Scientists Not Alarmist Enough, NYT's Gillis Pushes Poll Showing Public Thinks 'Weather Extremes' Mean Climate Change
Since scientists are not alarmist enough for New York Times's apocalyptic climate reporter Justin Gillis, he is now relying on surveys done by computer to make the case for dangerous "climate change." "In Poll, Many Link Weather Extremes to Climate Change."
Gillis proudly confessed his global warming activism in an April 2 interview with The Columbia Journalism Review. He wrote on Wednesday:
Scientists may hesitate to link some of the weather extremes of recent years to global warming -- but the public, it seems, is already there.
A poll due for release on Wednesday shows that a large majority of Americans believe that this year’s unusually warm winter, last year’s blistering summer and some other weather disasters were probably made worse by global warming. And by a 2-to-1 margin, the public says the weather has been getting worse, rather than better, in recent years.
The survey, the most detailed to date on the public response to weather extremes, comes atop other polling showing a recent uptick in concern about climate change. Read together, the polls suggest that direct experience of erratic weather may be convincing some people that the problem is no longer just a vague and distant threat.
“Most people in the country are looking at everything that’s happened; it just seems to be one disaster after another after another,” said Anthony A. Leiserowitz of Yale University, one of the researchers who commissioned the new poll. “People are starting to connect the dots.”
The poll opens a new window on public opinion about climate change.
A large majority of climate scientists say the climate is shifting in ways that could cause serious impacts, and they cite the human release of greenhouse gases as a principal cause. But a tiny, vocal minority of researchers contests that view, and has seemed in the last few years to be winning the battle of public opinion despite slim scientific evidence for their position.
....
For instance, when people were asked whether they attributed specific events to global warming, recent heat waves drew the largest majorities. Scientists say their statistical evidence for an increase of weather extremes is indeed strongest when it comes to heat waves.
Asked whether they agreed or disagreed that global warming had contributed to the unusually warm winter just past, 25 percent of the respondents said they strongly agreed that it had, and 47 percent said they somewhat agreed. Only 17 percent somewhat disagreed, and 11 percent strongly disagreed.
Apparently the public, who the media have implictly chided for not being alarmed over the global warming threat, are now climate experts:
Majorities almost as large cited global warming as a likely factor in last year’s record summer heat wave, as well as the 2011 drought in Texas and Oklahoma. Smaller but still substantial majorities cited it as a factor in the record United States snowfalls of 2010 and 2011 and the Mississippi River floods of 2011. Those views, too, are consistent with scientific evidence, which suggests that global warming is causing heavier precipitation in all seasons.
Gillis embraced a dubious climate source, Bill McKibben who oh-so-scientifically claims that "things are getting freaky":
Advocacy groups seeking policies to limit climate change say that extreme weather is giving them an opening to reach the public.
A group called 350.org is planning a worldwide series of rallies on May 5, under the slogan “Connect the Dots,” to draw attention to the links between climate change and extreme weather. (The group’s name is a reference to an ideal concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.)
“My sense from around the country and the world is that people definitely understand that things are getting freaky,” said William E. McKibben, the founder of 350.org. “During that crazy heat wave in March, everyone in Chicago was out enjoying the weather, but in the back of their mind they were thinking, this is not right.”
This is a habit for McKibben, an author and environmental alarmist who wrote a book advocating couples limit themselves to just one child to combat overpopulation. Science blogger David Appell in a March 22 post:
Bill McKFibben went on Democracy Now today to talk about the President's attempt to make everyone happy on the Keystone Pipeline (or, at least, make everyone equally unhappy), and mentioned the warm weather in the US, calling it the "weirdest weather ever seen in this country."...weirdest weather ever? Weirder than the Dust Bowl years? Than any of various "storms of the century"....McKibben does this a lot, like with last year's Hurricane Irene, which he attributed to warm water off the east coast. Yet the 2011 Atlantic hurricane season had a near normal number of major hurricanes, with an above average number of tropical storms with a near normal number of major hurricanes.
- Clay Waters's blog
- Login to post comments















Comments
The AGW advocates rarely offer holistic data to make their . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 1:08pm.
. . . their case, and rely mostly on bits of data and anecdotal info from fellow AGWers.
I wish one or more of the networks would devote an entire evening to the discussion, allowing voices from both sides to express their theories and support them with data, before cross-examination from the other side.
Are they afraid of something?
As for the "tiny, vocal minority" of dissenters, I believe the list of signatures, including that of Prof. Lindzen, chief climatologist at MIT, is up to 35,000 now.
Well, gee, why do you suppose that is, Justin?
Submitted by CO2Maker on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 1:52pm.
Scientists, even the gullible ones, take cautious steps with the data (yeah, yeah, even if it's CRUddy data). But the public is waaaay ahead of them, and are sure global warming is here.
Where do you suppose they got that idea, huh?
Lemme think ... how did all those people get their information about "climate change," "global warming" (of the anthropogenic kind, no less), melting glaciers, disappearing polar bears, vanishing Endive Islands, etc.?
Maybe the public got their ideas from all those reporters laying on their backs, feet to the ceiling, using hockey sticks to stir up passionate feelings about nothing more than fantasies and dreams.
And the Nobel Algorithm laughs all the way to the bank.
➚ Let's get serious
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 2:01pm.
Holistic sounds so New Age.
But the data refutes the alarmists
Submitted by c5then on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 2:50pm.
