Two new polls released today have some good news for the fight against climate change.
First, according to a USA Today/Gallup poll:
A solid majority of Americans support the idea of a global treaty that would require the United States to reduce significantly greenhouse gas emissions.
The poll found that:
- 55 percent endorse a binding accord to limit greenhouse gases
- Two-thirds (66 percent) of young people ages 18 to 29 support an accord
USA Today says the results should provide some encouragement for President Obama as he gets ready for his trip to Copenhagen.
A separate Associated Press-Stanford University poll finds that most Americans think fighting climate change will be good for our economy.
- 40 percent say U.S. action to slow global warming will create jobs
- 46 percent say it would boost the economy.
- Less than one third say it will hurt the economy or result in fewer jobs
AP calls it:
A sign the public is showing more faith in President Barack Obama’s economic arguments for limiting heat-trapping gases than in Republican claims that the actions would kill jobs.
9 Comments
Anyone who still believes this nonsense should go here:
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/146138
This has gotten ridiculous in the extreme. You guys have sold your souls to push this scam, and even with overwhelming, incontrovertible, proof that ‘man-made climate change’ is nonsense, you still plow ahead like mindless lemmings.
Astroknott,
The web site you cite should embarrass even a skeptic. The reasons they mention are pathetic, and have been explained by climate scientists over and over and over.Still, if you avoid ever talking to anyone that has ever put any time into researching the issue, you might be persuaded by that garbage.
Bill
Pathetic? Really? Maybe you should try this site then:
http://www.cfact.tv/2009/12/07/lord-monckton-on-climategate-at-the-2nd-international-climate-conference/
Whats pathetic is watching people who claim to be believers in science completely ignoring science. There are literally hundreds of scientists that say this is a total scam. The ‘global-warming’ crowd has about as much ‘science’ behind their beliefs as Creationists have behind theirs.
Whats pathetic is watching them act like Climategate is no biggie. Anyone who actually cares about real science should be incensed by what has been going on.
Yes Astro, pathetic. Lord Monkton is even more ridiculous. He is not a scientist by any stretch, let alone a climate scientist.Here, try this post regarding Lord Monkton’s nonsense.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2008/07/once-more-unto-the-bray/
Its from a website put out by people actually involved in climate science, not someone posting up their personal opinion as fact.
Don’t think Lord Monkton ‘claims’ to be a scientist. Nor do I, but I am, and have always been, a science junkie. Thats how I know this is not science. Scientists don’t try to hide their data and silence their critics. Real scientists don’t cherry pick what data they want to use. In real science we look at the data and arrive at conclusions based on that data. Science does NOT arrive at a conclusion and then look for data that backs it up, while ignoring data that refutes that conclusion. Real science is open and transparent. Real science is about how things are, not how we want them to be.
This is politics and nothing else. And the worse kind of politics at that. It is fear mongering and creating a crisis mentality to push a political agenda. The debate is over, anyone who doesn’t agree that this is a scam is just a denier. Do a little research. Look at the geologic history of the planet. This is all a bunch of nonsense.
BTW I give up after this comment. If you can’t look at the facts and draw a realistic conclusion then there is no helping you.
While you may feel that finding a Cheap Ugg Boots is an impossible quest, let me assure you that it is possible.With a little luck, a willingness to spend long hours online and in discount stores, you can find a Cheap Uggs boots.
With the coming of Christmas Day,Owing a pair of Ugg Classic Short Boots is now doubt that increasing the festivals atmosphere.
Astroknott: It’s amazing how much of what you’re saying is actually true–but true of the self-professed skeptics, not for most people who support sensible, prudent action. The truth about just how much (or how little) the CRU e-mails really matter will come out. It seems pretty sensible to me that given the vast redundancy of the data collection effort and the vast number of people involved in scrutinizing and interpreting it, that any misbehavior by a small group is pretty much meaningless. It’s much more likely that groups with ideological and financial interests in opposition to CO2 regulation are just playing up doubts and fears. I don’t know of anyone who wouldn’t be totally relieved to find out that there were indeed natual processes that would rebalance the climate despite our massive CO2 production. From what I can see, the hype, hysterics and fearmongering is coming from those who oppose regulation, and the members of the scientific community are for the most part simply trying to do their jobs.
OK, one more post for neosapiens. Very polite post from you BTW, thanks.
As Carl Sagan used to say “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” or something to that effect. The claims by the global warming crowd have been extraordinary in the extreme. From Al Gore claiming that the arctic had a 75% chance of being ice free in 5 to 7 years to James Hanson of NASA claiming that sea levels could rise as much as 75 feet. And I admit that these are two of the more extreme of the claims. But you hear the same stuff constantly. Were destroying the planet, were killing the polar bears, ad infinitum. I could go on but I may begin to sound redundant. We are being asked to fork over vast amounts of money and sacrifice personal freedoms based on questionable evidence.
You say:
“It seems pretty sensible to me that given the vast redundancy of the data collection effort and the vast number of people involved in scrutinizing and interpreting it, that any misbehavior by a small group is pretty much meaningless.”
The University of East Anglia is not a small player in this. It is probably the biggest player in formulating the policy of the IPCC. Not a “small group”. But perhaps the most prominent climate research group in the world. And they LIED about the evidence. This is not a small oversight but intentional deception. Anyone who really cares about science should be furious with them.
You also say:
“It’s much more likely that groups with ideological and financial interests in opposition to CO2 regulation are just playing up doubts and fears.”
There has been tens of billions of taxpayer money going to climate research. Is there no “ideological and financial interest” in that? Why is research from energy companies suspect while government money is considered above reproach? I don’t trust the government, ANY government! Not that I trust energy companies entirely either but energy companies can’t tax me into oblivion. They can’t take away my freedom. Governments can do that, hence I consider governments to be a far larger threat.
Go here: http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3
These scientists are being ignored. Why? Only scientists that agree with the non- consensus are considered to be trustworthy. Why? There is a political agenda here, it is quite obvious.
OK, now thats my last post. Please think about this a bit. I know I wont have convinced you but mull it over. This is important.
• Lightweight technologies like Gadgets and Widgets have become increasingly popular on the public web. In 2010, enterprises will more intently use them to build tactical solutions (“quick wins”) and then slowly migrate to more strategic options. So portal vendors will not only support these frameworks but also will start providing a roadmap for moving from Gadgets to Portlets, and vice-versa