No sooner had I finished writing about the Eos poll on the near unanimity of the climatology community on the anthropogenic cause of global warming than I came across another poll on the general public's position. And I did not take heart.
The authors of the Eos paper referred to a 2008 Gallup polll that found 58% of Americans think "human activities rather than natural causes explain the rise in the Earth's temperature." Around 38% say it's natural.
Troubling enough. But then along comes this new Rasmussen poll that find only "44% of U.S. voters now say long-term planetary trends are the cause of global warming, compared to 41% who blame it on human activity."
I suppose the sampling base isn't exactly the same -- American vs. American voters. I don't know exactly how the questions were phrased and posed, and what questions they followed. Plus, there's no significant difference between the two polls when it comes to the proportion who say it's all nature's fault. But there's no way to put a positive spin on these kind of results.
The percentage of those who agree with the climatologists was actually slightly higher in Rasmussen's 2006 survey, at 46%. So at best, nothing has improved since the Fourth Assessment from the IPCC made it as clear as could be that climate trends are something about which we should be very worried.
It would be foolish for anyone to expect the country at large to put global warming at the top of its priority list. People worry about jobs, for one thing. But this isn't about priorities, it's about confidence in science itself. There seems to be a wall of separation between science and irrationality, one that keeps close to half of America from trusting scientists, whether it's on biological evolution or climate change.
Part of the problem (though maybe just a very small part) may be illustrated by the lead paragraph in Rasmussen's web report:
Al Gore's side may be coming to power in Washington, but they appear to be losing the battle on the idea that humans are to blame for global warming.
It's as if it's impossible to separate Al Gore from the very concept of climate change. I've never understood the hostility directed at the guy. (He's no saint, but it's not as if he took the country into a war on false pretences or anything.) Whatever the cause, it's clear that there is a sizable chunk of the population who just won't buy anything a scientist says if it happens to be in accord with Gore.
Time for a new mascot.
Light bulb goes off. I suddently realize noone with a brain cares about AGW MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING Climate Change crapola. Time for a new pseduoscience hoax to insult and belittle people over James.
Why don't you like bbq? : (
It seems that Sue Pseudio believes that the vast majority of climate scientists are co-conspirators trying to fool the whole world. Those wacky scientists. Sue, may I direct you to my online tinfoil hat store at www.wowyouareparanoidandinneedofmedication.com.
skwawk. parrot the polls parrot the polls. skwawk. tell us people are stupid. skwawk.
Someday the true parrotophiles on SciBlogs are going to come over with their shotguns to rid you of that pseudoavian.
Let's hope Obama appoints Gore to some sort of energy conservation global ambassadorship, so that Big Al is on TV every day and the Gorophobes are driven to frenzied spasms and bite themselves to orts.
Pierce r. Brosnan Butler Bannanorama Bahama Mama Junior the third esquire - dude you were a good actor for a couple of the bond movies - but man you are flabby and fat now. Saw you on entertainment weekend. shape up man. (btw - How's the trust fund working out for you?)
"we should be very worried." James, I LOVE when you say that. It sends goose bumps up and down my arms. My leg trembles, and my bust shakes. Ooooo say it again, please. One more time. "we should be very worried." Oh God, yes! I love that! Do it again. Do it again.
Jimmy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Jimmy Jimmy Jimmy. Dude. We're all gonna die right? tomorrow? well, no. that would take the suspense out of it. It'll happen in something like oh say 2050 20511111 whatever. gee.
My Pa always useder say Once an asswipe allways an asswipe. If you can't mature to a rational communicating thinking gracious human being by the time you graduate from college (even if you are a stupid biologist), then I guess, in reality, you are never going to "grow up". But you can try to pretend you just grew up at a blogger's convention and learned to be a stutepid person. Nonetheless having a consistent history of calling people names and insulting anyone that has a different viewpoint and being a condescending asswipe will always be your albatross James. Wear it proudly. Ass-butt. But hey - go ahead and fake it best you can for now and pretend like your documented history aint existing. Ass-butt.
Wow, James. You're being visited by the zoo monkeys in all their poo-flinging glory.
If it's any consolation, Cassandra had it tough too. Chin up, and good luck.
Okay "Haszz butt," I'm going to assume you're talking about the article (if you're not, or if you're kidding, I apologize before hand).
Nobody gives a damn.
[q]even if you are a stupid biologist[/q]
Because I supposed you know more about biology?
[q]Nonetheless having a consistent history of calling people names and insulting anyone that has a different viewpoint and being a condescending asswipe will always be your albatross James[/q]
And yet here you are, calling him an asswipe, while insulting him for putting people down, which he never did in the article anyway. Now how stupid do you feel?
Jackass, it's spelled "stupid." Learn to spell. If you were trying to create a portmanteau of "stupid" and "tepid" you failed; tepid isn't exactly the word I would use to describe this article, and stupid certainly isn't, although it's defiantly the word I'd use to describe *you.*
[q]history aint existing[/q]
Like documented history am not existing? Not only can you not spell stupid right, you fail at grammar too, didn't read the article, and just look like a genuine fuckwit. And yes, I *am* calling you names. Get the hell over it.
