Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
40 days ago.
by slinky
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Kunectdots

"40 Years Since Climatologists Blamed California Drought On Global Cooling"

h ttps://stevengoddard.wordpress.c om/2015/05/03/40-years-since-climatologists-blamed-california-drought-on-global-cooling/

Posted 364 days ago.

Kendall78

A small city has a murder rate of one death per year. The next year it's two murders and the next year it is three murders. This increase keeps going for decades and then stops increasing and holds at 25 murders a year. 18 years later guy comes along and says there is no murder problem since there has been no further increase. Is he wise or stupid?

Posted 365 days ago.

Kendall78

It's cute how ppl who mention the last 18 years never mention the climate reverting back to the way it was prior...oh that's right...it hasn't.

Posted 365 days ago.

harryanderson

“This analysis shows that 13 of the warmest years have occurred in the past 15 years. Alternately, one could say that 12 of the warmest years came in the last 13.”

h ttp://ww w.politifact.c om/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/feb/15/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-12-hottest-years-record-have-com/

The decade from 2000-2010 was the warmest on record.

ht tp://ww w.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html

Climate researchers look to longer term trends to determine warming, as there is too much natural variability within any given year. And that long-term trend is unequivocal (see NASA chart below): The world has now gone 30 consecutive years — 360 straight months — where every month has been above the 20th century average, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.”

htt p://ww w.factcheck.o rg/2015/03/cruz-on-the-global-cooling-myth-and-galileo/

A complete, non-cherry-picked look at the data shows clearly warming hasn’t stopped.

Posted 367 days ago.

harryanderson

They cherry-pick 1998 as their starting point.

Those who accept the conclusions of almost every climate scientist don’t have to cherry-pick their data, but if they did:

“It would be just as easy, however, to pick out much cooler years as a starting point to show a sharp increase in temperatures. Starting one year earlier or later — at 1997 (0.46 degrees above the 20th century average) or 1999 (0.41 degrees) — would yield between one-fifth and one-quarter of a degree of warming. This would represent as much as 31 percent of all warming the world has seen since 1880, when record keeping began.

“Choosing 1997 or 1999 as a starting point, however, would be just as misleading as choosing 1998.”

htt p://w ww.factcheck.or g/2015/03/cruz-on-the-global-cooling-myth-and-galileo/

Posted 367 days ago.

harryanderson

“Now the fact is the average weather is not warning ergo the climate isn't either.”

That statement isn’t true.

“(Rep. Lamar Smith) mentioned an oft-repeated claim that there has been a ‘lack of global warming over the past 15 years.’ Though the rate of warming has slowed, the world does indeed continue to warm, and cherry-picked data underlie the claims that warming has stopped.”

h ttp://w ww.factcheck.or g/2015/04/the-extreme-weather-warming-connection/

Posted 367 days ago.

Kendall78

Rush and Hannity are idiots on this topic. On their radio shows they can't even tell the difference between weather and climate.

Posted 369 days ago.

harryanderson

Like I pointed out 5 days ago, John Thune asks what we’re going to do about it and Heartland editor Justin Haskins declares the “real debate” involves discussing the “validity of solutions.”

As Haskins said, “The real debate is not whether man is, in some way, contributing to climate change; it’s true that the science is settled on that point in favor of the alarmists.”

Posted 385 days ago.

harryanderson

According to a Duke study, many conservatives fear accepting the scientific consensus on climate change because they fear the proposed solutions.

Lead author Troy Campbell said, “In other words, does what we call 'solution aversion' exist? We found the answer is yes. And we found it occurs in response to some of the most common solutions for popularly discussed problems."

ht tp://today.duke.edu/2014/11/solutionaversion

Conservatives were shown evidence that the temperature would rise, then asked to look at two proposed solutions: one that emphasized taxing and one that emphasized empowering the free market. Of the first group, only 22% believed the evidence. Of the second, 55% believed.

We shouldn’t let fear of big-government liberal solutions blind us to facts. If we do, we cede the issue to the socialists. This is critical. We need to fight for conservative solutions to real problems.

