Yes that’s it, the locals are just too stupid to notice global warming because they are conflating it to local temperatures. Let’s remind everyone bloviating about AGW the next time we have a heat wave and record setting local temperatures are recorded, that these local temperatures don’t matter.
Study finds local temperature influences belief in global warming
Columbia Business School’s Center for Decision Sciences’ study depicts how beliefs on global warming are mistakenly influenced by daily temperature
NEW YORK – May 27, 2011 – A study by Columbia Business School Professor Eric Johnson, co-director of the Center for Decision Sciences (http://www4.gsb.columbia.edu/decisionsciences) at Columbia Business School, Ye Li, a postdoctoral researcher at the Center for Decision Sciences, and Lisa Zaval, a Columbia graduate student in psychology, found that those who thought the current day was warmer than usual were more likely to believe in and feel concern about global warming than those who thought the day was unusually cold. The study, recently featured in Psychological Science, explains why public belief in global warming can fluctuate, since people can base their thinking off of the day’s temperature. The researchers behind this study are also affiliated with Columbia University’s Center for Research on Environmental Decisions, CRED (http://www.cred.columbia.edu/).
The team surveyed about 1,200 people in the United States and Australia in three different studies in order to determine their opinions about global warming and whether the temperature on the day of the study was warmer or cooler than usual. Respondents who thought that day was warmer than usual were more concerned about global warming than respondents who thought that day was colder than usual.
“Global warming is so complex, it appears some people are ready to be persuaded by whether their own day is warmer or cooler than usual, rather than think about whether the entire world is becoming warmer or cooler,” said lead author Ye Li. “It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
The study also revealed that respondents were fairly good at knowing if it was unusually hot or cold–perceptions correlated with reality three quarters of the time. While politics, gender and age all had the predicted influences – for instance, on the researchers’ 1-to-4 scale of belief in global warming, Democrats were 1.5 points higher than Republicans – after controlling for the other factors, the researchers found that perceived temperatures still had nearly two-thirds the power as political belief, and six times the power as gender.
These results join a growing body of work that shows how irrelevant environmental information, such as the current weather, can affect judgments and opinions on climate change.
No, honest guv, I don’t have a thermometer, I modelled, honest guv, I did, I modelled it.
“The study, recently featured in Psychological Science, explains why public belief in global warming can fluctuate, since people can base their thinking off of the day’s temperature.”
Psychological Science must be pretty hard up for material to publish. It’s troubling to think that someone in academia thought this was worth $tudying.
I wonder if any of the studies incorporated ‘perceptional offsets’ (I just made that up…good isn’t it?) due to the use of central heating or air-conditioning.
Hmnn that was quite a cool summer…yes but were you using the aircon?
Warmists never cease to amaze me as they twist and turn in their attempts to convince us that they are right about Global Warming…and surely they dug this hole for themselves during the mild winters of the nineties which were incessantly blamed on Global Warming…!
They’re really on the back foot here in Australia right now. Dr Flim Flannery was on the telly last night squirming as he tried to sell his Carbon Tax during what has been one of the coldest weeks in Australia for many years…the only heat around was the radiation from his blushes!
I imagine their results would similar if they were studying belief in the Tooth Fairy or the Loch Ness Monster and be inversely related on whether or not they believed Bill Clinton had sex with that woman.
Uh, duh…….
Oh, so now it’s down to “Weather” you are a female democrat, now, is it? Brother! Oh…Sister! The whole democraphic is skewed. Maybe if you show pictures of cute ursis maritimus cubs, it will temper the response? Is this “preliminary work” to eventually lead to making all data irrelevant, as well…just to confuse the non-issue further? The conditioning experiment is progressing nicely.
News Flash: Scientists Have Discovered That Individual’s Sex Lives Determine Their Perception of Global Orgasm!
This has got to be why I made this post yesterday: http://pindanpost.com/2011/05/27/wheres-the-warming/
And this morning it is another degree colder still…just 7C below May’s average
Pay no attention to that blizzard outside; the Earth is hot, blazing hot. Trust us. Don’t be influenced by what you see and feel. Believe in the models! Believe in Gaia and in Her Profit, Al Gore. Look, see this map with the red area all across the Arctic where there aren’t any thermometers or people to tell us any different? That, that is what you should believe.
/sarc²
“It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people… yet people are still so easily influenced.”
What makes the “workers” try to think for themselves? We need some more $$ to study that, too.
