Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop

[Vast LWC]

So, a concentrated advertising campaign by corporate interests and the politicians they hold in their pocket has temporarily swayed public opinion.

Surprise Surprise. Because that's never happened before.

Meanwhile, however, people who know better are of a different frame of mind:

Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real - CNN.com

 

[saveliberty]

Frankly, its the least of our problems. We have to worry about asteroids hitting us, viruses, man induced destruction.

Wrong again, belly button lint is the least of our problems. The list should be, have to worry about Toyotas hitting us, government reforming health care and natural disasters.

 

[Avatar4321]

If global warming is real, there is no need to create fraudulent data, nor to destroy accurate data.

If global warming was real, It wouldnt be getting colder.

You guys have already made it clear that no matter what the evidence shows, you are going to find that it someone proves global warming correct. so whats the point? You arent being reasonable.

But hey, ignore the evidence. Let's just blame it on those "evil" corporations. Yeah, cause they dont give a damn about the planet. They are going to warm it up so much we are going to freeze our asses off.

 

[saveliberty]

So, a concentrated advertising campaign by corporate interests and the politicians they hold in their pocket has temporarily swayed public opinion.

Surprise Surprise. Because that's never happened before.

Meanwhile, however, people who know better are of a different frame of mind:

Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real - CNN.com

You mean the article that says this?:

"However the results of the investigation conducted at the end of 2008 reveal that vast majority of the Earth scientists surveyed agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures."

That would seem to be before the big reveal on manipulated data and general cheating in the study of global warming. Do you actually read your sources?

 

[Vast LWC]

You mean the article that says this?:

"However the results of the investigation conducted at the end of 2008 reveal that vast majority of the Earth scientists surveyed agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures."

That would seem to be before the big reveal on manipulated data and general cheating in the study of global warming. Do you actually read your sources?

There is NO new evidence suggesting that Global Warming theory is incorrect.

Just because a scientist at an institute was a bit overzealous in fighting the rabid critics of Global Warming, and tried to dress up his otherwise solid data, does not in fact disprove ANYTHING, despite what Rush Limbaugh tells you.

Do you have any evidence at all that there has been a decline in the support of Global Warming among the scientific community since a year ago?

In fact, the Goddard Institute just recently released new data that clearly shows that this year will in all probability be the fifth warmest year on record in the 130 years they have been keeping records.

Just 3 months ago, there was a completely different result in the polls:

Public Opinion Stunner: WashPost-ABC Poll Finds Strong Support for Global Warming Reductions Despite Relentless Big Oil and Anti-Science Attacks Climate Progress

Public opinion is a fickle, fickle thing. It can change on the drop of a hat. The fact Americans are not in favor of Global Warming theory from week-to-week doesn't prove anything.

I'm happy that you're glad you're "winning" the debate, and I'm very, very sad for your grandchildren.

 

[boedicca]

AGW is bunk - the science is far from settled given the frequent reports of fraud and errors.

But let's assume for a moment that it is true. So what do we see: in a bad economy, people care less about the environment than they do about their own survival.

This isn't surprising. Being concerned about the environment is the luxury of prosperous nations. Evidence: the abysmal air and water quality in developing or underdeveloped nations.

If the leaders of the environmental movement really cared about protecting the environment, they would be very pro captialism and growth in order to create the leisure and resources for environmental programs. But as Green is the New Red, their real agenda is to destroy our economy, regardless of the negative impact on the environment.

 

[Dr Gregg]

If global warming is real, there is no need to create fraudulent data, nor to destroy accurate data.

If global warming was real, It wouldnt be getting colder.

You guys have already made it clear that no matter what the evidence shows, you are going to find that it someone proves global warming correct. so whats the point? You arent being reasonable.

But hey, ignore the evidence. Let's just blame it on those "evil" corporations. Yeah, cause they dont give a damn about the planet. They are going to warm it up so much we are going to freeze our asses off.

Umm, are you aware of the nature of science? The incredible stress to publish data to get grant funding, tenure, etc. So there are scientists that stupidly fudge data, but they always get caught and they are essentially banished from science. So pointing out a few examples of scientists gone bad, as many of the anti GW people like to do, does not discredit the entire field. IN fact, other scientists will question other's finding and if that data is fudged, they go down hard on them.

