Wake Up The Candidates: Americans Are Scared Of Global Warming
| Tue Oct. 2, 2007 4:53 PM PDT
Hey, it's working. The long slumber is coming to an end. A Yale University survey found 40 percent of Americans will only vote for a presidential candidate who has a strong sense of urgency on the global warming problem.
"One of the most surprising findings was the growing sense of urgency," said Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change and the study's principal investigator. "Nearly half of Americans now believe that global warming is either already having dangerous impacts on people around the world or will in the next 10 years—a 20-percentage-point increase since 2004. These results indicate a sea change in public opinion."
The survey's findings reveals that 62% of Americans believe life on earth will continue without major disruptions only if society takes immediate and drastic action to reduce global warming; 68% support a new international treaty requiring the U.S. to cut its emissions of carbon dioxide 90% by 2050; 85% support forcing automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of cars, trucks and SUVs to 35 miles per gallon, even if it meant a new car would cost up to $500 more; 82% support requiring electric utilities to produce at least 20% of their electricity from renewable energy sources, even if it cost the average household an extra $100 a year; 50% say they are personally worried—15 percent say a great deal—about global warming.
We heard about Leiserowitz's 2004 survey in MoJo's The Thirteenth Tipping Point. Well, it seems to be tipping, at last. Somebody set the alarm and wake up Washington.—Julia Whitty is Mother Jones' environmental correspondent. You can read from her new book, "The Fragile Edge," and other writings, here.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
Another new study published in Science refutes the "Hockey Stick" temperature graph, used by man-made global warming theorists such as former Vice President Al Gore to argue for a recent spike in average global temperature after centuries of relative stability. My good friend, Gerd Bürger of Berlin's Institut für Meteorologie decided to revisit the work of Osborn and Briffa, and his results raise serious questions about the claim that the 20th century has been unusually warm. Bürger argues that Osborn and Briffa did not apply the appropriate statistical tests that link the proxy records to observational data, and as such, Osborn and Briffa did not properly quantify the statistical uncertainties in their analyses. Bürger repeated all analyses with the appropriate adjustments and concluded "As a result, the 'highly significant' occurrences of positive anomalies during the 20th century disappear." Further, he reports that "The 95th percentile is exceeded mostly in the early 20th century, but also about the year 1000." Needless to say, Gerd Bürger is not going to win any awards from the champions of global warming ? nothing is more sacred than 20th century warming!
Another new study published in Science refutes the "Hockey Stick" temperature graph, used by man-made global warming theorists such as former Vice President Al Gore to argue for a recent spike in average global temperature after centuries of relative stability. My good friend, Gerd Bürger of Berlin's Institut für Meteorologie decided to revisit the work of Osborn and Briffa, and his results raise serious questions about the claim that the 20th century has been unusually warm. Bürger argues that Osborn and Briffa did not apply the appropriate statistical tests that link the proxy records to observational data, and as such, Osborn and Briffa did not properly quantify the statistical uncertainties in their analyses. Bürger repeated all analyses with the appropriate adjustments and concluded "As a result, the 'highly significant' occurrences of positive anomalies during the 20th century disappear." Further, he reports that "The 95th percentile is exceeded mostly in the early 20th century, but also about the year 1000." Needless to say, Gerd Bürger is not going to win any awards from the champions of global warming ? nothing is more sacred than 20th century warming!
Submitted by Vipin (not verified) on Wed Oct. 3, 2007 4:10 AM PDT.
I have a blog containing good information on global warming. Ozone has doubled since the mid-19th century due to chemical emissions from vehicles, industrial processes and the burning of forests, the British climate researchers wrote. Carbon dioxide has also risen over that period. History of global warming is very deep since 1850.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Wed Oct. 3, 2007 8:08 AM PDT.
I'm really glad to hear this. It's certainly about time. I have been wondering (and still am) why environmental concerns that have a real potential to cause global civilizational collapse and even human extinction have taken a back seat to other issues.
http://misanthropicscott.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/environment-a-backseat...
Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth has been called unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'.
Schools will have to issue a warning before they show pupils Al Gore's controversial film about global warming, a judge indicated yesterday.
The move follows a High Court action by a father who accused the Government of 'brainwashing' children with propaganda by showing it in the classroom.
Stewart Dimmock said the former U.S. Vice-President's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, is unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'. The Europeans are our moral and intellectual superiors, so we must listen to them and follow.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Wed Oct. 3, 2007 12:14 PM PDT.
