Global Warming Scandal Makes Scientific Progress More Difficult, Experts Say

[saveliberty]

I had forgotten about this principle:

“When the Arctic Ocean ice melts, it never raises sea level because floating ice is floating ice, because it’s displacing water,” O’Brien said. “When the ice melts, sea level actually goes down. I call it a fourth grade science experiment. Take a glass, put some ice in it. Put water in it. Mark level where water is. Let it [melt]. After the ice melts, the sea level didn’t go up in your glass of water. It’s called the Archimedes Principle.”

Hot Air » Blog Archive » Scientists scoff at AP global-warming story

Newsmax.com - 31,000 Scientists Debunk Al Gore and Global Warming

31,000 sounds more than a small minority.

 

[Oddball]

New public opinion poll on global warming

Filed under:

• Climate Science
• RC Forum
• Reporting on climate

— gavin @ 23 August 2006
There is a new Zogby poll on public attitudes in the US towards global warming and the potential connection between severe weather events and climate change.
Unsurprisingly to us (but maybe not to others), most of the US public feel that global warming is happening (around 70%), and roughly the same amount of people report being more or much more convinced of this over the last two years.

RealClimate: New public opinion poll on global warming

Real Climate: the Daily Kos of the enviroloon warmercoolerist movement.

I can dig up the appropriate e-mails which demonstrate that any and all non-cultist posts are screened and deleted, if that'll help.

 

[Jay Canuck]

Poll: Public Concern on Warming Gains Intensity - ABC News

A vast majority, 85 percent, believes global warming probably is occurring, up slightly from 80 percent in a 1998 poll.


Views of Global Warming:
Then and Now
Now1998Think it's probably
happening 85% 80%Personally see it as
very/extremely important 49 31Know at least a moderate
amount about it 58 44Think scientists
disagree about it 64 67

 

[Jay Canuck]

anyways the deniers being funded by big oil will have to spend milions of more $'s to try and change the perception of what is taking place right in front of people eyes

 

[Oddball]

Holy leaded premium gas, Batman!

Energy producers hiring their own experts, to keep a bunch of authoritarian goombahs from destroying their businesses?!?

Oh, the scandal!

 

[PoliticalChic]

anyways the deniers being funded by big oil will have to spend milions of more $'s to try and change the perception of what is taking place right in front of people eyes

And where are the kudos for Big Oil, without which we couldn’t get to work? Or should we go after the owners of Exxon with pitchforks an firebrands? Better not, after all they is us! “Exxon Mobil, in fact, is owned mostly by ordinary Americans. Mutual funds, index funds and pension funds (including union pension funds) own about 52 percent of Exxon Mobil’s shares. Individual shareholders, about two million or so, own almost all the rest. The pooh-bahs who run Exxon own less than 1 percent of the company.” http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/business/02every.html


And, of course, the antibusiness crowd loves stories about how much Big Oil is stealing from the American people! On the contrary, in 2006, the oil industry paid $81 billion in income tax, and while Exxon’s earnings increased 89% from 2003 to 2007, their income taxes increased 170%. Exxon: Profit Pirate or Tax Victim?


The non-thinking segment of the public, i.e. the above poster, has been conditioned to hate the oil industry. Very few realize the extent to which they are subsidized by this industry. “According to the [Exxon] company's income statement, the amount of taxes it paid in 2008 was 2.5 times as much as its net profit. The $45.2 billion profit figure makes a snappy headline, but the $116.2 billion in taxes that it paid is relegated to a footnote—if that. Exxon's tax bill breaks down like this: income taxes, $36.5 billion; sales-based taxes, $34.5 billion; "all other" taxes, $45.2 billion.” Exxon, Big Oil Profits Evil Only Until You Weigh Their Tax Bills - US News and World Report

 

[Meister]

climate depot! - sure!.... kind of like Home Depot for deniers.

Canuck, your making yourself look embarrassingly stupid. You didn't bother to look at the research from PEW, which is the research that they used, did you?

 

[Meister]

New public opinion poll on global warming

Filed under:

• Climate Science
• RC Forum
• Reporting on climate

— gavin @ 23 August 2006
There is a new Zogby poll on public attitudes in the US towards global warming and the potential connection between severe weather events and climate change.
Unsurprisingly to us (but maybe not to others), most of the US public feel that global warming is happening (around 70%), and roughly the same amount of people report being more or much more convinced of this over the last two years.

RealClimate: New public opinion poll on global warming

yeah, a new poll. You are looking a little bad here, Canuck....time for some damage control?

