Oh my: Belief in man-made global warming now under 50%

posted at 6:49 pm on December 7, 2009 by Allahpundit

Hide the decline.

agw

The good news for warmists: While only 45 percent believe in anthropogenic global warming, more than two-thirds believe that global warming is occurring. Moreover, these numbers are much rosier than the ones Pew got when they polled this question in October, with just 57 percent expressing a belief in GW at the time and a measly 36 percent subscribing to AGW. Even so, with all the buzz over Copenhagen and the effort expended to laugh at Climategate, it’s mind-boggling that the trend is towards skepticism, not belief. How much more hype do they need to manufacture to convince people? Are the statues not scary enough? Is Al Gore’s poetry not poignant enough? What’ll it take?

I know what it’ll take. It’ll take a guy no one trusts in the first place to blithely insist at today’s White House presser (for the second time this week) that “I think everybody is clear on the science.” Case closed. Bring on cap and trade! Click the image to watch.

Update: Ah, missed this in the CNN item at first glance:

The CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey, released Monday, indicates that two-thirds of all Americans believe global warming is a proven fact.
That’s down eight points since June of 2008, with views among Democrats holding steady while Republicans’ belief in global warming dropping 11 points

The poll indicates the number who say the U.S. should reduce emissions even if other countries do not follow suit has also dropped, from 66 percent in 2007 to 58 percent today.

“That drop is due to roughly equal changes among Republicans and Democrats, suggesting that economic conditions, rather than political factors, may be at play,” noted Holland.

Just another partisan issue, driven by a reaction to the president? If so, then ironically greens probably would have been better off with McCain in the White House: Republican opposition on this issue wouldn’t have been as dug in.

gibbs-agw


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

CO2 ruled a pollutant, yeast and anaerobes hardest hit.

daesleeper on December 7, 2009 at 10:14 PM

Science is never settled if you’re a scientist and never done by poll.

jdkchem on December 7, 2009 at 10:16 PM

During the Carter administration, It was SETTLED SCIENCE that the earth was cooling and we’d be in the next Ice Age in 30 short years! Remember that? Well, I don’t see any icebergs here in San Diego. Fact is, it was the same idiots screaming for the same reasons. They were making it up then and they are making it up now because there is a lot of money to be made in fear in panic. “Never waste a good crisis” Rahm Emanual. OB’s chief of staff.

Bikerken on December 7, 2009 at 10:16 PM

Trust me: Fear the EPA as much as crap and trade.

mobydutch on December 7, 2009 at 10:35 PM

Earth was the center of the solar system. This was settled science. When Galileo was a denier of this it almost cost him his funding head.

Mojave Mark on December 7, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Now that the EPA has “declared” the CO2 that YOU exhale to be a “pollutant”, you damn well better lawyer-up ‘cuz I’m fixin’ to SUE for some real serious damages!

bannedbyhuffpo on December 7, 2009 at 11:20 PM

I figure once the college crowd learns that CO2 is the fizz in their beer they’ll defect from the AGW nonsense in droves.

MJBrutus on December 8, 2009 at 6:42 AM

Trust me: Fear the EPA as much as crap and trade.

mobydutch on December 7, 2009 at 10:35 PM

you need to fear them more

they are pretty much unbridled

at least with Congress we can vote them in and out

CWforFreedom on December 8, 2009 at 6:45 AM

So, it seems a UCI Scientist was among the people who had emails hacked. The OC Register caught up with him and he says all us people who believe this means the science is wrong are a bunch of radicals. That the WSJ has a set of bogus Scientists who lie that Global Warming doesn’t exist. He agrees with Gibbs that the science is basically locked up and confirmed and some of these guys are MERELY worried about their public image and impressing people and that’s ALL the emails show. Here’s part of the OC Registers interview with this guy:

Michael Prather, a researcher at UC Irvine who specializes in climate modeling and has served for years as an author with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, joins many scientists and climate specialists in a firm ‘No.’
Prather, who found one of his own e-mails among those that were hacked, says the scientific consensus on global warming, as well as the data supporting it, remain strong.
He and others say the e-mails instead reveal that scientists are all too human, and can become as excessively concerned with public relations as anyone else in an institutional setting.
The controversy provided a strange backdrop to the beginning of a climate summit in Copenhagen, where 192 countries will try to hammer out agreement on reduction of greenhouse gases.
We asked Prather three questions as the controversy raged. Prather also allowed us to publish his 1998 e-mail — a kind of workaday scientific note filled with technical language, but one that did not inspire the kind controversy other e-mails did.
Q. What is the significance of the release of these hacked e-mails?
A. Primarily they show that climate change science is healthy, interactive, and mostly open.
There are some minor examples of potentially bad behavior, but no conspiracy. The few examples of this are notable in 1000+ emails!
Q. Could the release of the emails change the scientific consensus on climate
change?
A. No, there is far too much science on climate change, far beyond UEA and Penn State, to alter the scientific consensus. If the public lets this affect them, then we have a serious communication problem.
These emails will be used by those who have already made up their minds on climate change to support their irrational belief system. We have already seen some of this, as the highly polarized press (WSJ) digs up their pet scientists to write op-ed pieces masquerading as scientific articles. What is worse, but expected, is that when scientists who were directly attacked, or whose primary work was directly attacked, by these one-sided half-page opinion pieces ask to write a rebuttal, the WSJ editorial policy does not allow equal access but limits their response to a couple of brief paragraphs. Thus, for those whose believe that climate change just cannot be human intervention, these emails will bolster their faith, but for those who continue to examine the scientific evidence, including the uncertainties in current knowledge, they will prove trivial.
Q. What is the consensus?
A. 99% of the last IPCC assessment still stands, and the new data since 2007 make an even stronger case for an acceleration of the human-caused global warming.

Sultry Beauty on December 8, 2009 at 7:16 AM

anaerobes hardest hit.

daesleeper on December 7, 2009 at 10:14 PM

As founder of People for the Ethical Treatment of Anaerobes (and its sister organization, People for the Ethical Treatment of Aerobes), I am compelled to say, “LEAVE THE LITTLE BUGGIES ALONE!!!!

ya2daup on December 8, 2009 at 8:15 AM

Satire: White House Says “Overwhelming Consensus of Political Scientists” Supports Its Climate Change Policies http://optoons.blogspot.com/2009/12/white-house-says-overwhelming-consensus.html

Mervis Winter on December 8, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Warming believers; don’t wait for Obama or the Democrats to lead you! Be good to Mother Earth and start today to save her.
Sell your car.
Cut the power to your home.
Euthanize your pets.
Quit exhaleing.

Lead the way, we will be right behind you!

What? You are unwilling to help Mother Earth! Do you deny that if just the 40% of you that are Democrats eliminated your carbon footprint, we would save the planet?

Then a 40% carbon reduction by everyone won’t save it either.

barnone on December 8, 2009 at 10:22 AM

Gibbs is an idiot used as a tool to make Obama look good when caompared to his utter ignorance. If he says its true, then we know it isn’t as everyone remotely associated to this administration is incapable of the truth.

volsense on December 8, 2009 at 11:48 AM

Comment pages: 1 2