UK report,
It's funny how many people echo your sentiment. It's even funnier how none ever cite an example of the inaccuracies in the film. Perhaps these people, yourself included, have not actually seen it. Perhaps you have no specific examples. If you have some, please post them instead of stating as fact that which is merely opinion overheard at your water cooler.
Despite the claim of a heavily publicized recent study, the sun still appears to be the main agent in global climate change, according to new research by Danish scientists.
The study by the Danish National Space Center rebuts a July study by UK scientists who allege there has not been a solar-climate link in the past 20 years.
Another new study published in Science refutes the "Hockey Stick" temperature graph, used by man-made global warming theorists such as former Vice President Al Gore to argue for a recent spike in average global temperature after centuries of relative stability. My good friend, Gerd Bürger of Berlin's Institut für Meteorologie decided to revisit the work of Osborn and Briffa, and his results raise serious questions about the claim that the 20th century has been unusually warm. Bürger argues that Osborn and Briffa did not apply the appropriate statistical tests that link the proxy records to observational data, and as such, Osborn and Briffa did not properly quantify the statistical uncertainties in their analyses. Bürger repeated all analyses with the appropriate adjustments and concluded "As a result, the 'highly significant' occurrences of positive anomalies during the 20th century disappear." Further, he reports that "The 95th percentile is exceeded mostly in the early 20th century, but also about the year 1000." Needless to say, Gerd Bürger is not going to win any awards from the champions of global warming nothing is more sacred than 20th century warming!
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Thu Oct. 4, 2007 9:17 AM PDT.
UK report,
If you wouldn't mind, when you post such statements, please provide a link to the article so that we can see exactly what they are really saying about they Hockey Stick.
Further, that graph is just one of many many data points all pointing to the same thing.
CNN Meteorologist Rob Marciano clapped his hands and exclaimed, "Finally," in response to a report that a British judge might ban the movie "An Inconvenient Truth" from UK schools because, according to "American Morning," "it is politically biased and contains scientific inaccuracies." Misant, read the UK judge ruling yourself. Remember, we Brits are of a higher class than you crude, rude, and loud mouth Yanks. Just look at Gore, how fat he is. What a poor spokesman for "global warming" and look at his large estate, talk about consuming the world's resources, but typical of you Yanks, a mere 5% of the world's population, but 25% consumer of the world's resources.
F*#K You! You British "fucked up the world where ever you went. Ireland, Iraq, India, and countless other places, besides America. We all had to fight you to get you out. There wouldn't have been any trouble in Ireland if your king hadn't taken the land away from the Catholic landowners and gave it to people symphetic to England. Your country created the mess that is now Iraq by forcing three distinct groups of people to live together when you artifically drew the bounderies of that nation. You sided with the Arabs on the Palistine Mandate. I know that this has nothing to do with "global warming", but The United Kingdom and America(I know that America has some serious faults* Greatly added to by the Bush Administration)by being so civilized, should set an example.
Clarence dear, you have Bush for your leader, we don't. That says it all. By the way,the Arabs were right on the Palistine Mandate.
When WW-I ended, no one could reconcile the claims of Arabs, Zionists, British & French so, in 1919, Woodrow Wilson and his democracy-mad Americans "dispatched the King-Crane Commission to the former Arab provinces of the Ottoman Empire to ascertain the wishes of their inhabitants regarding the postwar settlement of their territories." [Britannica]
The King-Crane report stated:
90% of Palestine's inhabitants were non Jewish & did NOT want a Jewish state in Palestine;
If they are given Palestine, "Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants."
The King-Crane Commission said that a Jewish state in Palestine would violate the Palestinian Arabs' right to self-determination. They recommended that Zionists respect the wishes of Palestine's inhabitants & find another place to plant the Jewish state.
The Zionists were furious! They didn't want democracy; they didn't give a damn about "the will of the people." The Zionists wanted Palestine, no matter what they had to do to get it. So they simply "rewrote" the history of the conflict. The usual versions of Israel's history either don't mention The King-Crane Commission Report or they minimize its importance. Anyone who believes in Democracy must consider the King-Crane Commission's official report—which even now can be documented by any interested party ment agency—irrefutable proof that:
In 1919, even after 30 years of intensive Jewish emigration into Palestine (inspired by Theodore Herzl's The Jewish State, published in 1898), 90% of Palestine's inhabitants were non-Jewish and did not want a Jewish state in Palestine. The will of the people was clear
The Zionists knew they were acting against the will of the people.
The Zionists knowingly subverted Democracy.
