|
|
Post by icefisher on Dec 3, 2009 17:10:26 GMT
Rasmussen has completed a poll on global warming opinions of Americans.
Just 25% of the public buys the line being sold by warmists that most scientists agree on global warming while 52% believe there is significant disagreement.
On the falsification of global warming data. 59% of Americans believe it is likely data has been falsified and only 26% believe its not likely.
On is the UN a reliable source of information on global warming only 22% said yes while 49% said no.
On which is a bigger priority for our national leaders—stopping global warming to save the environment or stimulating the economy to create jobs?
15% Stopping global warming to save the environment
71% Stimulating the economy to save jobs.
Oh, oh looks like the billion dollar AGW marketing program fell on its face.
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 3, 2009 17:37:33 GMT
That has actually been happening for quit some time as the tech allows us to do a better job of monitoring lies etc.
You can only cry wolf so many times before everyone stops listening. The wolf is dead, has been dead for quit some time.
|
|
|
|
Post by steve on Dec 3, 2009 18:02:40 GMT
Well the warmers won one of the votes!
As it happens I heard an IPCC scientist say something along the lines of "The only thing scientists agree on is that CO2 is a big problem. They disagree on just about everything else"
Do they have a different version of the wolf story in North Dakota?
|
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 3, 2009 18:22:59 GMT
Well the warmers won one of the votes! As it happens I heard an IPCC scientist say something along the lines of "The only thing scientists agree on is that CO2 is a big problem. They disagree on just about everything else" Do they have a different version of the wolf story in North Dakota? Actually, we do. We are unique in some ways, very litterate as whole. One huge advantage is that we were covered by a glacier not so long ago, and have no great desire for that to happen anytime soon. That brings us to the threat of climate change. When you live in an area that has dramtic swings, because of location, we have learned that you adapt. IF you don't adapt, you either leave or die. It is really that simple. We are also fortunate to have the EERC at UND. We are fortunate to have a pretty open culture, and there are some of us that actually visit the EERC for information. Cutting edge tech has come out of the EERC concerning burning coal, hydrogen etc. Also, we have the John D. Odegard school, which some of us old fellers visit...  I happen to know a few fellers of phd calibur on a 1st name basis. Their view that co2 is a pollutant...let's just say....is not the same as Mr. Jones etal. When talking to Osborne a few years back, (they do clmate forcasting seminars that farmers can sign up for)...and questioning him about the reliability of the forcasting he openly stated it is an educated crap shoot. In talking to him is where I learned how important the hydrological cycle is in any model. He stated that it is so veyr chaotic, that any model predicting long term....meaning 10 years or longer had virtually no scientific credibility. Good guesses, but not realistic. When I asked him about co2, he stated that co2 is so minor, being the IR overlaps with h20 vapor, that the hydroligical cycle totally overwhelms it at its leisure. So, yes we are a bit different in ND. We are actually asking the questions that need to be studied and answered. I think Svensmark has very valid points, I also think Spencer (I think he is the other one doign research on ions and clouds), have very valid questions. I also live where cloud cover at night can make a 30 degree diff in temps at night. And on a clear night in Jan, I feel like I can reach up and touch the stars they seem so close. Those nights are usually a bit below 0F......and the snow is damn crunchy to boot. |
|
|
|
Post by itsthesunstupid on Dec 3, 2009 18:56:07 GMT
Well the warmers won one of the votes! As it happens I heard an IPCC scientist say something along the lines of "The only thing scientists agree on is that CO2 is a big problem. They disagree on just about everything else" Do they have a different version of the wolf story in North Dakota? It is a huge leap from "is global warming a problem?" to "CO2 causes global warming". |
|
|
|
Post by icefisher on Dec 3, 2009 19:25:55 GMT
Well the warmers won one of the votes! As it happens I heard an IPCC scientist say something along the lines of "The only thing scientists agree on is that CO2 is a big problem. They disagree on just about everything else" Do they have a different version of the wolf story in North Dakota? It is a huge leap from "is global warming a problem?" to "CO2 causes global warming". Steve isn't so discerning. Steve seems to be of the school, my gawd its warming. . . .ergo . . . .man has caused it. . . .kind of a rationalism run amuck from the smog problem. Fact is the majority of people agree that it has been rapidly warming. Of course that might not continue to stand in the backwash from Climategate. Only 36% of Americans according to a Pew poll believe that global warming is a manmade problem. |
|