I know you're not supposed to feed trolls. But what about beating them with a baseball bat? It was a good article, and very worrisome - global warming needs to be higher up on the list of priorities because, oh, I don't know, it can trigger a series of events that can make us go extinct (by our own hands, mind you.) Because humans are innately stupid like that. As my proof - just look at some of the comments you've gotten.
James - If you just hadn't acted like an asswipe the last few years with all your put-downs and insults and sarcasm combined with your pseudo-"sticking to the science" total B.S. , then maybe noone wuld have noticed. But after you have insulted the masses over and over and over and thrown your $hi7 in everyone's face, what do you expect?? I appreciate that you paid your granny Enigma32 to stick up for you, but just out of fairness, you should probably let granny enigma read everything you have thrown out there for a while now, not just the last two days. I'm sure it would be a big eye-opening experience for granny enigma. then she would understand the whole ass-wipe reference. Because you ARE, as defined by YOUr OWN WORDS blogged on the INTERNET for a while now - a TOTAL ASS-WIPE. ENIGMA would do well to do a little research before embarrasing herself. yes, i think so.
Does Enigma Schmegma Eater's name mean that he/she eats Enigma's schmegma? I'm assuming schmegma is to be taken as smegma, which leads to something I don't even want to think about.
By the way, James, you're doing one fine job, as evident by all the trolls you've stirred up.
I suspect all the trolls are really one very, very sad person.
James, I can't remember where I read this or heard this, but someone explained the large numbers of Americans who don't think AGW is real as a by-product of the red/blue divide. People who've been brainwashed by Bill O'Reilly to believe Democrats are evil baby-eating virgin-sacrificing kitten-murderers who want to kill the baby Jesus all over again and turn America into a Muslim/Satanic/Socialist state - are likely to refuse to believe ANYTHING that comes from a "liberal" source, be it Al Gore or NASA.
I think it was on George Hrab's podcast.
Did you see where Japan and USA were gonig to send up satellites soon to be able to meausure CO2 concentrations. Shouldn't they have done that first pre-hysteria? hmmmmm....
@KristinMH your conspiracy theories are typically stupid. It's pretty clear to me the stirring is around the tone and professionalism (lack of) demonstrated repeatedly by your lovable little host here. Noone likes to be constantly insulted and belittled. Expecially coming from a biologist journalist that couldn't think his way out of wet paper bag. It seems to be kind of a "You reap what you sow" kind of thing. Or think of it like this, there's a big mirror being held up and James is having to actually look in it at himself.
When I first found this site, I was hopeful that there would be some good SCIENTIFIC discussions about environmental issues, but apparently the comments are populated by GCC deniers who throw out personal attacks and have fallen for the pseudoscience suspicions that the right uses to keep the sheeple in the dark. Grow the f--- up. Educate yourselves a little before you talk.
Skwawk. We stick to the science here. Just Ask James. It's True. Stickin' to the science. Skwawk squawk.
@Enigma Schmegma Eater
Get it right. I'm a guy. And not only am I guy, I'm laughing my ass off at you, Fuckwit.
James, you might consider defining the term "ad homine argument" for the new commenters. While I seriously doubt it would prevent such behavior, the predictable response set would at least provide the science community with a few more laughs.
"44% of U.S. voters now say long-term planetary trends are the cause of global warming, compared to 41% who blame it on human activity."
If there were no humans, we would actually heading toward some global cooling, assuming the ice age cycles continued as they have for the last few dozen thousand years. So 44% voters are wrong on both counts - it is due to man, and even if it wasn't, the long term trend would not be toward more warming.
Al Gore - has the problem any time a celeb over-identifies with a cause. Thus, we have GWB's War (although a war on Iraq wasn't his idea, the neocons had been kicking it around for a decade or more), and now AGW is Al Gore's issue (which it isn't, because we would still have it if he was never born).
So, once again, more reasons why we need science ambassadors to go out there and interface with the public and the Obama administration. Because if the scientists don't, the Discovery Institute and Rush Limbaugh will do it for them.
James why are all your commentors so hostile and uncivil and crude = on both sides of the aisle? I think it is because they are drawn to your prose and take after your ass-holishness. congratulations. wow.
James - If the moon was made out of slow roasted chicken, would you eat it then and wash it down with a nice cold Miller lite? I certainly know I would. (no nike tonite pass the word)
BTW - there is NOTHING wrong with same sex marriage. It can really pan out if you work HARD at it. Trust me, I know.
James, you said "Troubling enough." Is that a complete sentence?
Well, not very good english, but I am reminded of something the late Tom Bradley (a past mayor of Los Angeles) once said to encourage saving water. This is an imporant quote, one that I hope puts things into the proper perspective:
"If it's yellow, let it mellow... if it's brown, flush it down."
It's hardly something you can easily forget once you hear it. And, it illustrates so well how we can learn very important things from highly paid people in high government positions.
