We previously saw a Fox News pie chart that had a couple extra slices (here). Now, fair and balanced math adds up to 120 percent of voters indicating that they view the science on global warming to be rigged.
This is an interesting Rasmussen poll when you add up the number and discover that you are in a parallel universe.
The question is: “In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?” According to the poll, 35 percent thought it very likely, 24 percent somewhat likely, 21 percent not very likely, and 5 percent not likely at all (15 percent weren’t sure).
This rather dubious poll is offered to show that people are dubious about the science and math of global warming experts.
For the full story, click here
Global Warming, I mean Climate Change is for real.
Strongest winter storm in 30 years in Iowa and Illinois – 8 Dec 09
Record snowfall in Arizona – More than 4 times previous record!
– 8 Dec 09
Flights in Chicago canceled as snow moves in; worst still to come
– 8 Dec 09
Large areas of USA under winter & blizzard warnings – 7 Dec 09
Blizzard warning for Minnesota – 7 Dec 09
Urgent – Blizzard warning – Snowfall in excess of 4 feet
expected in Colorado tonight – 7 Dec 09
Ice and snow shut down I-5 shut in California – 7 Dec 09
Expecting two feet of snow in Flagstaff, Arizona -7 Dec 09
Snow and record cold in Sacramento – 6 Dec 09
Potential blizzards in CA, UT, CO, AZ, KS, NE, SD, IA, MN, IL,
WI and MI – 6 Dec 09
Record low obliterated in Virginia – 6 Dec 09
Earliest snowfall ever in Southwest Louisiana
Razmataz: Has the Earth been cooling or warming in the past decade?
Following are excerpts from an AP article I read on the Internet:
Decade of 2000s was warmest ever, scientists say
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, AP Special Correspondent – Mon Dec 7, 7:08 am ET
It dawned with the warmest winter on record in the United States. And when the sun sets this New Year’s Eve, the decade of the 2000s will end as the warmest ever on global temperature charts.
Warmer still, scientists say, lies ahead.
Through 10 years of global boom and bust, of breakneck change around the planet, of terrorism, war and division, all people everywhere under that warming sun faced one threat together: the buildup of greenhouse gases, the rise in temperatures, the danger of a shifting climate, of drought, weather extremes and encroaching seas, of untold damage to the world humanity has created for itself over millennia.
**********
The warming seas were growing more acid, too, from absorbing carbon dioxide, the biggest greenhouse gas in an overloaded atmosphere. Together, warmer waters and acidity will kill coral reefs and imperil other marine life — from plankton at the bottom of the food chain, to starfish and crabs, mussels and sea urchins.
Over the decade’s first nine years, global temperatures averaged 0.6 degrees Celsius (1.1 degrees F) higher than the 1951-1980 average, NASA reported. And temperatures rose faster in the far north than anyplace else on Earth.
The decade’s final three summers melted Arctic sea ice more than ever before in modern times. Greenland’s gargantuan ice cap was pouring 3 percent more meltwater into the sea each year. Every summer’s thaw reached deeper into the Arctic permafrost, threatening to unlock vast amounts of methane, a global-warming gas.
Less ice meant less sunlight reflected, more heat absorbed by the Earth. More methane escaping the tundra meant more warming, more thawing, more methane released.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/decade_s_end_climate
“It’s called “micro-climates”. Look into it.”
Maybe you meant microclimates. Although any discussion of microclimates as the relate to global temperature trends would cancel each other out. The heat retained by the city microclimate and the cooler temperatures that exist in a valley are irrelevant to a “global” climate discussion.
Cooling isn’t the issue either. It’s called “micro-climates”. Look into it.
Global warming is instability in patterns and aggregate warming causing sea levels to rise.
You know. Instability. Unstable weather. Like your arguments.
I’ve used Wizard of Oz clips before. Don’t make me do it again. But then again, you flying denier monkeys probably root for the Wicked Witch.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. He’s burning a Big Oil lamp.
Elaine M.,
My intent was not to talk down to you.
For the last twelve years, the climate has actually seen a cooling trend.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTlhOTNiOWFlMmMzNmJkOWM3ZTk5NWJkNTU2Nzk5NWI=
What has caused this cooling?
Not all secrets are created equal either.
Cheney’s Secret Energy Task Force was secret. (Actual Crimes Committed, by the same people the deniers side with BTW)
So was the Manhattan Project. (A valid national security secret at the time.)
So were Brittney’s comeback plans. (Who cares?)
So is the recipe for Coke. (Yummy Empty Calories!)
Paranoia is not proof.