I base my understanding of secular trends in climate change on how the ecosystem is responding to stimuli. I live in a very good place for detecting succession, it’s near the Mediterranean / Marine West Coast transition. During the warm 80s and 90s, I was seeing the NW species stressed and meanwhile, things like Yuccas started to show up (I have a few on my land). Ever since the late 90s the trend has reversed. I am seeing more Douglas Fir seedlings, the Coast Live Oaks are going haywire (both from the standpoint of mature tree growth and new seedlings) and the Redwoods look very healthy. I’ve also noticed Steller Jays pushing out Scrub Jays. Raccoons and Deer are increasing.
charles nelson says:
May 27, 2011 at 4:16 pm
I think the obesity epidemic, and epidemics of auto immune diseases are also playing a role. I see more and more people who will break a sweat walking at a moderate pace outside when it’s 68 deg F and 40% RH. These are clear cases of abnormality. People’s personal “climate control” systems are not working well in an increasing number of cases.
Of course, this also sorta backfires on the AGW crowd.
If most of their believers live in cities, they’ll tend to believe in AGW due to the Urban Heat Island psychological effect… whether the globe is warming or not.
Isn’t it funny that the increasing Polar Bear Populations and the increasing arctic ice are both ignoring the models?
Let’s recall that Jim Hansen’s allies in Congress left the council chamber’s windows open before his testimony, during the hot DC summer of 1988, so that the air conditioning would be over taxed and the senators would sweat their way into believing his 99% blarney.
It appears that influencing people with local temperature is OK so long as the perception goes in the right direction.
I wonder how lead author Ye Li is going to feel when the realization finally sinks in that AGW has been a studied misdirection from the word go, and he discovers that he, too, was, “so easily influenced.”
Really?
I though the Alarmists & Media were the ones suffering from that problem…..
Next, they should do a study on whether air conditioning impacts congressional hearings on global warming.
Global warming is so complex, it appears some people are ready to be persuaded by whether their own model shows warmer or cooler than usual, rather than think about whether the entire world is actually becoming warmer or cooler.
“Global warming is so complex, it appears some people are ready to be persuaded by whether their own day is warmer or cooler than usual, rather than think about whether the entire world is becoming warmer or cooler,” said lead author Ye Li.
This is why “C” students manage “A” students (read PhD’s.) And “B” students teach, ughhh, hmmmm… do silly research, draw kindergartenish conclusions, worry, fret…
Global Warming complex? What’s complex about a minuscule gas, necessary for life on earth, causing the globe to warm 100 years from now & causing a great flood… destroying mankind??? Easy to understand!
Immediately followed by the study showing how computer scientists believe their statistics, trends, and computer models….over real life
Doesn’t have to be local temps – the Moscow heatwave scored good points last year. Around the same time there was much less media coverage to the cold waves sweeping north along the eastern flank of the Andes.
“Global warming is so complex,……..said lead author Ye Li. “It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
========
Ummm, the money spent by what you call “society”, came out of my pocket.
My education (into which I still put some “time and effort”) continues, and contrary to your conjecture is not “easily influenced”, maybe it’s time to try another tack.
My home is heated by gas, and my gas bill shows a month-by-month comparison of previous and current consumption – March & April this year were significantly higher than last year’s. That isn’t a “perceptual” thing, it is a hard fact. If there is warming, it certainly isn’t global.
Research published by Penn and Teller confirmed that liberals are 3.75 times more likely to ban substances without understanding the nature and benefit of the substance. Recently, liberals have suffered extreme confusion with contradictory studies by liberal icons. Ralph Nadar has exposed a carcinogenic element in cleansers while Jane Fonda endorses the same carcinogen in L’Oreal cosmetics. The liberal decision on whether or not to ban silica has become a battle celebrity.
Coincidentally, my friend just sent me a link to a study titled
Visceral Fit: While in a Visceral State, Associated States of the World
Seem More Likely
http://pbjlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Risen-Critcher-2011.pdf
which happens to be on the subject.
They are trying to convince us that the trueth is all about perception.
“Respondents who thought that day was warmer than usual were more concerned about global warming than respondents who thought that day was colder than usual.”
For a postdoctorate researcher, this is a seriously worrying research result. I fear his other works and conclusions.
“The study also revealed that respondents were fairly good at knowing if it was unusually hot or cold”.
What does it mean to be “unusually” hot or cold? My God man, can you hear yourself.
I would have thought this was common sense – and moreover, similar to most of the general psychology take on these things? meaning that if you’re told it’s warm or cold – you feel appropriately warm or cold, etc, etc – I guess a bit like the normal placebo effect? The interesting thing is that there are many other factors which would affect weather ‘memory’ – you always remember the steaming hot days and miserable cold days but all the ‘average’ days inbetween are more likely forgotten? A stage further and you more likely tend to remember the summer more often than the winter because you are usually outside more – so logically it is easy to ‘think’ of warmer temps and associate them with so called climate change – making it easier for the average guy to ‘believe’ the BS!