Posted 385 days ago.

harryanderson

Ohwiseone,

My post wasn't directed at anyone in particular; I was making a general observation.

Posted 389 days ago.

harryanderson

The Haskins quote comes from humanevents.co m/2014/12/24/a-conservatives-case-for-global-warming/

Indeed. Prominent Republicans are ignoring the anti-science propaganda and focusing on solutions.

Thune asks what we’re going to do about it and Haskins declares the “real debate” involves discussing the “validity of solutions.”

That’s exactly what I’ve been saying here. Take global warming out of the childish political wars and debate responses to it.

Posted 390 days ago.

harryanderson

I’ve listed Republicans who accept the scientific consensus on global warming. Here are two more.

Number-three Senate Republican John Thune said, “There are a number of factors that contribute to (global warming), including human activity. The question is, what are we going to do about it and at what cost?”

w ww.washingtonpost.c om/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2014/11/17/top-republican-bows-to-scientists-on-climate-change/

And an editor at the Heartland Institute, Justin Haskins, admitted in Human Events, “The real debate is not whether man is, in some way, contributing to climate change; it’s true that the science is settled on that point in favor of the alarmists. The true debate ought to be focused on the extent to which man is affecting the global climate, the validity of the so-called 'solutions' to global warming, and if warming is really going to be the sort of catastrophe the media and alarmists keep telling the world it will be.”

Posted 390 days ago.

harryanderson

It's critical for conservatives like George Schultz to offer conservative solutions to global warming. No sense ceding the issue to liberals like we've been doing.

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

I’m not sure I agree with Schultz’s proposed solutions. I prefer the conservationist and personal responsibility approach. We should conserve resources for those who come behind us and assume responsibility for our actions that reduce others’ standard of living.

That being said, I agree with Schultz that, if we fail to act, we’ll be “mugged by reality.” And when that happens, big, intrusive, government steps in to exploit the crisis. That’s when our freedoms erode.

We should all conserve. Turn down thermostats. Walk, bike, or use shared transportation when possible. If we each act responsibly in his or her own sphere of influence, together we can make a huge impact. If we all sacrifice just a few of our present luxuries, we’ll leave better gift to those who follow us. It’s the right thing to do.

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

Here's what I posted this morning, that apparently was too important to leave on the first page, so it was buried in numerous posts.

In an op-ed this morning, another conservative, George Schultz, who was Reagan’s Sec. of State, has proposed action on global warming.

After listing some of the strong scientific evidence, Schultz writes, “These are simple and clear observations, so I conclude that the globe is warming and that carbon dioxide has something to do with that fact. Those who say otherwise will wind up being mugged by reality.”

He proposes research into energy development and a carbon tax, and suggests Reagan, his old boss, might have done something similar.

htt p://ww w.washingtonpost.co m/opinions/a-reagan-model-on-climate-change/2015/03/13/4f4182e2-c6a8-11e4-b2a1-bed1aaea2816_story.html

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

But like all propaganda from you, the details don't matter. It's the scare.

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

I always figured you responded before reading and considering. You confirm that supposition when I write "village" and you read "race."

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

Perhaps you should learn how to read better. I said nothing about a race.

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

I should say that some people have been seeing changes. A village of 400 in Alaska must be relocated because of thin ice, and Republican Senator Lisa Senator Murkowski “acknowledges the impacts of climate change on Alaska’s coastal communities.”

htt p://ww w.washingtonpost.c om/news/energy environment/wp/2015/02/24/the-remote-alaskan-village-that-needs-to-be-relocated-due-to-climate-change/

But most of us in the northern temperate climate zone haven’t seen much effect from global warming.

Posted 417 days ago.

harryanderson

There is no crisis at present. That's why the counter global warming propaganda has shifted public opinion. People aren't yet seeing changes. It's not yet affecting them.

Maybe there have been changes due to global warming. Nevertheless, the extra energy is there, and almost every climate scientist says it will emerge and change the climate in ways that will lessen our ability to grow food, hydrate ourselves, and perform other necessary tasks.

Posted 417 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or