There has been a sharp decline over the past year in the percentage of Americans who say there is solid evidence that global temperatures are rising. And fewer also see global warming as a very serious problem -- 35% say that today, down from 44% in April 200
Comments
Yes, people are entirely free to have whatever opinion they want about collected scientific evidence, and to not understand the difference between climate and weather.
Opinions still fail to alter the situation, however.
Or, more simplified: http://www.overcompensating.com/posts/20091021.html
i know, let's just all agree global warming is a load of crap and Algore is greedy opportunist.
Simple enough!
See, no thinking required, just a knee-jerk attack on something based on irrational hatred of a person.
Not to be confused with a blind belief in fairy tales because you have a man-crush on a jilted politician with a super slick sales presentation and a puffed up resume.
Most global warming theorists are so enthralled with his "immenseness" they'd pony up a $100,000 non refundable deposit on oceanfront property in Arizona if that turns out to be his next scam.
I don't think he ever found man-bear-pig either. A shame really.
If you look further into that same poll, you'll find that professional scientists, i.e., people who know what they're talking about, have very few doubts at all about global warming.
Just as I choose to believe my mechanic, rather than my tailor, when he says my car's transmission is shot, I choose to believe climatologists over amateurs on the issue of global warming.
Silly of me, I know.
timothy sez Al Gore has "a puffed up resume."
Okay, let's review. Al Gore's resume includes the following titles:
Vice President of the United State
United States Senator
United States Representative
Nobel Laureate
Author
Emmy and Grammy Award winner
Army veteran
Visiting professor at Middle Tennessee State University, Fisk University, Columbia University School of Journalism, and UCLA
Member of the Board of Directors of Apple, Inc.
Senior advisor to Google.
I'm just wondering where the puffed-up part comes in.
Silly, silly timothy.
I think the important thing to realize here is that Zank is the one who keeps bringing up Al Gore. If only he could put aside this bizarre fixation on Gore. Who isn't even mentioned in the linked story.
One has to wonder who actually has some sort of man-crush here. Is there something you're not telling us, Tim?
Algore may not be mentioned by name in this particle article, but he is ipso facto the name & face of the global warming alarmists. His followers are like Obamas, resembling disciples who question nothing and blindly follow right off a cliff no matter how ridiculous or untruthful the claims made.
I don't need a "professional scientist" to help me read a thermometer. There is no definitive proof on either side, and most thinking people would defer to having proof before taking steps to destroy the worlds economy based upon the rantings of a "Professor Harold Hill" wannabe.
As for the "puffed up" resume remark, I would point to the Nobel (that's a joke) the Emmy & Grammy (that's hilarious, what an artist he is!) and the author claim (see ghostwriters).
If there's a legitimate case to made for global warming dangers, take the politics and freakish sideshows out of it and I'll listen, otherwise I'll stick with 65% that realize we're being pitched a load of crap.
For your reading pleasure, this is the kind of nonsense that comes from the junk science and combined hysteria promoted by global warming nutz:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/2987848/Save-the-planet-time-to-eat-dog
Global warming is real because the Bush/Cheney administration said so.
If they lied about that, what else could they have lied about? WMDs? Iraq's involvement in 9/11?
ROFLMAO!
Yeah, I think if memory serves they threw their support behind the global warming movement right about the time they were caught killing puppies in the White House basement to drink their blood.
Has there been an event in the last 20 years you wouldn't attribute to or affirm with a reference to Bush/Cheney?
Oh boy, you found a story - with a misleading headline. Crappy science journalism? Amazing! Maybe you should have read it to see it doesn't say to eat pets.
"Victoria University professors Brenda and Robert Vale, architects who specialise in sustainable living, say pet owners should swap cats and dogs for creatures they can eat, such as chickens or rabbits, in their provocative new book Time to Eat the Dog: The real guide to sustainable living.
...
"'The title of the book is a little bit of a shock tactic, I think, but though we are not advocating eating anyone's pet cat or dog there is certainly some truth in the fact that if we have edible pets like chickens for their eggs and meat, and rabbits and pigs, we will be compensating for the impact of other things on our environment.'"
You know, growing your own food goes back to those crazy America-hating-liberal victory garden people in more recent memory. Wouldn't want that nutjobbery!
Tim, we already know you don't want to listen. You're too busy using this as an excuse to hate Al Gore for whatever psychotic reasons you have.
"I don
Glad I could be of help, chalk one up to common sense.
I imagine 65% or more of the population would have dismissed Galileo's pronuncement as to the earth revolving about the sun when it was first expounded, if polls were around then. That belief wouldn't have changed the facts, however.
There is a vastly greater amount of science out there that supports the concept of global warming than doesn't. That ship has sailed.
It is perfectly valid, however, to argue -respectfully- as to how much of this situation is due to human activity on the planet and how changes in that activity could reduce or possibly reverse the potentially dire effects of climate change. It is even OK to argue whether climate change will, indeed, bring about some of the consequences some have predicted.
Nevertheless, both sides can't be right. I'll take my chances by erring on the side of preparing for at least some big problems ahead, instead of denying anything is happening at all.