The Government of the United States confirmed the legitimacy of the claim that Palestinians make today.
Some Quotes from the Commission's Report
"a national home for the Jewish people is not equivalent to making Palestine into a Jewish State."
"nor can the erection of such a Jewish State be accomplished without the gravest trespass upon the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."
"In his address of July 4, 1918, President Wilson laid down the following principle as one of the four great 'ends for which the associated peoples of the world were fighting': 'The settlement of every question, whether of territory or of political relationship upon the basis of the free acceptance of that settlement by the people immediately concerned, and not upon the basis of the material interest or advantage of any other nation or people which may desire a different settlement for their own exterior influence or mastery."
"If that principle is to rule, and so the wishes of Palestine's population are to be decisive as to what is to be done to Palestine, then it is to be remembered that the non-Jewish population of Palestine—nearly nine-tenths of the whole—are emphatically against the entire Zionist program. To subject a people so minded to unlimited Jewish immigration, and to steady financial and social pressure to surrender the land, would be a gross violation of the principles just quoted, and of the peoples' rights, though it kept within the forms of the law."
"No British officer, consulted by the Commissioners, believed that the Zionist program could be carried out except by force of arms."
"That of itself is evidence of a strong sense of injustice of the 'Zionist program."
"The fact came out repeatedly in the Commission's conference with Jewish representatives that the Zionists looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine.''
"the initial claim, often submitted by Zionist representatives, that they have a 'right' to Palestine, based on an occupation of two thousand years ago, can hardly be seriously considered."
Among other things, the indigenous Arab population—the people who actually lived in Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, etc.—had been promised control over their own countries at a price: IF they helped the Allies overthrow the Turkish Army that occupied their land. They did.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Fri Oct. 5, 2007 9:49 AM PDT.
UnKnowing Report,
Wow!! You really are quite the wacko. As for the inaccuracies of Gore's movie, I notice no one seems to be citing what they actually are.
Check this review. It mentions them. See if you think they're at all significant and worth talking about.
Scott, Lars is right, in this regard. Go onto the Danish National Space Center homepage(Google) and read for yourself. Remember Scott, today the Scandinavians people are so more advanced that the Yanks across the pond.(I know that Clarence would bring up about the unkind things the Vikings did 1000 years ago, but I will not get into that).
But the point is that Gore and his movie "An Inconvenient Truth" aren't the last word. In March, the New York Times reported that while they praise Gore for raising awareness about warming, a number of scientists see exaggerations and errors in some of his assertions. "They are alarmed, some say, at what they call his alarmism," the Times wrote. For example, Gore forecasts sea levels rising up to 20 feet, flooding parts of New York and Florida. But the U.N. panel's actual estimate is that seas will rise 7 to 23 inches in this century.
Ok..Uk report! We know that the Israelies inhabited the land that was called Palistine according to The Holy Bible..They were given the land by God. The Israelies were defeated and carried off as slaves. Judea was defeated a 100 or so years after that (the Jews) and removed from the land. The Arabs moved in and took over.
May the Islamist flock to your country and do the same!
Clarence, we in Europe find your primitive views of a "tribal religion" to be backward. Thankfully, most Yanks do not share your view. The World Council of Churches and the European Union has condemned Israel's racist practices. It is just such religious right wing wackos like you that give the Yanks a bad reputation across the pond. But we understand the USA view after reading John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's best seller, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy." Getting back on subject, I hope that you are a vegetarian and don't drive those God awful big gas guzzling SUVs or God forbid, a pick up truck with a gun rack in the back. We can agree to disagree on the middle east and agree as Woodsy Owl would say, "give a hoot and don't pollute." Since you Yanks are such pigs of consumers, I will say, recycle. We in Europe are not such pigs of consumers, it is not because we don't have the money due to taxes to help the unemployed, but we really believe in being socially responsible and not consuming much. That is why we are thin. We are not guilty of the continuing sin of gluttony by being overweight and fat, like I read about you Yanks.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Sat Oct. 6, 2007 10:28 PM PDT.
Sorry Lars and UnKnowing, you happen to be flat dead wrong about solar radiation. Here are three peer reviewed articles on the subject.
http://www.mps.mpg.de/homes/natalie/PAPERS/warming.pdf - This one allows for the possibility of up to 30% from solar radiation. However, the following two do not allow for any significant amount at all.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V3S-4C76BVX-B...
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/mpa/publications/preprints/pp2006/MPA2001...
Even if we allow for the sole article I've ever found that states as high as 5 - 30% from solar radiation, that still leaves a minimum of 70% human caused, still far overshadowing the sun, so to speak.