For the record, if any of you have doubts allow me to point out a few things about this recent revelation from the Guardian, a VERY LIBERAL publication. As the song goes,
“And no one knows what goes on behind close doors”
The UN Copenhagen climate talks are in disarray today after developing countries reacted furiously to leaked documents that show world leaders will next week be asked to sign an agreement that hands more power to rich countries and sidelines the UN’s role in all future climate change negotiations.
The so-called Danish text, a secret draft agreement worked on by a group of individuals known as “the circle of commitment”
The draft hands effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank; would abandon the Kyoto protocol – the only legally binding treaty that the world has on emissions reductions;
The document was described last night by one senior diplomat as “a very dangerous document for developing countries. It is a fundamental reworking of the UN balance of obligations.
“It is being done in secret. Clearly the intention is to get [Barack] Obama and the leaders of other rich countries to muscle it through when they arrive next week. It effectively is the end of the UN process,” said one diplomat, who asked to remain nameless.
It allows too many loopholes and does not suggest anything like the 40% cuts that science is saying is needed.”
“It proposes a green fund to be run by a board but the big risk is that it will run by the World Bank and the Global Environment Facility [a partnership of 10 agencies including the World Bank and the UN Environment Programme] and not the UN. That would be a step backwards, and it tries to put constraints on developing countries when none were negotiated in earlier UN climate talks.”
I think the big picture is being missed with all the arguement over one professor. If a handful of scientists believe global warming is a hoax and twelve hundred scientists (who won a nobel prize for their work) believe that global warming is real; it seems to me that we should develop environmental and industrial policies that are supported by the vast majority of peer reviewed science. This is especially true if the consequences are even close to what is expected.
Just out of curiousity, if the ice sheets do melt, can we beat the snot out of the all the global warming deniers?
To Razmataz:
You asked: “The poll was performed in September thru early October 2009. Wasn’t that before the email controversy?”
The article at that link seems to suggest that it is referring to three different polls.
As I implied, polling Americans will likely NOT glean any scientific truth.
Razmataz–
You said:
The earth has warmed and cooled throughout its existence. Most of the time humans could not have had anything to do with it.
I’m sure you’re familiar with the “ice age”. Did humans cause the earth to come out of the ice?
***************
You’re missing my point. There are people like Inhofe who are denying that the planet is getting warmer. I didn’t say anything about the causes. There is no need to talk down to me. I am fully aware that Earth has experienced periods of cooling and heating throughout its existence. There have been mass extinctions, too, that were not caused by humans. That doesn’t rule out the fact that humans are most likely partly responsible for the current condition of our planet.
We’re going to have a difficult time addressing the issue of global warming in the US–no matter what the causes of it are–if we have people in Congress who deny the existence of it.
Natural variations in climate do not preclude manufactured variations in climate.
Leading, misleading and irrelevant question.
Elaine M.,
The earth has warmed and cooled throughout its existence. Most of the time humans could not have had anything to do with it.
I’m sure you’re familiar with the “ice age”. Did humans cause the earth to come out of the ice?
Rising temperatures and rising levels of a gas made by man that retains heat that didn’t exist before the industrial revolution aren’t related.
Uh huh. And rain isn’t wet either.
Cause and effect. You just admitted it yourself.
That you find the cause inconvenient is your problem Doesn’t change the reality of the problem. Degree isn’t an issue either. Mitigation of damage is. Degree is the argument of equivocation. Losing a finger or losing an arm. It’s still losing.
Razmataz–
“Is the warming directly attributable to humans? Perhaps. How much of it? That’s the debate.”
That isn’t the only debate. Some people–Sen. James Inhofe and others–are deniers of global warming. That was the point of my comment.
“Is the warming directly attributable to humans? Perhaps. How much of it? That’s the debate.”
It’s only a debate for those with a profit motive. Your being wrong also does not constitute debate. It constitutes you being scientifically ignorant about chemistry, complexity and thermodynamics.
Come on, you still haven’t shown why the AMS is wrong about global warming and you are right. Just like CO2, you’re just retaining hot air, troll.
Byron,
Perhaps the words of my grandfather will help you. “You can have too many chiefs and not enough braves, but you can never have too many eyes or ears.”
“The ice caps are shrinking. Wouldn’t there have to be some increase in planetary warming for this to happen?”
Yes. Is the warming directly attributable to humans? Perhaps. How much of it? That’s the debate.
When the oceans rise, more surface is exposed for evaporation. Warmer temperatures increase the amount of evaporation. More evaporation causes more rain clouds. More rain clouds causes less sunshine to penetrate. Less sunshine causes the earth to cool.
It’s also bad science.