“It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
=====================================================
Well lead author Ye Li here is a simple little test for you…..
Using the exact same data, statistics, computer models, peer review process, etc….
…How simple would it be to convince those same people that instead of global warming there is global cooling?
Global problems should look global. If the contiguous US states haven’t warmed in 15 years, maybe the global changes are just …. local changes.
Imagine that. Having citizens decide for themselves.
I wonder if it has anything to do with the constant bombarding of unusual weather as being caused by “global warming.” If the warmistas bombard people with weather images as examples of global warming, maybe people will start to believe it.
Whilst obviously the study’s authors are drawing spurious conclusions, I don’t find their findings at all surprising. They have shown that a clear correlation exists between global – for which, read ‘western’ – temps and interest/belief in global warming. We’ve all seen the graphs, and they’re not wrong on that one. Belief in ‘global warming’ lagged but closely followed the peak temperatures.
Or that the concept of a global temperature is meaningless in the first place.
“It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
Apparently the author hasn’t heard of religion.
They will believe whatever the “scientists” and media tell them. The data nor facts are never checked, so it’s a belief system. With all the conditions remaining the same, it would have been just as easy to push global cooling. Warming is scarier….burning and all. They refuse to acknowledge or believe their own data and keep making the same statements. It’s like no new knowledge or data or facts have emerged in 30 years. They WANT global warming and no facts or data is going to talk them out of it…they must have their doomsday or they will be very sad.
This seems like an appropriate time to ask this question.
My father, an aerospace engineer, religiously kept min-max temperature records a single location (our home) in rural SW Denver, CO from 1960 to the mid ‘90s until he became wheel chair bound and couldn’t read the thermometer.
True to form, he recorded these observations on yearly pages of 1×1 mm K&E (orange on white) graph paper. Each taped over the previous years’ records for quick reference.
When I say rural, I mean for most of the time there was a wheat field behind our back yard (sadly not now). At the very least they might serve as a data point for UHI effect as the suburbs grew to and past us.
Would these records be of use to anyone(1)? If so, who? TIA.
(1) I mean anyone, but myself. They mean something to me and I never throw away anything irreplaceable.
I personally would be more interested in a study by:
“Columbia Business School’s Center for Decision Sciences”
Into this statement:
These results join a growing body of work that shows how irrelevant environmental information, such as the current weather, can affect judgments and opinions on climate change.
=======
Which could also be written (fill in the blanks).
These results join a growing body of work that shows how irrelevant _________ information, such as the __________, can affect judgments and opinions of ___________.
Which would explain the performance of my stock portfolio.
Well, one disadvantage to hot weather is it cuts down on the number of firearms one can carry on one’s person.
Can’t be true. If it was Warmist Summits held in warm countries would be more successful than those held in cold… hang on a minute.
Who needs a thermometer?
One only needs to look at the fauna living in new territories to know that temperature is going up.
Most psychological studies are backwards.
More likely explanation: If you believe the world is getting warmer, your own perception will consciously notice warmer-than-usual days and won’t notice colder-than-usual days. If you believe the world is getting colder, vice versa.
The study might have been worthwhile if they had worked with people from a primitive country who had never heard of the whole dispute, thus had no preset bias … but I’m not sure if there are any such countries now. Almost everyone has some kind of access to media and cell phones!
There’s nothing like reality to show how not-warm this spring is!
Ask the farmers.
Anyone else in the world abnormally cool today? Anyone burning up?
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_MEMORIAL_DAY_SNOW?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-05-27-04-51-12
Steve,
Didn’t say where you were located. Contact your local NWS office and I believe they would look to see what info matches up with the co-op sites near you and also the Cocorahs numbers. Also some colleges/universities are doing climate studies. Don’t be surprise if your data is off by a few degrees. The mountains in TN used to give me some much lower numbers than some sites in small cities or near water.
Ok, I’ve heard of taking away guns. I’ve heard of taking away free press. But take away thermometers? How ugly is this going to get?
Do we need a Constitutional Amendment protecting the freedom of following weather? SHEESH!
Eliminate the Medieval Warm Period. Eliminate thermometers. Instead let’s eliminate funding for global warming study.
“Study finds local temperature influences belief in global warming”
And this just in, “Study finds experience with rain influences belief in wetness of water”
“It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
Society has wasted a lot of money, time and effort in a vain attempt at thwarting basic human instinct. It does no good to go on endlessly about global climate, when the heart of the matter is what is happening in one’s own region.
