse to understand peak oil and oil depletion. The best comprehendible example is the "Ancient Old Cow Principle." The old cow has been milked for too many years, but now gives diminishing milk and butter. The old cow is now relentlessly being milked to the last drop. Somehow, the oil companies, governments, auto industry and the news media find this "Ancient Old Cow Principle" incomprehensible, in spite of the fact that they have successfully milked (bilked) and shoveled huge piles of manure for decades.
Force feeding (more oil depletion allowances) does not appear to rejuvenate the old cash cow any longer. The old cow is just worn out. This is not very difficult to understand, but the oil companies, governments, auto industry and news media argue that the "Ancient Old Cow Principle" is simply too complicated to fathom, and desperately clutch to the old cow's nearly empty udder. Frantically they keep on squeezing and squeezing in desperation, but then they realize that the old beast is giving out. If the "Ancient Old Cow Principle" has missed its logical visualization, then I have considered to providing a video clip attached to my e-mail showing actual "live cows" with large udders being milked to their last drops, by courtesy of the farmers from the Great Dairy State of Wisconsin.
Peak oil and oil depletion is real, just sit back and watch the show with fascination. However, from past experience, successful perception and comprehension of the "Ancient Old Cow Principle" cannot be guaranteed, and evidently remains highly suspicious and is arguable among oil companies, governments, the auto industry and the news media. For solutions to Carbon Dioxide Emissions and Hydrogen Energy Regeneration, please see my website at: http://www.MZ-Energy.com. Publication is authorized with my name.

Manfred Zysk, M.E.
[email protected]




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy