global warming reversal

[InRareForm]

http://m.motherjones.com/environment/2013/07/global-warming-carbon-capture-storage

[AntiChrist]

lol

[tlongII]

lol climate science

[Wild Cobra]

No, this can actually help.

First off, if we burn trees instead of coal, the net CO2 in the atmosphere is zero. This is because as we replant, the new growth absorbs the CO2.

One thin I have advocated more than once is to start cutting trees again. open up the forests and allow for cost effective wood products. Building more with wood and less with steel and concrete sequesters CO2 instead of using it, and the trees planted to replace this sequestered CO2 will absorb it from the air.

Then there is this too:

link: METHANOL FROM WOOD WASTE: A Technical and Economic Study (http://www.fpl.fs.fed.us/documnts/fplgtr/fplgtr12.pdf)

[boutons_deux]

The worldwide conspiracy and joke about AGW exposed, finally!

As the BigCarbon Corps have said all along, all the scientists are lying to us!

Earth Scientists Pin Climate Change Squarely On 'Humanity'

Most of the scientists who study the Earth say our climate is changing and humans are part of what's making that happen. But to a lot of nonscientists it's still murky. This week, two of the nation's most venerable scientific institutions tried to explain it better.

The federal government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued its annual report Tuesday. Mostly, it was bad news: rising sea levels, less sea ice in the Arctic and warmer oceans. NOAA said 2012 was in the top 10 hottest years on record for global average temperature, but in the U.S. it was the hottest on record.

NOAA's report describes that warming pattern in 260 pages without discussing the cause; a second report will talk about that in September.
But the American Geophysical Union, which represents some 60,000 scientists who study the Earth, is ready with an explanation of the cause now. Arguably, there is no other group of scientists more attuned to what the planet is doing.
This week the group with the headline: "Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years." It added, "Human-induced climate change requires urgent action."

What Professional Science Societies Say About Climate Change

"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society. ... In addition to rapidly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is essential that we develop strategies to adapt to ongoing changes and make communities more resilient to future changes."
— American Association for the Advancement of Science,

"National and international policy discussions should include consideration of the best ways to both adapt to and mitigate climate change. ... At the same time, some continued climate change is inevitable, and policy responses should include adaptation to climate change."
— American Meteorological Society,

"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth's physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur."
— American Physical Society,

"Climate change is occurring, is very likely caused by human activities, and poses significant risks for a broad range of human and natural systems. ... The environmental, economic, and humanitarian risks of climate change indicate a pressing need for substantial action to limit the magnitude of climate change and to prepare to adapt to its impacts."
— National Academy of Sciences,

"[C]omprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem.
— American Chemical Society,


Climate scientist from Texas A&M University was chairman of the 14-scientist panel that wrote the statement, the first such statement for the American Geophysical Union in six years. He says scientists are much more confident that their climate models are accurate — there's much more data about the history of the oceans and the atmosphere, and other explanations for the warming planet have been tried and come up short.
"We've been looking," he says. "What [are the] other possible candidates? We just cannot find any other way that this can be happening."

North agrees that things like temperature and sea level do vary a lot, and that gives the long-term climate record a kind of herky-jerky appearance. So scientists are not surprised at temperature "plateaus" and temporary reversals in sea level rise.

"This thing doesn't just go up continuously, but is a kind of ratchet," North says. "It goes up, then it steps back a little bit, then it goes up some more." But the unrelenting driver of the warming — CO2 — does not change. It just keeps coming.

The AGU's new statement matches others written by major scientific organizations. But this year it's firmer and more direct.

http://www.npr.org/2013/08/06/209462713/earth-scientists-pin-climate-change-squarely-on-humanity?sc=17&f=1001

http://www.npr.org/2013/08/06/209462713/earth-scientists-pin-climate-change-squarely-on-humanity?sc=17&f=1001

[boutons_deux]

Meanwhile USA BigCarbon corps, having corrupted enough politicians and bought enough defensive propaganda, continue to suck in the profits while destroying the planet

‘American Carbon’ Enters World Economy And Atmosphere At Fastest Pace Ever (http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/06/2418971/american-carbon-fastest-pace-ever/)


http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/AmericanCarbon.jpg

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2013/08/06/2418971/american-carbon-fastest-pace-ever/

[boutons_deux]

Watching Fox News makes you distrust climate scientists

In the past several years, a number of polls have documented the huge gap (http://www.pewresearch.org/daily-number/the-partisan-divide-on-global-warming/) between liberals and conservatives when it comes to their acceptance of the science of climate change. Naturally, then, researchers have increasingly turned their attention to trying to explain this dramatic divide over what is factually true. And it wasn’t long before they homed in on the role of conservative media in particular — thus, a number of studies (e.g., here (http://woods.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/files/Global-Warming-Fox-News.pdf) [PDF]) show that watching Fox News increases your risk of holding incorrect beliefs about the science of climate change.

