Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (46824)	1/26/2014 10:48:06 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

"Who the hell wrote that headline...?" Sadly, not me. I will take credit for this one. "Rick Santorum was right. Scientists prove sex with dawgs caused cancer" Dogs Carry the Oldest Known Living Cancer The cancer, which causes genital tumors in dogs and is spread by sexual contact, is 11,000 years old. news.nationalgeographic.com

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (46824)	1/27/2014 10:46:42 AM
From: Thomas A Watson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

Modeling (((JF rat fish and eric.))) JF let all know how your mind functions. You post no comment with the article you posted. Do you believe that article shows a valid analysis and conclusions concerning peer reviewed literature. Now specifically in the green house effect. There are two papers that call CO2 warming fiction. They however do not dispute man made global warming. Theoretical Physicists do not dispute the absurd in any publication. UK poll: 62% don’t believe in man-made climate. Educated high income classes more skeptical than (((JF rat fish and eric.))) unskilled Last week a new ComRes/ITV poll came out in the UK. The poll of 2,047 people from across the country shows that the population is split roughly into thirds. A third are skeptics, a third are believers, a third don’t know. Overall about 60% of UK citizens are not convinced that humans are changing the weather. What was also really interesting but unreported about this study is that the wealthiest and most educated are more skeptical and those with the lowest income or shortest education (((JF rat fish and eric.))) were more likely to believe that humans are affecting the climate. In the upper middle class 36% think the floods are due to human activity, and virtually the same percentage — 35% are skeptics. In the manual worker and less skilled social bracket 44% think humans are to blame, and only 28% are skeptics. The skeptic message is winning over the upper class, better educated bracket. Presumably the rest will follow. Firstly, most people think the weather is getting worse (redbar) — 65% of all the population. This belief is most common in the lowest income and less educated (((JF rat fish and eric.))) bracket. Figure 1: Results from the question “Weather in the UK seems to get worse every year” graphed according to social grouping. A belief that the weather is getting worse does not necessarily mean that it is due to man-made emissions, and “weather” can mean storms and floods rather than hotter or colder temperatures. The next few questions provide more definition, though two of them still use the confounded and almost useless term “climate change”. We don’t know if people answer the question using the literal meaning or the coded one where all climate change equals man-made change. But we can see that when people say the weather is getting worse, quite a lot of them are are referring to storms and floods, but about 15% are thinking of hotter or colder weather or don’t think this is a a true change in the climate, or a man-made effect but perhaps is only a natural patch of bad weather. One question asks if the recent storms and floods show climate change is really happening, and the 65% who thought the weather is getting worse falls to 50% who think the climate is changing. Note the stark divergence across social groups continues. I’ve colored the more skeptical answers in blue and those more likely to be concerned about concerned about the climate with the red bars. Obviously, the IPCC message rings with uneducated and low income groups. The more educated and the higher the income, the less convinced people are. Alarmists would probably say that rich people are more likely to be deniers and the poor are more concerned, the predictable spin. But I say this has more to do with education and information sources. Looks to me like skepticism is driven by those who can read and are online. Those who rely solely on TV news will be the last to find out. (Can anyone find a older version of a study like this so we can see how the proportions of social groups are shifting? Since skepticism is growing, but a predisposition to selfish “denial” in the population probably stays the same, it would be a safe assumption that the more educated are driving the rise in skepticism.) The propaganda message that CO2 is “pollution” is failing first in the well read classes. The intellectual debate is being played out in the influential upper middle classes. Figure 2: Results from the question “The recent storms and flooding in the UK show that climate change is really happening”, graphed according to social grouping. Turn the last question inside out and a curious thing happens. The number who believe climate change is real and causing floods and storms drops from 50% to 44%. So for at least 6% of the population any statement of belief in climate change vanishes if the opposite question is asked. The change appears to occur in the lesser skilled, lower income groups. These are what I call “passive skeptics” — they tick boxes on surveys saying “yes” to propaganda, but if given the merest excuse to dump the official approved line, it’s dropped. Climate activists don’t know these people exist, because they never discuss the skeptical view with any approval so they don’t realize how fickle some of their “fans” are. They never see the other side. Again, unskilled workers, the unemployed and pensioners are more likely to say that storms and floods are due to “climate change”. Again, the divergence is obvious, the highest proportion of skeptics are in the upper middle class. Those who believe, are in the low income, less educated groups. Interestingly the most uncertain group are the lower middle class — perhaps caught between knowing the official dogma, but hearing increasingly skeptical messages from friends or colleagues in the influential wealthier more educated group? Figure 3: Results from the question “The recent storms and flooding in the UK are no worse than they have been in the past and are probably not a result of climate change at all” graphed according to social grouping. Finally, thankfully, there is one question that uses the phrase, “human activity”. And now the 44% drops to 38% who agree with the officially approved conclusion. Fully sixty two percent of the population are skeptical. The stand-out feature of the responses graphed below is that there are fewer skeptics and more belief in the official line among the poorest and least educated.