It seems the majority of the country now has discovered what some of us knew all-along: Al Gore is a lying, hypocritical buffoon who has no credibility:
Just one-out-of-three voters (34%) now believe global warming is caused by human activity, the lowest finding yet in Rasmussen Reports national surveying. However, a plurality (48%) of the Political Class believes humans are to blame.OK, maybe it doesn't say anything about feelings on Al Gore but it does mark a huge change in feelings on global warming at a time that the Obama administration is pushing very expensive environmental policies. This may be the issue that sets people against Obama in large numbers. I have seen it in my business; two years ago I'd ask my classes who believes global warming is man-made and it was nearly unanimous in the afirmative. Not any more.
Forty-eight percent (48%) of all likely voters attribute climate change to long-term planetary trends, while seven percent (7%) blame some other reason. Eleven percent (11%) aren’t sure.
The GOP should grab this issue with both hands when Obama uses his office to push new, oppressive and expensive regulations.
Update: That whole thing about polar ice melting...er, nevermind.
Posts
4 comments:
Its a good thing I don't rely on the bulk of the American public to influence my opinion on climate change. Instead I'll let the science do that for me. Can you tell me where the current scientific literature on climate change is pointing towards? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't say anything about Al Gore, and it definitely does not say anything about any sort of hoax.
The current scientific literature is pointing to no shrinking ice cap and some studies say the temps have been dropping for the last decade while others say the opposite. The key is who is writing them and who to believe.
The GW lobby has been bust handing out grants to write reports backing their theories and some of the more unscrupulous in the industry have been writing those reports and distorting the data. Hell, the orimary means of measuring ice were found to be dramatically skewed and off by huge amounts. I covered that here:
http://environmentalrepublican.blogspot.com/2009/02/global-warming-facts-melting-ice-is-not.html
The data is so twisted as to be useless and I for one don't want us to spend trillions for a problem that doesn't require the energy, time or money when we truly have serious environmental problems.
You said, "The current scientific literature is pointing to no shrinking ice cap and some studies say the temps have been dropping for the last decade while others say the opposite."
You are referring to "ice cap" but are not defining which one. The arctic ice, is very much declining. Take a look here:
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
Indeed the antarctic is a different story.
Please point to actual studies that have been published, saying the temps have been dropping for the last decade and more importantly, what this means for the AGW theory. I am very much familiar with the scientific literature on the subject and have found nothing that publishes these findings.
Here is the current NASA gistemp data: http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/
Not sure how this qualifies as cooling in the last 10 years. I'll warrant a slow in an increasingly steep upward trend but the "no cooling in last 10 years" is cherry picking data and comparing it to 1998 which was an abnormally strong el nino year. Indeed 2005 was actually hotter than 1998. If you choose 1997, the whole argument falls apart.
The NSIDC fixed the sensor problem you are speaking of, and changed their predictions accordingly. Not sure what more you can ask for form a scientific institution. At least they admit publicly when they make a mistake, unlike the blatant lies that are perpetrated by those with an invested interest in continued use of fossil fuels.
I appreciate the ability to post on your blog, even though I fundamentally disagree with your position on the subject.
It's an open forum to post your thoughts, that's why it's here.
Now, even taking 98 out of the picture as GW's always point to as not representative, the trend is cooler for a decade. look at the chart:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/06/ncdc-updates-database-for-dec08-ncdcs-own-graphic-shows-10-year-cooling-trend/
Real data from real sources. It's not cherry=picking and it's not making facts up.
Post a Comment