Now, a new paper (http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/about_us/meet_us/max_boykoff/readings/hmielowski_2013.pdf) [PDF] just out in the journal Public Understanding of Science takes this line of inquiry further, beginning to unpack precisely how conservative media work to undermine the public’s acceptance of science. The paper shows that a distrust of climate scientists is a significant factor underlying the modern denial of global warming, and moreover, that watching Fox News and listening to Rush Limbaugh both increase one’s level of distrust of these scientific experts. Or as the paper puts it, “[C]onservative media use decreases trust in scientists which, in turn, decreases certainty that global warming is happening.”

The study, conducted by Jay Hmielowski of the University of Arizona and colleagues at several other universities, relied on a large polling sample of Americans in two phases: 2,497 individuals were interviewed in 2008, and then a smaller sample of 1,036 were reinterviewed in 2011. The respondents were asked about what kind of media they consumed — conservative choices included Fox News and the Rush Limbaugh Show; “non-conservative” media outlets included CNN, MSNBC, National Public Radio, and network news — as well as about how much they trusted or distrusted climate scientists. They were also asked about their belief that global warming is happening. (The study controlled for variables like political ideology, religiosity, and other demographic factors.)

The results showed that conservative media consumption led to less trust in climate scientists, even as consuming nonconservative media had the opposite effect (leading to an increased trust in climate scientists). Between people who said they don’t consume any conservative media and people who said they consume a large amount, “we see a 13 percent difference in the amount of trust in scientists,” according to study coauthor Lauren Feldman of American University.

The authors then proposed that distrust of scientists is a key link in the chain between watching Fox (or listening to Rush) and coming to doubt climate science. The idea is that because most people don’t know a great deal about the science of global warming, they rely on “heuristics” — or mental shortcuts — to make up their minds about what to believe. “Trust” (or the lack thereof) is a classic shortcut, allowing one to quickly determine who’s right and who’s wrong in a seemingly complex and data-laden debate. Or as the paper put it: “The public’s low level of knowledge and the media’s conflicting, often value-laden messages about global warming lead people to use heuristics to make sense of this complex issue.”

Evidence of Fox and Rush Limbaugh raising doubts about climate scientists — in a way that could generate distrust — isn’t hard to come by. Limbaugh includes scientists (http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/04/29/the_four_corners_of_deceit_prominent_liberal_socia l_psychologist_made_it_all_up) in his “four corners of deceit … government, academia, science, and the media.” As for Fox, there are myriad examples of coverage that could be said to cast doubt on climate science. For instance, there’s the 2009 memo (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2010/12/15/foxleaks-fox-boss-ordered-staff-to-cast-doubt-o/174317), exposed by Media Matters, in which Fox Washington editor Bill Sammon instructed staff to cast doubt on climate research in their coverage.

http://grist.org/climate-energy/watching-fox-news-makes-you-distrust-climate-scientists/?utm_source=syndication&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=feed

Another report a few years ago showed that on general knowledge, Fox watchers scored a lot lower than non-Fox watchers.

From my scientific observations here in ST, conservatives/Repugs/bubbas are obviously a lot more stupid, uneducated, and ignorant than others.

[boutons_deux]

eg:

Fox News Claims Solar Won't Work in America Because It's Not Sunny Like Germany
http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/02/07/fox_news_expert_on_solar_energy_germany_gets_a_lot _more_sun_than_we_do_video.html

[Wild Cobra]

I see you're on a roll again Boutons.

How about finding something on black carbon for us please.

[boutons_deux]

I see you're on a roll again Boutons.

How about finding something on black carbon for us please.

"Do Your Own Research"

-- WC

[Wild Cobra]

"Do Your Own Research"

-- WC
LOL...

I just wanted you to find articles that you might start to believe. That's OK if you aren't interested.

[boutons_deux]

Young Republican voters won't support climate denial


A new poll conducted for the League of Conservation Voters (http://www.lcv.org/) found strong views among young voters, including young Republicans, regarding climate change denial. In short: young voters will not tolerate denying science or opposing action to slow climate change.

Suzanne Goldenberg at The Guardian reports (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/25/us-politics-climate-change-scepticism):

The bipartisan poll conducted for the League of Conservation Voters found solid 80% support among under-35 voters for Barack Obama's climate change plan – and majority support even among those who oppose the president.

On the flip side the poll found three-quarters of voters, or 73%, would oppose members of Congress who stood in the way of Obama's climate action plan.

The findings could prove awkward for Republicans in Congress who have adopted climate contrarianism as a defining feature.

Some 55% of Republicans in the House of Representatives and 65% of those in the Senate reject the science behind climate change or oppose action on climate change, according to an analysis by the Centre for American Progress.


Embarrassingly, many members of Congress still do not accept the scientific consensus on climate change. See a map here (http://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/map-climate-change-deniers-congress.html). Goldenberg reports on how these deniers are seen by young voters.

The implications were even more harsh for those Republicans who block Obama on climate action and dispute the entire body of science behind climate change. "For voters under 35, denying climate change signals a much broader failure of values and leadership," the polling memo said. Many young voters would write such candidates off completely, with 37% describing climate change deniers as "ignorant", 29% as "out of touch" and 7% simply as "crazy".