It's funny that you make this claim "But hey, ignore the evidence. Let's just blame it on those "evil" corporations. Yeah, cause they dont give a damn about the planet. They are going to warm it up so much we are going to freeze our asses off."

When this fits the anti-GW people to a tee. More evidence supports it than you can find "fraud" or conflicting evidence, so which side really sticks their fingers in their ears and screams nanny nanny poo poo more? Claiming all the scientists are in on a fraud, a myth, are making shit up. Unreal people can be so contradictory, and others wonders why I lose my cool with such stupid shit being said

 

[Dr Gregg]

So, a concentrated advertising campaign by corporate interests and the politicians they hold in their pocket has temporarily swayed public opinion.

Surprise Surprise. Because that's never happened before.

Meanwhile, however, people who know better are of a different frame of mind:

Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real - CNN.com

You mean the article that says this?:

"However the results of the investigation conducted at the end of 2008 reveal that vast majority of the Earth scientists surveyed agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures."

That would seem to be before the big reveal on manipulated data and general cheating in the study of global warming. Do you actually read your sources?

Do you read his sources?
" .....that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures

 

[boedicca]

Umm, are you aware of the nature of science? The incredible stress to publish data to get grant funding, tenure, etc. So there are scientists that stupidly fudge data, but they always get caught and they are essentially banished from science. So pointing out a few examples of scientists gone bad, as many of the anti GW people like to do, does not discredit the entire field. IN fact, other scientists will question other's finding and if that data is fudged, they go down hard on them.

Uhhhhh...that is most certainly NOT the case with AGW. Much of what we now know was the scientific equivalent of Cooking The Books. Said Cooked Books were the basis for much of the Hallowed IPCC Reports, which in turn have become the Sacred Documents for Secular Religious Efforts to destroy our economies in service to a global governmental body.

Call it whatever you will - just don't call it Science.

 

[Dr Gregg]

Umm, are you aware of the nature of science? The incredible stress to publish data to get grant funding, tenure, etc. So there are scientists that stupidly fudge data, but they always get caught and they are essentially banished from science. So pointing out a few examples of scientists gone bad, as many of the anti GW people like to do, does not discredit the entire field. IN fact, other scientists will question other's finding and if that data is fudged, they go down hard on them.

Uhhhhh...that is most certainly NOT the case with AGW. Much of what we now know was the scientific equivalent of Cooking The Books. Said Cooked Books were the basis for much of the Hallowed IPCC Reports, which in turn have become the Sacred Documents for Secular Religious Efforts to destroy our economies in service to a global governmental body.

Call it whatever you will - just don't call it Science.

says the scientifically ignorant. yes, we should listen to the layman that don't look at data but other people's conclusions of data.

 

[saveliberty]

There is NO new evidence suggesting that Global Warming theory is incorrect.

Just because a scientist at an institute was a bit overzealous in fighting the rabid critics of Global Warming, and tried to dress up his otherwise solid data, does not in fact disprove ANYTHING, despite what Rush Limbaugh tells you.

Do you have any evidence at all that there has been a decline in the support of Global Warming among the scientific community since a year ago?

More than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231-page Senate minority report that questions man-made global warming. The Heartland Institute has recently sponsored three international meetings for skeptics. More than 800 scientists heard 80 presentations in March. They endorsed an 881-page document, created by 40 authors with outstanding academic credentials, that challenges the most recent publication by the IPCC. The IPCC panel’s report strongly concludes that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide.

Last year 60 German scientists sent a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her to “strongly reconsider” her position supporting man-made global warming. Sixty scientists in Canada took similar action. Recently, when the American Physical Society published its support for man-made global warming, 200 of its members objected and demanded that the membership be polled to determine the APS’ true position.

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2010/01/04/

On Sunday, January 3, 2010, the former director of the National Hurricane Center called for an investigation into the “scientific debauchery revealed by ‘Climategate,’” citing the way global warming skeptics have been marginalized in the mainstream media in a Newsmax article.

Neil Frank, who directed the National Hurricane Center for over a decade tells us that some scientists played with data in order to show CO2 had an effect on warming and then marginalized global warming skeptics.

Frank went on to say that “Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.”

“Particularly disturbing was the way the core IPCC scientists (the believers) marginalized the skeptics of the theory that man-make global warming is large and potentially catastrophic,”

Scientist Says Global Warming Just Isn?t So | Hallelujah Health Tip

Same article: “Several years ago two scientists at the University of Oregon became so concerned about the overemphasis on man-made global warming that they put a statement on their Web site and asked for people’s endorsement; 32,000 have signed the petition, including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds."