James, you often write in short choppy little incomplete sentences, have you given any thought to maybe becoming a rap artist? Perhaps your message, put into a bouncing rap, would be better received by more people?
Hey! Nobody eats my... smegea? (whatever the hell that is). I would also like to point out that I'm not a troll (although I am stupid enough to take the bait in my weaker moments - sorry guys).
I was once an enigma. Then,....I ate the moon. but only because it was made out of bbq spare ribs. AND, I washed it down with a nice cold Budweiser. I AM THE MAN!!!!
Holy crap!!!! James H. is now named - POWNED!!!!! Jimmy Powned. JHames the Pwned. JamesHpwned. jimmyboypowned. I dunbeennamedjamesthepwned. however you want to say it. This dude is living wrong or doing something totally wrong. It's all WRONG. doin sumthin way wrong. PWNED. dude - get another career!!!!!! srlsly.
JimBO! YOYOYOYO... Now you know. You learned a pseudoblogging lesson. NEVER......GO.......FULL.......RETARD!!!!!!!!!!. That was obviously your first mistake as a full retard blogger.. dude - stop being a full retard. try being a normal human being with a respect for others.........for once.
I am smelling jealous from the Sock Puppet. Does the Sock Puppet have any accomplishments in his life? I ask because he makes a lot of noise about James' career and education; yet never goes beyond school yard insult. These are all the signs of a loser. That is why he can not hang in any debate and never responds with any substantive point.
Day 58, of no response on the difference weather and climate.
Can anyone join this hatefest or do you need special blogger-insult training?
Unfortunately, Enigma Schmegma Eater and the rest of the trolls are quite representative of what passes for the intellectual leadership on science issues of the far Right in the US these days.
I think the lowered public acceptance of AGW found by Pew can be directly attributed to the disinformation campaign being waged by Republicans from Inhofe to the Bush administration over the last 8 years. They've had the chairmanship. They've had the bully pulpit.
Obama's administration appears poised to pay more than lip service to science (not just climate science, but more broadly). Let's hope they recognize the need to educate, not just legislate (and competently administrate).
Don't mind Trent. He's just James' resident cowgirl.
you wrote: """"It's as if it's impossible to separate Al Gore from the very concept of climate change. I've never understood the hostility directed at the guy. (He's no saint, but it's not as if he took the country into a war on false pretences or anything.) Whatever the cause, it's clear that there is a sizable chunk of the population who just won't buy anything a scientist says if it happens to be in accord with Gore.""""" ___
James - you just described your own self. It's a credibility thing. He made a joke docudrama full of lies, and you..., well you do "this". Just sayin.
p.s. nice totally unrelated and unecessary political shot you took while attempting to communicate some type of incoherent thought. Very typical of you.
KristinMH wrote:"Democrats are evil baby-eating virgin-sacrificing kitten-murderers who want to kill the baby Jesus all over again and turn America into a Muslim/Satanic/Socialist state."
Obviously, James has taught you well. Well, I know abortion-on-demand in catholic hospitals is on the agenda, right after the Fairness Doctrine gets put back in place to quiet talk radio, but I wasn't actually aware of the baby-eating. hmmmm.
James, do you eat babies? Have you eaten any babies recently?
Good lord, can't you deep-six the obnoxious sock-puppets? There isn't a person in the world who would blame you for a blanket IP ban, there. Except for maybe dipshit, and that's really ok.
RED (Jan. 24, 2009 12:17 PM) says:
"Did you see where Japan and USA were gonig to send up satellites soon to be able to meausure CO2 concentrations. Shouldn't they have done that first pre-hysteria? hmmmmm...."
Enough such observations have been made, but, of course, more data are better. But who was against getting more data?
To clear up one possible mechanism of global warming (often misquoted by global warming deniers),there was the project Triana, a.k.a. DSCOVR, about which Bob Park writes (at http://bobpark.physics.umd.edu/WN08/wn120508.html ):
" The $100 million observatory was already built. It was meant to answer the most fundamental question of climate science: what is the energy balance between solar radiation falling on Earth and reflected or reradiated energy? Global warming deniers all claim solar variation is the major factor in global climate change. Is it? Well, Triana is the only experiment that can unequivocally answer that question. But I couldn't find a single global warming denier who wanted it tested. So I wrote an op-ed for the NY Times; but maybe nobody read it, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/15/opinion/15park.html . It's still timely; the NY Times should feel free to reprint it without change."
Hey A - and 9/11 was an inside job blah blah. Another name you can call Global Warming Deniers is "thermometer readers". Now that, is truly inconvenient.
Disparities in poll numbers are often the result of different questions and different sampling designs. I would look to at each poll's within comparison, rather than a comparison between them.
Quite frankly, AGW debate is past, the issue now is developing policy to abate its impact. Public opinion is beside the point.
Oh, and Trent 1492 regarding weather versus climate, look it up in a Intro to Physical Geography text. Essentially weather is the short term sample, climate the long term trend.
Apologies, assumed troll.