Young voters aren't the only people calling for climate action. Recently evangelical scientists (http://www.treehugger.com/culture/200-evangelical-scientists-ask-congress-pass-climate-legislation.html), military experts (http://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/military-report-critiques-us-energy-production-lack-climate-action.html) and former Republican EPA administrators (http://www.treehugger.com/environmental-policy/making-republican-case-climate-action.html) have called on Congress to take significant action to address climate change.

http://www.treehugger.com/climate-change/young-republican-voters-wont-support-climate-denial-poll-finds.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+treehuggersite+%28Treehugger% 29

But BigCarbon owns Repug Congress assholes, so Human-Americans' simply don't matter. aka, disenfranchised by Corporate-American $$$.

[Jacob1983]

No one gives a shit about this. Let's be honest. The fad has died down tremendously in recent years mainly because Americans are apathetic lazy beings when it comes to the environment. People don't give a shit because it will not directly affect them.

[Wild Cobra]

Young Republican voters won't support climate denial


A new poll conducted for the League of Conservation Voters (http://www.lcv.org/) found strong views among young voters, including young Republicans, regarding climate change denial. In short: young voters will not tolerate denying science or opposing action to slow climate change.

Suzanne Goldenberg at The Guardian reports (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/25/us-politics-climate-change-scepticism):

The bipartisan poll conducted for the League of Conservation Voters found solid 80% support among under-35 voters for Barack Obama's climate change plan – and majority support even among those who oppose the president.

On the flip side the poll found three-quarters of voters, or 73%, would oppose members of Congress who stood in the way of Obama's climate action plan.

The findings could prove awkward for Republicans in Congress who have adopted climate contrarianism as a defining feature.

Some 55% of Republicans in the House of Representatives and 65% of those in the Senate reject the science behind climate change or oppose action on climate change, according to an analysis by the Centre for American Progress.


Embarrassingly, many members of Congress still do not accept the scientific consensus on climate change. See a map here (http://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/map-climate-change-deniers-congress.html). Goldenberg reports on how these deniers are seen by young voters.

The implications were even more harsh for those Republicans who block Obama on climate action and dispute the entire body of science behind climate change. "For voters under 35, denying climate change signals a much broader failure of values and leadership," the polling memo said. Many young voters would write such candidates off completely, with 37% describing climate change deniers as "ignorant", 29% as "out of touch" and 7% simply as "crazy".


Young voters aren't the only people calling for climate action. Recently evangelical scientists (http://www.treehugger.com/culture/200-evangelical-scientists-ask-congress-pass-climate-legislation.html), military experts (http://www.treehugger.com/energy-policy/military-report-critiques-us-energy-production-lack-climate-action.html) and former Republican EPA administrators (http://www.treehugger.com/environmental-policy/making-republican-case-climate-action.html) have called on Congress to take significant action to address climate change.

http://www.treehugger.com/climate-change/young-republican-voters-wont-support-climate-denial-poll-finds.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+treehuggersite+%28Treehugger% 29

But BigCarbon owns Repug Congress assholes, so Human-Americans' simply don't matter. aka, disenfranchised by Corporate-American $$$.





Well, that is a misinterpretation of the synopses of the poll. Wish i could find the actual questions.

80% said they support the president taking action. It doesn't say the president's plan...

66% say climate change is a problem to address.

79% are more likely to vote for someone who "supports these steps," but doesn't outline the steps/questions asked.

link: GS Stratagy Group synopsys (http://www.lcv.org/issues/polling/recent-polling-on-youth.pdf)

link: GS Stratagy Group: about (http://www.gsstrategygroup.com/go.cfm?do=Page.View&pid=3)

These people are business marketers. They produce material to market what your agenda is.



Our Firm

GSSG recognizes that your company’s reputation and bottom line are strongest when your image and business model are firmly aligned with trends in public opinion and consumer behavior.

Shifts in public attitudes and consumer behavior can pose risk to your business, resulting in disruptive drumbeats by activist critics and the media, lost sales, shareholder and employee unrest and, ultimately, unfavorable policies and government scrutiny driven by reactive regulators and politically motivated elected officials.

GSSG helps you proactively manage your reputation to stay in step with public opinion and consumer behavior and a step ahead of the public policy curve. We accomplish this through careful amassing and analysis of survey research and disciplined application of the results.

Led by some of the country’s most experienced corporate and political strategists, GSSG provides you with a sophisticated approach that not only positions you at the forefront of opinion trends, but enables you to anticipate and benefit from future trends and behavior.

Whether you are launching an initiative to advance your business objectives, confronting a crisis, or simply looking for a new edge over your competitors in today’s fractured, high-velocity marketplace, GSSG is uniquely equipped to help.

[boutons_deux]

"These people are business marketers. They produce material to market what your agenda is."

Kock Bros and Big Carbon pay VRWC stink tanks and "scientist" whores to promote BigCarbon's denial of AGW, eg, AGW shill WC.

[Wild Cobra]

"These people are business marketers. They produce material to market what your agenda is."

Kock Bros and Big Carbon pay VRWC stink tanks and "scientist" whores to promote BigCarbon's denial of AGW, eg, AGW shill WC.



Idiot.

I'm not a denier. I'm a realist.