If the Earth has been around for millions of years (as most liberals claim) I find it hard to believe that a measly 150 years of industrialization by man is going to somehow bring about it's demise.
No ship has sailed on the "science" of any of this at all. Just yelling "the sky is falling" louder and more often, while waiving a PHD in the air and having the 100% backing of virtually ALL media does not proof make.
The collective opinion of 2000 paid "scientists" doesn't impress me. How many scientists are there today in the world? I'll bet it's a damn sight more than the ones being paid to push this.
Yep, you've got it right. All those scientists who don't support your view are obviously on the take.
As a scientist who doesn't support your view, but isn't getting a dime from Al Gore, let me enlighten you on a little bit of scientific thinking that has proven valid for centuries. If there is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence to support a particular scientific conclusion, the conculsion has an extremely high probablity of being true.
If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc. etc. You know the rest.
By the way, are you also saying that if you believe in a time frame for the development of the universe of, say, something in the neighborhood of several billion years, that that makes you a de facto liberal? If so, you are in a tinier minority than you may have realized.
See? You can't have a respectful argument with ignorant and crazy.
Yeah Tim, there should have been climate change when the dinosaurs had their industrial revolution.
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
You claim there's no evidence, Tim, but you provide none of your own. You just insult and deny.
Tim, doesn't your neck get tired from carrying around that giant brain? I mean, what's it like being smarter than all the scientists in the world? The responsibility must be awesome.
Ok, Michaelk42 sez: "You claim there
Littlejohn, It doesn't take an astronomically high I.Q. to know when your being fed a sh&t sandwich. In my experience, if one is exposed to only one side of an argument, daily and weekly year in and year out from every single source of media, every grade school, every high school, and every college one eventually comes to accept the mantra as fact.
There are 2500 scientists on the UN council pushing a very obvious agenda. There are 31,000 American scientists that disagree and don't have an agenda. There is an enormous amount of money in global warming mediation and that's what this is all about. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with saving the planet, it's about the $$$$$$$$$ and power, plain and simple.
HAHAHAHA
THAT debunked petition? THAT'S what you have Tim?
Oh, now that's comedy.
"The OISM
Poor, poor timothy. He haz a mad.
I suppose, given a little time and the inclination, I (or someone else) could (or probably has already) debunk the credentials of the UN scientific committee as well.
I simply don't think you have to be "climatologist" to have a basic grasp of weather. This Earth was scorched a few times long before we fired up an internal combustion engine and it's becoming more clear that a majority of people are now seeing through the make believe man made "smokescreen". In the 70's it was global cooling, we were all supposed to be frozen by now. Make up your minds Einsteins.
Feel free to worship at the alter of Climate Change, that is your right. I just think you are woefully misguided.
Nellie, I'm not mad. Just sad. Too many gullible people on this Earth and not enough common sense.
The thing I linked to VERIFIED the pool of scientists working for the UN.
Tim, you're still failing to grasp the difference between "weather" and "climate." And then just being insulting.
Worshiping at the alter [sic] of climate change? Sorry Tim, just paying attention to actual science. You know, instead of subscribing to conspiracy theories.
Hey, you guys, leave Tim alone! He's discovered the vast Scientist Conspiracy. I realize now we shouldn't have left all those clues in "The Last Supper." We were such fools. Now, of course, we'll have to have him eliminated, before he can alert the populace. BWHA-HA-HA-HA! *rubs hands together*
BTW, who is "Algore"?
Oh! I get it! Tim made a funny! He ran Al Gore's first and last names together, which proves Al Gore must be stupid!
I'll bet Tim calls the Democratic Party the "Democrat Party!" That's funny, too! See, it shows that Democrats are wrong. Wow, Tim's a genius AND a comedian! I think that qualifies him to be governor of Alaska. I hear there was a recent opening. And from there - dare I say it? - Republican candidate for vice president!
See, if "Algore" weren't so stupid, he could be smart, like Tim and Sarah. Only stoopy-poopies go to Harvard.
LittleJohn, What do you do at the News-Sentinel, sweep the floors?
Huh? Get a dictionary and look up "ad hominem."
Are you under the impression I work for the News-Sentinel?
Are you making fun of people who sweep floors for a living?
Are you making fun of people who sweep floors for the News-Sentinel (I feel sorry for them - journalists are such pigs).
What are you talking about? Seriously, if that was a real question, unlike, "When did you stop beating your wife?" I'll cheerfully answer it.
I thought we were having a good time here. Sorry if I hurt your feelings and made you snippy. Honest.
I thought you worked at the News Sentinel?
No. Fraid not. I'd be happy to be working anywhere, but these are not good times for people looking for newspaper jobs. My father was a newspaper man all his life, too - two-time runner up for a Pulitzer, as a matter of fact. But I fear we're coming to the end of an era. Thanks, largely, to the medium we're using right now. As much as I enjoy an Internet debate, I'd much rather be making my point in a column.
Are you managing to get paid for anything in this economy? If you are - especially if you get insurance benefits - hang on tight. Jobs are precious right now.