Sending Warmists into apoplexy. Warmists like Chris Mooney
Global warming denial hits a six-year high
The latest data is out on the prevalence of global warming denial among the U.S. public. And it isn’t pretty.
The new study, from the Yale and George Mason University research teams on climate change communication, shows a 7-percentage-point increase in the proportion of Americans who say they do not believe that global warming is happening. And that’s just since the spring of 2013. The number is now 23 percent; back at the start of last year, it was 16 percent:
(it’s cute how Chris titled the picture “denial”)
The percentage of Americans who believe global warming is human-caused has also declined, and now stands at 47 percent, a decrease of 7 percent since 2012.
The number who believe global warming is mostly natural stands at 37%.
Mooney is upset that people have heard of the “pause”, and attempts to dismiss it
According to both Anthony Leiserowitz of Yale and Ed Maibach of George Mason, the leaders of the two research teams, the answer may well lie in the so-called global warming “pauseâ€Â — the misleading idea that global warming has slowed down or stopped over the the past 15 years or so. This claim was used by climate skeptics, to great effect, in their quest to undermine the release of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s Fifth Assessment Report in September 2013 — precisely during the time period that is in question in the latest study.
As we have reported before, the notion of a global warming “pause†is, at best, the result of statistical cherry-picking. It relies on starting with a very hot year (1998) and then examining a relatively short time period (say, 15 years), to suggest that global warming has slowed down or stopped during this particular stretch of time. But put these numbers back into a broader context and the overall warming trend remains clear. Moreover, following the IPCC report, new research emerged suggesting that the semblance of a “pause†may be the result of incomplete temperature data due to the lack of adequate weather stations in the Arctic, where the most dramatic global warming is occurring.
Yet, Warmists cherry pick time frames, particularly using the time frame since 1980, which was the beginning of the most recent spike, after a 30 year pause/reduction. The very fact is that there has been no statistically significant warming since 1997, which completely contradicts what the Warmist computer models predicted. And the warming still wouldn’t prove anthropogenic causation.
“Even more likely, however,†Maibach adds, “is that media coverage of the ‘pause’ reinforced the beliefs of people who had previously concluded that global warming is not happening, making them more certain of their beliefs.â€
In other words, Warmists are very upset that the media told people the truth. Because this is not about science, but politics.
Yeah, except when you look at that 15 years, there hasn’t been any warming. If you look back since the early 20th century? Yes. But that ignores the last 15 years.
If you want, you can go back to the Medieval Warm Period and show that we’ve cooled since then.
If you want, you can go back to the Little Ice Age and show that we’ve warmed since then.
Hey CAGW’ers, don’t argue about cherry-picking when you do it yourself.
The article author makes the point that “pausers” are relying on incomplete weather station coverage from the polar regions and proceeds to claim that the polar regions are actually warming based on those same incomplete weather stations.
Yeah, I saw that one, it was amazing. And Mooney probably sees now problem with the hypocrisy.
Really?
http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php
“If you want, you can go back to the Medieval Warm Period and show that we’ve cooled since then. ”
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Temperature_reconstructions_0-2006_AD.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
Maybe Is time to learn some easy fact checking.
You still trying to push that discredited Michael Mann “hockey stick” graph? Even he has come out and tried to “save” it by modifying it. Even the IPCC has moved away from his graph. It is silly as it is wholly wrong.
It has been proven to be a fallacy based upon one tree. And it was proven that Mann and company selected certain other tree groups to GET the result that they were looking for.
However, thanks for giving us a laugh. but, it was a sympathy laugh for you. You so sad.
Commenter jaget80 supplied a most useful gadget (I was not aware of this) for examining the temperature trends using the available temperature records:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/trend.php
You should play around with it, varying the start years, and see if the actual evidence supports your claim that the Earth is no longer warming. You would be doing your own climate research!!
http://i41.tinypic.com/2drb0n4.jpg
That’s funny. I put in 1997-2012 using RSS Satellite data… and there isn’t any warming trend at all. As can be seen by my screencap.
Does that mean I’m a climate scientist now?
Dr. Vernal Liquidambar Styracifula, Phd. Yes, you are now a Climate Scientist cum laud. See, that was easy-peasy and you were using real data. Just think what you can achieve with your own data.
[…] at Pirate’s Cove is blogging about “Belief That Global Warming Isn’t Happening […]
ooooooooo.. I’m all a-giddy like a “If All You Can See” bikini girl in the snow.
Gumballs,
No, you are not a climate scientist. Since actual scientists are searching for the truth, they don’t stop when they get the answer that confirms their prejudice.
But thanks for proving my point. You can cherry pick the date and the database (out of 8). How is it there was no warming from 1998 to present, but there was warming from 2000??? According to all the databases it’s been warming for the past 5 years, since 2008, too!! And the rate of warming from 2012 to 2013 was astronomical!!
As you review longer and longer slices of data you observe cyclic peaks and valleys superimposed on an overall increase in temperature. For example, plot one of the Land/Ocean databases from 1900 to present and you’ll note all the 21st century in above the trend line! It’s warmer now than predicted from the previous data, and the Pirate says it may be cooling!
This is kind of expected. You know how global warming causes the temps to be high, low, or exactly the same with increasing consistency? Well another aspect of global warming is that it affects the mind. Rising CO2 levels cause people’s brains to not believe in CO2-caused global warming.
I think it centers in the amygdala. Not sure. But it’s pretty sciency, so it must be true.
;)
Kevin, This co2 effect on the brain is especially true for beer drinkers. They are breathing directly the co2 released from the beer and disbelieve global warming with a passion to the consternation of scantily dressed lady bartenders and waitresses. ;)
So now it’s clear, Blick. My love of Newcastle Brown is the true reason I don’t buy into AGW :).
Kevin, Yeah, you got it. See, this AGW, Climate change, warming, sciency
stuff is easy. Besides, the best benefit of the co2 in a glass of Newcastle Brown is it makes viewing the Captain’s “IF ALL YOU CAN SEE” posts all the more vivid.
VIVID??? Did someone mention that CO2 makes scantily-clad women more vivid?
Dude,…. I’m there!!!!
Hah! There’s an icon for beer!
Too funny GB.