Polar bear populations seem to be increasing. No significant recorded temperature increases for a decade. Himalayian glaciers that are getting bigger...
The only people who still think that man is doing anything that can affect the climate are the media (and those who believe the media) and those who make money from the global warming scam.
Seriously...does it make any sense that increasing a trace gas from 0.028% of the atmosphere to 0.031% is going to cause catastrophic changes???!!!!
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Wow, they polled 1008 people?
Submitted by UpNorth on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 3:53pm.
Further broken down to 18% from the "Northeast", 22% from the "Midwest", 37% from the "South" and 23% from the "West"? Yet, they don't identify further, by residence. Do they all dwell in cities? Do they all get their news from NPR, the alphabet networks, cable/satellite? Did they interview a single farmer? Then there is this disclaimer, "Totals may occasionally sum to more than 100% due to rounding"? Terrific, we're gonna lie, but pay no attention to your lyin eyes, if the figures aren't right.
And, D.C. is in the South? And 58% of those polled are strongly, or somewhat interested in what their favorite TV weather person thinks of AGW? These people reveal themselves as people who are only interested in getting their money for doing surveys.
This is a deeply flawed survey, conducted by deeply flawed people on the AGW bandwagon.
Libs always double down on failure
Submitted by Slyrr on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 3:59pm.
They've written fear books and horror movies about how GW will destroy the world. They've been scaring kids at school with this claptrap for over 10 years, giving them nightmares and raising a generation of kids who value snail darters more than human life.
The liberal leftists in Politics, schools, universities and 'science' communities have literally been terrorizing people from kindergarten through college, trying to pound the GW message into their heads and turn them into good little GW soldier drones.
But they've cried 'wolf' once too often, saying the GW boogerman is responsible for everything from impotence to bad grades, to racism, to spontaneous decapitation. And the public has had enough.
So when the looney leftists see that they've overplayed their hand and no one believes them anymore, how do they react? "Well, we're obviously not terrorizing them ENOUGH!"
Well, keep at it, libs. The more you try to tighten your grip, the more people will slip through your fingers.
"Connect the dots" & "350.org"
Submitted by deadeyedan on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 4:48pm.
By noting the 2005 record-setting Atlantic Basin tropical storm season which included Hurricane Katrina, and then noting that 2010 was (globally) the all-time record low for overall tropical storm intensity and 2011 was nearly so, we can connect the dots.
By noting the eight-year lull in Fujita Force Scale five tornadic events from 1999-2007 (note that includes the record tropical storm year), beating the old record by three years, then a dramatic upturn in tornadic activity last year, we can connect the dots.
When we connect those dots we find no pattern, none whatever. Nature has, since the founding of Rome, had mildly prolonged lulls in activity followed by sharp upward spikes and mildly prolonged high activity followed by sharp downward spikes as if to create a balance and average things out.
These are not trends - these are not patterns, at least not those suggested by an external influence such as our emissions. They are not patterns of any sort.
In order to find some kind of "perfect" level of carbon dioxide in parts per million we only need go back in time and find that, throughout earth's knowable history through its rock record, that level which has persisted all of that time. Any other level, as the prevailing wisdom would suggest, would have to be the result of artificial intervention. Except that 350 ppm is far below the norm for earth by a considerable factor and that in fact below 250 would be fatal for most terrestrial plants.
Any CO2 level achievable by human emissions at the current rate for the next several centuries would not match what existed in earth's atmosphere eons ago (therefore perfect?) for durations of many millions of years. Since any of those much higher levels in the past had no artificial forcing, any of them would qualify as "perfect", so no amount we could insert into the atmosphere could be considered "imperfect".
It's all a big scam, as Weather Channel founder John Coleman repeatedly asserts.
GLOBAL WARMING - authoritarian, rather than authoritative, science
"A large majority of climate scientists say "what?"
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 5:20pm.
This is really way out there (my bold):
A large majority of climate scientists say the climate is shifting in ways that could cause serious impacts, and they cite the human release of greenhouse gases as a principal cause. But a tiny, vocal minority of researchers contests that view, and has seemed in the last few years to be winning the battle of public opinion despite slim scientific evidence for their position.
Justin Gillis had already admitted this, in his opening wish list:
Scientists may hesitate to link some of the weather extremes of recent years to global warming -- but the public, it seems, is already there.
One would love to see him challenged - preferably by his editor or the NY Times Ombudsman - to present the data that proves that 'a large majority of "climate scientists" believe that man-made greenhouse gases are the principal cause of current climate change.' In fact, one would like to seem Gillis make the case that there is actually scientific evidence that there is something historically 'changed' with the current climate.
Also, one might wonder if Gillis missed the Gallup Poll out in recent days that calls into question, his entire world of what the"public" actually believes:
Americans Worry Most About Water Contamination, Least About Global Warming
See - Gallup gave the public a list of items in regards to their view of "environmental problems". .
Contamination of soil and water by toxic waste
Pollution of drinking water
Pollution of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs
The loss of tropical rain forests
Air pollution
Extinction of plant and animal species
Global warming
. . and ask folks to rank them according to their concerns. You guessed it, "global warming," came in dead last.
This should be telling Gilis something; either folks aren't that worried about global warming, and/or their not connecting global warming to climate change.
(;~/ gary
Hey Gary,
Submitted by Boudin on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 7:19pm.
That poll certainly cant reflect the conservative opinions, because as everyone knows, we want dirty air and water!