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
Bdaman:
that is true.
Should have said, “…I’ll BET it’s high.”
Byron and Bdaman,
Can I dump my garbage in your house? I assume that both of you would answer no to this question – what I don’t understand is why you are saying that businesses should be free to dump their garbage in your house. I don’t think anyone should be able to make money off of polluting someone else’s property, but that’s what corporations do when they pollute the air and water. What possible reason is there NOT to charge companies for pollution?
Byron,
Would you rather play russian roulette with a gun with 10 chambers and 1 bullet (10% chance to die) or with a gun with 1,000,000 chambers and 1,000 bullets (0.1% chance to die)? What was the population in 1961? 100,000,000? (That’s just a guess, but I’ll be it’s high.) say we have 3 times as many people and they drive 3 times as much (almost certainly an underestimate of today’s driving), then the statistics you quoted are saying that cars are 3 times safer than they were in 1961. You ripped your own point to shreds.
Bdaman,
Your precious emails were amongst people in one lab, not several. In science, you generally don’t talk much to people outside your lab until your work is published (then you tell everyone who will listen). Add how science works to the list of things that you don’t understand.
Byron no dude I’m definately not afraid to post under Bdaman. Think about it, they’ve called me every name in the book here. I love posting under Bdaman, they hate me and I love it.
Tootie:
bdaman is that you?
Follow the money. Scientists who perpetuate the myths and dire predictions get the most research dollars.
The more dire they are, the more money they rake in.
Godless leftists (in particular) do not make sense. They will claim that man is the pinnacle of biological evolution and yet somehow that evolution led to these unimaginable and mostly unknown forces having taken all that time and energy to create the smartest species (humans) that would bump off the planet.
It is really quite silly of them to trash their own theory by proposing this was all for naught.
The main feature about the Biblical end times (in particular the last seven years of man’s rule of earth) is the willingness of the whole world to believe a lie. This is an example of what that will look like.
And now the myths have been commandeered by the Marxists.
Slarti:
What is the frequency of deaths. If 1 of 10 was a pool of people that had died over the last 100 years through lightening strikes, then that group.
These labs generally work in isolation with fairly limited interaction with each other.
Except thru E-mails in which the hide the decline and perform tricks and make statements such as ” we cant account for the lack of warming and it’s a travesty that we cant”
Slart we are talking Global Warming not car accidents.
Prof. Mojib Latif is one of the leading climate modellers in the world. He is the recipient of several international climate-study prizes and a lead author for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). He has contributed significantly to the IPCC’s last two five-year reports that have stated unequivocally that man-made greenhouse emissions are causing the planet to warm dangerously.
At the UN’s World Climate Conference–an annual gathering of the so-called “scientific consensus” on man-made climate change –Latif conceded the Earth has not warmed for nearly a decade and that we are likely entering “one or even two decades during which temperatures cool.”
The global warming theory has been based all along on the idea that the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans would absorb much of the greenhouse warming caused by a rise in man-made carbon dioxide, then they would let off that heat and warm the atmosphere and the land.
But as Latif pointed out, the Atlantic, and particularly the North Atlantic, has been cooling instead. And it looks set to continue a cooling phase for 10 to 20 more years.
“How much?” he wondered before the assembled delegates. “The jury is still out.”
But it is increasingly clear that global warming is on hiatus for the time being. And that is not what the UN, the alarmist scientists or environmentalists predicted. For the past dozen years, since the Kyoto accords were signed in 1997, it has been beaten into our heads with the force and repetition of the rowing drum on a slave galley that the Earth is warming and will continue to warm rapidly through this century until we reach deadly temperatures around 2100.
While they deny it now, the facts to the contrary are staring them in the face: None of the alarmist drummers ever predicted anything like a 30-year pause in their apocalyptic scenario.
Latif says he expects warming to resume in 2020 or 2030.
In the past year, two other groups of scientists–one in Germany, the second in the United States–have come to the same conclusion: Warming is on hold, likely because of a cooling of the Earth’s upper oceans, but it will resume.
But how is that knowable? How can Latif and the others state with certainty that after this long and unforeseen cooling, dangerous man-made heating will resume? They failed to observe the current cooling for years after it had begun, how then can their predictions for the resumption of dangerous warming be trusted?
My point is they cannot. It’s true the supercomputer models Latif and other modellers rely on for their dire predictions are becoming more accurate. But getting the future correct is far trickier. Chances are some unforeseen future changes will throw the current predictions out of whack long before the forecast resumption of warming.
Blouise:
those are good ideas, thank you for sharing.
Byron,
Don’t be disingenuous. You were making a point about safety – just to illustrate the point, would you rather be in a group of 1 million in which 1000 people died or in a group of 10 where 1 person died?
Byron,
That’s easy, because they come from different countries\cultures\world views. They have no reason to agree on anything that’s not demonstrably true. You generally need a group to have group think. These labs generally work in isolation with fairly limited interaction with each other.
My house is over 120 years old. In an angled corner of the living room an old natural gas fireplace sat unused while the whole house was heated by an ancient but reliable, no electricity, gravity based, coal/gas furnace. I installed a working gas stove in the old fireplace and turned the thermostat for the furnace down to 56 degrees. I put rounded, slip-on, foam coats on all the water pipes in the basement. Before going to bed each night I turned off the fireplace and turned it back on in the morning. By the end of the winter, the gas bill had been reduced by two-thirds. Pleased with such savings I then replaced the old gas hot water tank with a new instant, when needed hot water heater. The gas bill fell even further. Therefore, I decided to move on to the electric.
I purchased new-fangled light bulbs and haven’t had to change one in four years and within a month of doing so saw my electric bill cut by one third. I decided to replace the old washer, dryer, and refrigerator with energy efficient models from New Zealand. My electric bill is now exactly half of what it was.
Global warming … I don’t know … what I do know is that my gas and electric bills are unbelievably low. All the changes are now fully paid by the reductions in costs, and this year every penny saved is pure profit. It’s now time to tackle my cooling costs so next summer a new white roof will replace the old. According to the roofer, the color won’t cost any extra. According to the environmentalists, a white roof should markedly reduce the expense of cooling which will reduce my electric bill even further.
Global warming … I don’t know … but at noon on September 11, 2001, I stopped listening to anything a conservative/republican had to say on any subject. That decision was money in my pocket.
Gyges:
I have been doing some reading on this mostly in relation to figuring out what those emails are saying. There is a good deal of debate within the climate science community about a whole host of things.
I actually dont have enough knowledge to know for a certainty. But I do know we have a few years to do some additional science to make an honest assesment.
Gyges:
That is a good point, but how do you know all the scientists that are pushing global warming are objective and correct? Group think is a pretty powerful thing.
Many people do not have strong personalities and are easily influenced by bullies. Have you read Ibsens’ “An Enemy of the People”?
An independent mind is hard to find.
What evidence is required for YOU to believe that global warming is man made,
Teacher, can I answer, me, me, me, o.k. Bdaman go ahead.
Well I would need proof of the warming first and that hasn’t happened since 1998.
Byron,
Two more questions that are much more important:
What evidence is required for YOU to believe that global warming is man made, and have you actively looked for it?
Slartibartfast, your right, my bad, thanks for the comment. Anything else?
Slarti:
I found that in an article on highway safety I did not alter or add to that paragraph in any way.
And anyway total number of deaths is total number of deaths. How do you want to flesh it out? Percent of population, number of deaths per miles driven, etc? In the end the total number of dead is still the total number of dead. And there are so many other factors that go into that number, such as better roads, better driver education, etc. So you cant identify a single factor in cause of deaths.