I have seen a couple of others that allow for 5-15%. So, there may actually be something to solar radiation. However, it will not be enough to account for the current warming and will not cause an ice age when removed. Of course, without us, it would have.
Stick to peer review, it will steer you toward the truth, to the best of our current knowledge. And, when in doubt, follow the money trail. If it leads to Exxon, and it usually does, it's probably an elaborate Exxon press release.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Sat Oct. 6, 2007 10:29 PM PDT.
Sorry Lars and UnKnowing, you happen to be flat dead wrong about solar radiation. Here are three peer reviewed articles on the subject.
http://www.mps.mpg.de/homes/natalie/PAPERS/warming.pdf - This one allows for the possibility of up to 30% from solar radiation. However, the following two do not allow for any significant amount at all.
(Splitting comment into two to avoid spam filter. See next comment for completion.)
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Sat Oct. 6, 2007 10:31 PM PDT.
(Continued from previous comment)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V3S-4C76BVX-B...
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/mpa/publications/preprints/pp2006/MPA2001...
Even if we allow for the sole article I've ever found that states as high as 5 - 30% from solar radiation, that still leaves a minimum of 70% human caused, still far overshadowing the sun, so to speak.
I have seen a couple of others that allow for 5-15%. So, there may actually be something to solar radiation. However, it will not be enough to account for the current warming and will not cause an ice age when removed. Of course, without us, it would have.
Stick to peer review, it will steer you toward the truth, to the best of our current knowledge. And, when in doubt, follow the money trail. If it leads to Exxon, and it usually does, it's probably an elaborate Exxon press release.
And, UnKnowing Report, I am avoiding taking the bait on the Israel issue. There is little point discussing such things with complete blithering idiots that believe that it's OK to blow up school buses.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Sat Oct. 6, 2007 10:56 PM PDT.
(Continued from previous comment)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V3S-4C76BVX-B...
(damn, have to split again. I guess it's just one link per reply. EDITOR: Please consider this a request to increase to at least 3.)
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Sat Oct. 6, 2007 10:57 PM PDT.
(continued from previous comment.)
http://www.mpa-garching.mpg.de/mpa/publications/preprints/pp2006/MPA2001...
Even if we allow for the sole article I've ever found that states as high as 5 - 30% from solar radiation, that still leaves a minimum of 70% human caused, still far overshadowing the sun, so to speak.
I have seen a couple of others that allow for 5-15%. So, there may actually be something to solar radiation. However, it will not be enough to account for the current warming and will not cause an ice age when removed. Of course, without us, it would have.
Stick to peer review, it will steer you toward the truth, to the best of our current knowledge. And, when in doubt, follow the money trail. If it leads to Exxon, and it usually does, it's probably an elaborate Exxon press release.
And, UnKnowing Report, I am avoiding taking the bait on the Israel issue. There is little point discussing such things with complete blithering idiots that believe that it's OK to blow up school buses.
(end of three part comment.)
Scott, Exxon has no ties to the Kingdom of Denmark and their scientific report which you do not comment upon, because you know that Vikings are correct. The Scandinavians are the moral superiors to you Americans. We give out the Nobel science prizes and the peace prize(to your last great president, James Carter).
UK the last word
worldends.co.uk/index
& asteroid2039.com
check out these British websites...Is this the religion that you were talking about that you in the European Community are following. I think that you all are "blooming idiots"
From 1995 on, the WCC(World Council of Churches) focused its attention on Jerusalem as a key to peace in the wider region, calling for it to be recognized by all as a shared city. With the breakdown of the Oslo peace process, the provocative visit of Ariel Sharon to the Esplanade in Jerusalem and the resulting second Palestinian uprising, the WCC has intensified its efforts for international advocacy on behalf of its member churches and Christians of Jerusalem and the Holy Land. More and more of the latter have been forced to emigrate as a result of Israeli occupation of their lands and discriminatory practices against Palestinians. Free Palestine, end the occupation.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Sun Oct. 14, 2007 5:33 PM PDT.
Lars,
What report am I not commenting on? Did you post a link to some report that I missed? Is there some report that relates to this particular topic that I am supposed to be aware of?
U.K. Report, you are a troll. You post the same crap regardless of what the topic is. Buy a brain somewhere. Please.
Submitted by Misanthropic Scott (not verified) on Mon Oct. 15, 2007 3:18 PM PDT.
Lars,
If you mention a report, and want people to read it, you have to post a link.