Even worse, grumbling about the weather that does not suit one’s fancy is a human right, earned over 10’s of thousands of years of putting up with what has been dished out. One might get away with cashing in on the current state of affairs, but sooner or later the tide turns, and then one will face an angry populace bent on getting even.
It’s bad enough putting up with inclement weather: it’s an entirely different matter putting up with dunderheads who’ve tarried too long with theoretical climate models.
Any mention of 1988 when the U.S. was undergoing one of it’s worst droughts in a generation and this AGW nonsense gained national attention?
One of those inconvenient truths that the media likes to forget.
Wayne, yes, here in the Florida Panhandle the temps are running about 5C over average – but this is very typical of a la nina year. Another reason why perceptions are so important is that the (alleged) global warming appears to be occuring up in the Artic and up in the Andes and other remote, lightly populated areas.
cirby says:
May 27, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Of course, this also sorta backfires on the AGW crowd.
If most of their believers live in cities, they’ll tend to believe in AGW due to the Urban Heat Island psychological effect… whether the globe is warming or not.
Herd mentality works like that. All deaths reported as suicide became aligned to the mental health movement and established a sound basis and support of funding and research.
The psychs supported the engineering of a net on Golden Gate Bridge and furthered this on a world-wide basis to cities with bridges.
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2008/10/10/golden-gate-bridge-to-get-a-suicide-net/
That’s until someone(s) observed differently.
Perhaps the work done by Rod Cross, retired physicist and the New South Wales Police into the death of Caroline Byrne? Her family did not believe she committed suicide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Caroline_Byrne
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/jury-finds-arthur-freeman-guilty-of-murdering-daughter-by-throwing-her-off-bridge/story-e6frg6nf-1226029669369
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/new-investigative-unit-will-reopen-cases-after-coroner-fears-hidden-domestic-violence-death-toll/story-e6freoof-1226060294225
It is not clear whether the human condition of malice, used in criminal law, is coded in the DSM-IV.
http://psychcentral.com/disorders/dsmcodes.htm
Global Warming RIP.
This is known psychology and the only thing different from dozens of other nearly identical studies is the specific topic. Well, that and the fact that the dozens of other studies set out to understand how current perception influences perception of long term memory while this piece of c**p sets out to present the exact same KNOWN psychology as if it was unique to global warming and is somehow new research.
charles nelson says: …studies incorporated ‘perceptional offsets’
Requires a salute, Charles!
Rhoda Ramirez, right, that is where the thermometers have already been confiscated from the public! ☺
But… Global Warming is so 2010…
It should have been a study on Climate Disruption.
BTW, I proved many people here in Israel they are mixing personal belief with facts about the temperature in summer. I showed them how due to better and more extensive air conditioning we feel it is much warmer outside only because we are constantly in air conditioned places, and only occasionally go out and stay in the “real world”.
Well, I’ve got a tree in my garden and after adjustment (using a special tree-ring processing method) its tree rings match exactly the Global Average temperature record. Has anyone else heard of a tree like that?
There’s nothing influencing the psychological “understanding” about the weather in my area and it’s weather cycles.
Living in an area where the temps can change 20 degrees in a 50 mile radius depending on the location of hill/mountains, water, fields, forests and concrete jungles. Gives you understanding of weather and climate better then any PHD.
Of course, this is the official scientific record of total Global Warming from 1870:
“1: Global Temperature Record
Phil Jones”
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/
I was just poking fun at Columbia Business School youngsters. They really think people have no instinctive memory of climate! I know they do, but they have to be older than in their 40’s to experience the spectrum to meaningfully judge. No one I know over this globe claims that his or her climate has actually changed, at all. There are cold spells, warm spells, wet spells, dry spells; sometimes over a span of up to a decade, maybe two, but not long-term change, none.
Nobody that is except some selected crazy environmentalists. To ALL members of this group this world’s climate is falling apart in a basket and they keep pointing at science. In this one case, the science methodology is incorrect. Shame on them, shame!
I am waiting for one spot on this globe to be where there is a non-reversible change in climate, like “It’s never going to snow in the United Kingdom again” and after fifteen years surely enough, it never snows. Didn’t happen. Moreover, I am not talking about a study that ‘x’ species of sparrow’s center of population is now statistically 123.4 meters further north proving a warming globe. Sheesh! The only actual climate change I have been able to find is in the Sahara Desert and it is getting greener around the edges, and that is a good thing. Will it stick? Check back with me in another fifteen years.
Surely it is more likely that people who believe in CAGW (computer aided global warming /sarc) will also be more likely to consider the current day temperature to be higher than normal (note the study did not say they thought the day was hot or cold). If you believe in CAGW, then the current day has to be “warmer than normal” otherwise the belief is compromised. The study participants at least were generally consistent in their logic (at least as far as temperature perception goes).