 

[Meister]

Poll: Public Concern on Warming Gains Intensity - ABC News

A vast majority, 85 percent, believes global warming probably is occurring, up slightly from 80 percent in a 1998 poll.


Views of Global Warming:
Then and Now
Now1998Think it's probably
happening 85% 80%Personally see it as
very/extremely important 49 31Know at least a moderate
amount about it 58 44Think scientists
disagree about it 64 67

ANALYSIS by GARY LANGER
March 26, 2006
Poll: Public Concern on Warming Gains Intensity - ABC News

From your outdated source. Canuck, are you getting it yet?

Notice the difference in the time line.
Friday, October 30, 2009By Marc Morano – Climate Depot

Polling: 'More Americans believe in haunted houses than man-made global warming' - 37% vs. 36% | Climate Depot

 

[Zander]

The AGW debate is easy to follow if you simply follow the money. If you are a scientist and you want to get grant money you go along with the scam. AGW adherents are shitting all over themselves now that the cat is out of the bag. This is not settled science, it is nothing but a money grab.
Source

Consider the case of Phil Jones, the director of the CRU and the man at the heart of climategate. According to one of the documents hacked from his center, between 2000 and 2006 Mr. Jones was the recipient (or co-recipient) of some $19 million worth of research grants, a sixfold increase over what he'd been awarded in the 1990s.

That is just a small fraction....

.......the European Commission's most recent appropriation for climate research comes to nearly $3 billion, and that's not counting funds from the EU's member governments. In the U.S., the House intends to spend $1.3 billion on NASA's climate efforts, $400 million on NOAA's, and another $300 million for the National Science Foundation. The states also have a piece of the action, with California—apparently not feeling bankrupt enough—devoting $600 million to their own climate initiative. In Australia, alarmists have their own Department of Climate Change at their funding disposal.

And all this is only a fraction of the $94 billion that HSBC Bank estimates has been spent globally this year on what it calls "green stimulus"—largely ethanol and other alternative energy schemes—of the kind from which Al Gore and his partners at Kleiner Perkins hope to profit handsomely.

Follow the money. It tell the entire story.

.... they depend on an inherently corrupting premise, namely that the hypothesis on which their livelihood depends has in fact been proved. Absent that proof, everything they represent—including the thousands of jobs they provide—vanishes. This is what's known as a vested interest, and vested interests are an enemy of sound science.

Which brings us back to the climategate scientists, the keepers of the keys to the global warming cathedral. In one of the more telling disclosures from last week, a computer programmer writes of the CRU's temperature database: "I am very sorry to report that the rest of the databases seems to be in nearly as poor a state as Australia was. . . . Aarrggghhh! There truly is no end in sight. . . . We can have a proper result, but only by including a load of garbage!"

This is not the sound of settled science, but of a cracking empirical foundation. And however many billion-dollar edifices may be built on it, sooner or later it is bound to crumble.

They changed data and lied. They did it for the money. Period. Deal with it.

You AGW'ers were taken, schnookered, scammed, you were HAD. You watched AL Gore's lie-filled movie and you came away a true believer. You were deceived. It will take some time to get over! These things are hard to face. The best thing to do is to accept reality. Admit you were duped, and move on with your life. Rehashing old lies is only going to make it even more painful.

 

[Si modo]

Every honest scientist who has had contact with IPCC, CRU, NCAR and/or Penn State should have smoke blowing out their ears right about now.

They do.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

This is a great cartoon

 

[Oddball]

Posted this on the other thread...Jones has stepped aside and Mann is under investigation.

UK climate scientist to temporarily step down - Yahoo! News

Penn State to investigate Michael Mann--or whitewash him

 

[Si modo]

Posted this on the other thread...Jones has stepped aside and Mann is under investigation.

UK climate scientist to temporarily step down - Yahoo! News

Penn State to investigate Michael Mann--or whitewash him

This is certainly a line in the sand for those who value scientific integrity above partisan politics.

 

[Meister]

Where's Canuck? I thought he would want to save face, here.

 

[Xenophon]

Maybe Al's next movie will be called 'an inconvinent goof.'

 

[Meister]

Or, "Ooops, That's My Bad"

 

[Jay Canuck]

have any charges been laid yet in this e-mail hacking conspiracy of yours yet....and just how many scientists have been implicated?

 

[Jay Canuck]

this is so highlarious - conspiracy theory about hacked emails = no such thing as man-made climate change. riggggggggght!

 

[Jay Canuck]

this thread should be in the conspiracy zone.....cuckoo!