ClimateGate still ignored by Obama and the mainstream media!
.
.
.
Belief in
Global Warming
at All-Time Low –
BEFORE
ClimateGate
December 7th, 2009
NEWSMAX.COM
.
.
A new poll reveals that the
percentage of Americans who
believe carbon dioxide emissions
will cause global warming has
dropped dramatically
in recent years.
And that poll by Harris Interactive
was conducted between
Nov. 2 and 11 —
before the so-called “climategate”
controversy erupted,
calling into question the validity
of some of the science supporting
manmade global warming.
The poll found that the
percentage of American who
believe in global warming has
dropped from 75 percent in
2001 and 71 percent in 2007
to just 51 percent.
At the same time,
the percentage of those who do
not believe in global warming has
risen from 19 percent in 2001
and 23 percent in 2007 to 29
percent today,
and the percentage who are
unsure has climbed from 6 percent
to 21 percent since 2001.
.
.
“The 51 percent who believe
emissions will cause climate
change is by far the lowest number
recorded in any Harris Poll since
we started asking this question
12 years ago,”
Harris Interactive disclosed.
Opinions differed sharply
along party lines —
73 percent of Democrats believe
in manmade global warming,
compared to 28 percent of
Republicans and 49 percent
of Independents.
As for the upcoming international
conference in Copenhagen,
Denmark,
only 28 percent of those polled
knew that the main topic to be
discussed is global warming and
climate change.
Nearly 10 percent said the
economic crisis would be the topic,
while smaller numbers cited
nuclear weapons,
health and epidemics,
terrorism,
international trade,
or drugs.
.
_____
.
Six days after the poll closed,
on Nov. 17,
someone hacked a server used
by the Climatic Research Unit of
the University of East Anglia
in Norwich, England,
and disseminated more than a
thousand e-mails and
other documents.
Climate change skeptics charge
that the e-mails show collusion
by climate scientists to skew
scientific information in favor
of manmade global warming.
The leaked documents
“show that prominent scientists
were so wedded to theories of
manmade global warming that
they ridiculed dissenters who
asked for copies of their data,
plotted how to keep researchers
who reached different conclusions
from publishing,
and concealed apparently
buggy computer code from
being disclosed under the
Freedom of Information law,”
CBS News reported.
.
.
One climatologist at the
National Center for
Atmospheric Research was
quoted as saying:
“The fact is that we can’t
account for the lack of
warming at the moment
and it is a travesty
that we can’t.”
.
.
.
.
___35 Inconvenient Truths:
.
__
.
__ClimateGate links in GREEN
.
_______
.
.
_Copenhagen links in GREEN
.
.
.
.
“Climategate” started out when there appeared on the Internet a collection of e-mails of a group of climatologists who work in the University of East Anglia in England. These documents reveal that some climatologists of international preeminence have manipulated the data of their investigations and have strongly tried to discredit climatologists who are not convinced that the increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere are the cause of global warming.
It is true that a majority of the scientists who study climatic tendencies in our atmosphere have arrived at the conclusion that the world’s climate is changing, and they have convinced a group of politicians, some of whom are politically powerful, of the truth of their conclusions.
A minority, however, is skeptical. Some believe that recent data that suggest that the average temperature of the atmosphere is going up can be explained by natural variations in solar radiation and that global warming is a temporary phenomenon. Others believe that the historical evidence indicating that the temperature of the atmosphere is going up at a dangerous rate is simply not reliable.
Such lacks of agreement are common in the sciences. They are reduced and eventually eliminated with the accumulation of new evidence and of more refined theories or even by completely new ones. Such debates can persist for a period of decades. Academics often throw invective at one another in these debates. But typically this does not mean much.
But the case of climate change is different. If the evidence indicates that global warming is progressive, is caused principally by our industrial processes, and will probably cause disastrous changes in our atmosphere before the end of the twenty-first century, then we do not have the time to verify precisely if this evidence is reliable. Such a process would be a question of many years of new investigations. And if the alarmist climatologists are right, such a delay would be tragic for all humanity.
The difficulty is that economic and climatologic systems are very complicated. They are not like celestial mechanics, which involves only the interaction of gravity and centrifugal force, and efforts to construct computerized models to describe these complicated systems simply cannot include all the factors that are influential in the evolution of these complicated systems.
All this does not necessarily indicate that the alarmist climatologists are not right. But it really means that if global warming is occurring, we cannot know exactly what will be the average temperature of our atmosphere in the year 2100 and what will be the average sea level of the world’s ocean in that year.
It also means that we cannot be confident that efforts by the industrialized countries to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere will have a significant influence on the evolution of the world’s climate.
Alas, the reduction of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere would be very costly and would greatly change the lives of all the inhabitants of our planet–with the possibility (perhaps even the probability!) that all these efforts will be completely useless.
Harleigh Kyson Jr.
hkyson - December 12, 2009 at 7:28 pm |