Your dam seems to have sprung a rather large leak.

 

[Dr Gregg]

There is NO new evidence suggesting that Global Warming theory is incorrect.

Just because a scientist at an institute was a bit overzealous in fighting the rabid critics of Global Warming, and tried to dress up his otherwise solid data, does not in fact disprove ANYTHING, despite what Rush Limbaugh tells you.

Do you have any evidence at all that there has been a decline in the support of Global Warming among the scientific community since a year ago?

More than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231-page Senate minority report that questions man-made global warming. The Heartland Institute has recently sponsored three international meetings for skeptics. More than 800 scientists heard 80 presentations in March. They endorsed an 881-page document, created by 40 authors with outstanding academic credentials, that challenges the most recent publication by the IPCC. The IPCC panel’s report strongly concludes that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide.

Last year 60 German scientists sent a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her to “strongly reconsider” her position supporting man-made global warming. Sixty scientists in Canada took similar action. Recently, when the American Physical Society published its support for man-made global warming, 200 of its members objected and demanded that the membership be polled to determine the APS’ true position.

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2010/01/04/

On Sunday, January 3, 2010, the former director of the National Hurricane Center called for an investigation into the “scientific debauchery revealed by ‘Climategate,’” citing the way global warming skeptics have been marginalized in the mainstream media in a Newsmax article.

Neil Frank, who directed the National Hurricane Center for over a decade tells us that some scientists played with data in order to show CO2 had an effect on warming and then marginalized global warming skeptics.

Frank went on to say that “Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.”

“Particularly disturbing was the way the core IPCC scientists (the believers) marginalized the skeptics of the theory that man-make global warming is large and potentially catastrophic,”

Scientist Says Global Warming Just Isn?t So | Hallelujah Health Tip

Same article: “Several years ago two scientists at the University of Oregon became so concerned about the overemphasis on man-made global warming that they put a statement on their Web site and asked for people’s endorsement; 32,000 have signed the petition, including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds."

Your dam seems to have sprung a rather large leak.

I'd love to see what fields these scientists are in, and how many are actually climatologist familiar in the field.

Plus, even if the consensus changes over time, and more evidence shows its not caused by man, that doesn't mean it was a liberal leftist myth, like so many science haters often say.

 

[Oddball]

What fields, other than climatology, have the IPCC hacks been in?

BTW, "consensus" is a disingenuous semantic scam. If there was actual physically reproducible science on hand, nobody would have to caucus and/or hold a vote as what constitutes proof of a scientific phenomenon.

 

[boedicca]

Many of the "scientists" the IPCC claimed as part of their vast consensus were political scientists, sociologists and from other soft disciplines (including government bureaucrats). Calling it Science is a complete misnomer.

 

[saveliberty]

There is NO new evidence suggesting that Global Warming theory is incorrect.

Just because a scientist at an institute was a bit overzealous in fighting the rabid critics of Global Warming, and tried to dress up his otherwise solid data, does not in fact disprove ANYTHING, despite what Rush Limbaugh tells you.

Do you have any evidence at all that there has been a decline in the support of Global Warming among the scientific community since a year ago?

More than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231-page Senate minority report that questions man-made global warming. The Heartland Institute has recently sponsored three international meetings for skeptics. More than 800 scientists heard 80 presentations in March. They endorsed an 881-page document, created by 40 authors with outstanding academic credentials, that challenges the most recent publication by the IPCC. The IPCC panel’s report strongly concludes that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide.

Last year 60 German scientists sent a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her to “strongly reconsider” her position supporting man-made global warming. Sixty scientists in Canada took similar action. Recently, when the American Physical Society published its support for man-made global warming, 200 of its members objected and demanded that the membership be polled to determine the APS’ true position.

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2010/01/04/

On Sunday, January 3, 2010, the former director of the National Hurricane Center called for an investigation into the “scientific debauchery revealed by ‘Climategate,’” citing the way global warming skeptics have been marginalized in the mainstream media in a Newsmax article.

Neil Frank, who directed the National Hurricane Center for over a decade tells us that some scientists played with data in order to show CO2 had an effect on warming and then marginalized global warming skeptics.

Frank went on to say that “Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.”

