CLIMATE CHANGE..
Saturday, November 14, 2009 at 06:57PM It is reported that MORE than half the UK population does not believe climate change has been caused by humans.
In a poll published just weeks before the global climate change summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, it has been revealed only 41% of British people accept as a scientific fact that the situation is largely man-made. The Populus research shows while 28% believed climate change was "far and away" the most serious problem facing Britain and another 51% agreed it was a serious concern, many remained unconvinced of the role humans played.
So, despite all the media hype, the relentless pro-AGW propaganda, the majority of folks here DO NOT swallow the tripe churned out by the eco-wacko brigade. Perhaps most interesting is the fact that ALL major UK political parties take a view widely at variance with the electorate. An inconvenient truth.
agw 
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (15)
I am not sure where I read it this week: the % of US population who believe the AGWtheories is dropping significantly as well.
When these issues, such as climate change (and indeed terrorism) get over securitised the way they have- the arse eventually falls out of the story for many. Sensible people can only be scared witless for an amount of time, until their rational thought process kicks in and they think for themselves ( as seen with the WOT).
I believe we need to pay attention to our world and the climate, but I have great difficulty with Gore's scaremongering on the issue.
David, if over half the population do not believe that climate change has been caused by humans how can the Biased Broadcasting Company say, through their Assistant Editor, Roger Hermiston, " We reflect the orthodoxy of the Climate Change debate, day in, day out, 300-365 days per year. Just every so often and it is very rarely, we take a look at other options." To do so broadcasts far and wide that the BEEB is a truly biased organisation who has decided not to report the full facts and opinions to its listeners and viewers. Does this course of action accord with the BBCs charter?
Most of us depend on the work of others - "scientists" - to tell us what is true and what isn't. Sadly, the "scientists" have let us down. They are as venal as the tax-gathering politicians. The story is better than a Michael Crichton thriller, here
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2009/9/29/the-yamal-implosion.html
Its not a question of the difference between what is true and what people think is true, as the ecowingnuts are now adopting as their line of defence. The public come fitted with BS-detectors. Yes, they are not scientists, but they have a lifetime of experience of spotting people trying to con them. Apocolyptic Alarmists "its happening faster than we thought!", the "fifty days to save the planet", "save the fluffy animals",. You know BS when you hear it. And when you are told there is no need to discuss it, its settled, the alarm bells start ringing!
I'm not surprised by this result. Anyone who takes the trouble to read up on this subject will soon find that there are problems with the AGW theory, and that while it remains persuasive, it is far from proven. In particular, the forecasts of future temperatures if no attempt is made to reduce CO2 emissions are far from convincing.
See here for a quick summary of the main areas of scientific contention. It can be read inside one minute and it does not contain any of the nonsense claims of the bone-head denialists, such as "global cooling since 1998".
I believe we need to pay attention to our world and the climate, but I have great difficulty with Gore's scaremongering on the issue.
Who are you, and what have you done to Pinky?
In the past ten days or so, I have watched, and listened closely, to Al Gore being interviewed on US television - first by Charlie Rose, next by Larry King.
Each interview was 40 minutes long or more.
He was not asked a hard question on either show. Not one.
He was never asked a) if there was any possibility that any of his statements or hypotheses on the GW matter were exaggerated, b) why he never debates the issue, c) about his financial investments in the " cures " for the alleged problem.
If the GW guys have not convinced the thinking public, maybe it's because they've never tried to convince them- other than the wooden, error filled " An Inconvenient Truth "
Or because they themselves don't believe that their arguments can withstand serious challenge.
Phantom, one does not open up one's religion to debate.
It is not a religion. It is a scientific theory, which means that it is capable of being disproved. This does not apply to religions, whose followers doggedly reject all evidence which indicates that both their deity and the afterlife are non-existent.
Despite many attempts, some on these pages, I have never heard an AGW guy say in clear and unhedged language what it would take to disprove the theory. The responses have always been disappointing, often involving circular references.
Peter- I will ask you - what objective and measurable events / conditions over what period of time would cause you to conclude that the theory was either false or grossly exaggerated?
Phantom
I already think the theory exaggerates both the role of CO2 in the 20th century warming and the likely extent of temperature increases this century if CO2 emissions are not reduced significantly.
If the temperature trended downwards between now and 2020 I think the theory would be dead in the water, because CO2 will continue to increase, probably at an increasing rate, between now and then, whatever global agreements may be cobbled together next year. By a downward trend, I mean that the rolling ten year average for each year between now and 2020 shows a decline. That would be statistically significant.
However, we have another problem with CO2, namely ocean acidifiaction, which will increasingly threaten marine food chains. And we are the top marine predator. So we need to do something about CO2 emissions anyway, even if AGW turns out to be bunkum.
Peter
That's a straight answer.
I've thought for some time something you may be saying - that the overall environmental cause is far greater than the GW / Climate Change thing. I am very concerned that if AGW is rejected, that people will think that all other environmental issues are as spurious as Al Gore Theory is deemed to be.
Gore and the Global Warming Cause have taken all the oxygen out of the environmental room, and that is a bad and dangerous thing. I see overfishing, mono-agriculture, loss of species, loss of habitat, soil erosion, water conflicts of various types as all being at least as big issues as is GW. But all we get is Big Al and Copenhagen and " let's do a carbon trade "
I see overfishing, mono-agriculture, loss of species, loss of habitat, soil erosion, water conflicts of various types as all being at least as big issues as is GW.
Yes, but you have omitted the greatest threat of all, namely the explosion in the human population. That is what lies behind the other threats you have listed.
Let's remember the numbers: 1950 3 billion, 2000 6 billion, 2050 9 billion. This is the elephant in the room.
The increase in human population is well in the process of being controlled in many places, such as China.
The increase in the unproductive and utterly dysfunctional world ( Africa, etc ) creates problems but they are different ones
The real environmental " problem " is that the Chinese, and others, who in very recent times were dirt poor, are a lot more prosperous, and are on the way to being rich, towards European / Japanese / US standards. Huge numbers, esp in Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou live as well as the average westerner right now.
What happens when many more hundreds of millions want to eat meat, live in a good condo, drive a car, and fly away on holiday once a year?
The world's population could remain flat from this point, and there would still be environmental and resource problems caused by the good thing that is rising living standards in China ( and India and other places )
Tonights forecast dark, continued dark with widely scattered light at dawn.....quotes Grorge Carlin
The Only True Forecast
Please see this important news report by the Finnish Broadcasting Co. YLE, TV1 (Nov 11th 2009), in regards to the global warming debate:
http://ohjelmat.yle.fi/mot/taman_viikon_mot/transcript_english