“Particularly disturbing was the way the core IPCC scientists (the believers) marginalized the skeptics of the theory that man-make global warming is large and potentially catastrophic,”

Scientist Says Global Warming Just Isn?t So | Hallelujah Health Tip

Same article: “Several years ago two scientists at the University of Oregon became so concerned about the overemphasis on man-made global warming that they put a statement on their Web site and asked for people’s endorsement; 32,000 have signed the petition, including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds."

Your dam seems to have sprung a rather large leak.

I'd love to see what fields these scientists are in, and how many are actually climatologist familiar in the field.

Plus, even if the consensus changes over time, and more evidence shows its not caused by man, that doesn't mean it was a liberal leftist myth, like so many science haters often say.

Just throw up a white flag, I won't shoot.

 

[Dr Gregg]

More than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231-page Senate minority report that questions man-made global warming. The Heartland Institute has recently sponsored three international meetings for skeptics. More than 800 scientists heard 80 presentations in March. They endorsed an 881-page document, created by 40 authors with outstanding academic credentials, that challenges the most recent publication by the IPCC. The IPCC panel’s report strongly concludes that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide.

Last year 60 German scientists sent a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her to “strongly reconsider” her position supporting man-made global warming. Sixty scientists in Canada took similar action. Recently, when the American Physical Society published its support for man-made global warming, 200 of its members objected and demanded that the membership be polled to determine the APS’ true position.

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2010/01/04/

On Sunday, January 3, 2010, the former director of the National Hurricane Center called for an investigation into the “scientific debauchery revealed by ‘Climategate,’” citing the way global warming skeptics have been marginalized in the mainstream media in a Newsmax article.

Neil Frank, who directed the National Hurricane Center for over a decade tells us that some scientists played with data in order to show CO2 had an effect on warming and then marginalized global warming skeptics.

Frank went on to say that “Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.”

“Particularly disturbing was the way the core IPCC scientists (the believers) marginalized the skeptics of the theory that man-make global warming is large and potentially catastrophic,”

Scientist Says Global Warming Just Isn?t So | Hallelujah Health Tip

Same article: “Several years ago two scientists at the University of Oregon became so concerned about the overemphasis on man-made global warming that they put a statement on their Web site and asked for people’s endorsement; 32,000 have signed the petition, including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds."

Your dam seems to have sprung a rather large leak.

I'd love to see what fields these scientists are in, and how many are actually climatologist familiar in the field.

Plus, even if the consensus changes over time, and more evidence shows its not caused by man, that doesn't mean it was a liberal leftist myth, like so many science haters often say.

Just throw up a white flag, I won't shoot.

there is nothing to wave, in science the data continue to come in, so I'll wait and see what happens the data shows, not what non-scientists opinions on the matter.

 

[driveby]

hoax .......

 

[saveliberty]

I'd love to see what fields these scientists are in, and how many are actually climatologist familiar in the field.

Plus, even if the consensus changes over time, and more evidence shows its not caused by man, that doesn't mean it was a liberal leftist myth, like so many science haters often say.

Just throw up a white flag, I won't shoot.

there is nothing to wave, in science the data continue to come in, so I'll wait and see what happens the data shows, not what non-scientists opinions on the matter.

Could you try complete sentences? I know it is hard for you to back up that fast and look behind you while typing, but all the same, please read what you type and make corrections. I have a science degree from a major university on the wall, with my name on it. I was especially amused by your wait and see line. Clearly you believe in warming. The neutrality act is pathetic.

 

[Avatar4321]

there is nothing to wave, in science the data continue to come in, so I'll wait and see what happens the data shows, not what non-scientists opinions on the matter.

I was unaware you had to be employed as a scientist to use your brain. Silly me.

Exactly what would it take for you to believe that no global warming was occuring?

 

[Dr Gregg]

Just throw up a white flag, I won't shoot.

there is nothing to wave, in science the data continue to come in, so I'll wait and see what happens the data shows, not what non-scientists opinions on the matter.

Could you try complete sentences? I know it is hard for you to back up that fast and look behind you while typing, but all the same, please read what you type and make corrections. I have a science degree from a major university on the wall, with my name on it. I was especially amused by your wait and see line. Clearly you believe in warming. The neutrality act is pathetic.

, did you get what I meant? Great, enough said. Would you stop being a dick? OH, probably not