2010 was the warmest year ever. I know this to be true because I read it in the paper. However, London started the year buried under snow and ice, we had a bloody awful summer and then ended the year buried under snow and ice again.
Funny thing, perception.
RE: Spector (May 28, 2011 at 12:44 am)
“Of course, this is the official scientific record of total Global Warming from 1870:”
Correction: make that “from 1850”
A global average is nothing without local reality.
We were also told that warming would not be uniform. If some people are noticing how cold it is, there should be more people who can say how unusually warm it is at the same time.
I liked the comment by Pat Frank: “I wonder how lead author Ye Li is going to feel when .. he discovers that he, too, was, “so easily influenced.”” Good one!
“It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
What Ye Li really meant to say:
It is striking that politically driven warmist advocacy has spent so much money, time and effort socially engineering and alarming people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced by common sense and the evidence of their own eyes.
Green Sand says:
May 27, 2011 at 4:10 pm
“No, honest guv, I don’t have a thermometer, I modelled, honest guv, I did, I modelled it.”
Thanks for the laugh. Too bad they have already used the name Farenheit 451 for a future story about burning books.
But, Comrade, this is no laughing matter. Do you own, or have you ever owned a thermometer??? Are you sure??? Then what can you tell me about your neighbors? Do they complain appropriately about the heat?
son of mulder says:
May 28, 2011 at 12:03 am
Well, I’ve got a tree in my garden and after adjustment (using a special tree-ring processing method) its tree rings match exactly the Global Average temperature record. Has anyone else heard of a tree like that?>>>
Well I for one have heard of a tree like that. Although I’ve also heard of ghosts, goblins, vampires, witches, spontaneous human combustion, honest politicians, santa, efficient governance, benevolent dictatorships…
If you have a bunch of time to waste, try reading the Illuminatus trilogy by Robert Anton Wilson. If you do, you’ll realize how when you start looking for something, even without trying, you see it all the time. It’s self-reinforcing. While reading about the Illuminati you will start seeing 5 and 23 everywhere. Voodoo, AGW, and socialist-liberal demogogues work that way.
The Center for Decision Sciences? Psychological Science? Are these things anything like “social” science?
As soon as subjectivity gets linked to the word “science,” True Science flies out the window.
True Science limits itself by being strictly objective. This limitation is a discipline which has benefits. By demanding things such as replication, True Science allows an understanding of physical reality which otherwise would be impossible, and offers humanity gains which otherwise would beyond its reach.
True Love, on the other hand, tends to be subjective, and to involve events which you can never replicate. It does not seem to matter whether the events involve a soul-mate, a grandchild, or the Almighty, they are not events which one can (or wants to) replicate before a bunch of scientists wearing white lab coats. Such events, which can dramatically alter the course of our lives, are simply outside of the scope of True Science. They are, by their very nature, “unscientific.”
This does not stop certain individuals from trying to make a science out of subjectivity, especially when they see a chance to profit from the gullibility of their fellow men, and are in essence con-artists. You will notice the above study is done by Columbia Business School.
In Business some allow greed-for-wealth to rule, just as in Politics some allow lust-for-power to rule. There is a tendency among such people to seek a way to herd their fellow man like sheep, or drive them like lemmings. Therefore they use “social” science and “psychological” science to increase sales or increase popularity (votes.)
The problem with such “science” is that it takes a dim view of what humans are. When you treat your fellow man like lemmings, you are missing much that is amazing and beautiful about humanity.
You are also setting yourself up for a fall. Not only are you missing the value of True Science, you are missing the value of True Love. You are earning yourself the worst of both worlds. You may think you are smarter than everyone else, and sneer at others as mere lemmings, but the lucre your greed gets you has far less value than Truth and Beauty. What’s more, the power your political lust gets you has far less power than true Truth.
Wealth and power are tempting things, but you don’t want to let them ruin your life and lead you to misery. Therefore, when you meet so-called experts in “social” science or “psychological” science or “decision” sciences, it pays to be wary. Are such “professors” treating their fellow man with dignity and respect, or are they treating their fellow man like lemmings?
When there’s confusion about global warming most people stick their heads out the window. James Hansen knew this effect tooooo well in his 1988 testimony when he ‘adjusted’ the air-conditioning system. ;O)
This study came from a business school. Where does science come in that label?
Perceptions are also affected by media alarmism of the Moscow heatwave and generally ignoring the South American big chill which killed millions of tropical fish. What about a study on how peoples perceptions of global warming are affected by the media alarmism? How about a study on how the Urban Heat Island effect alters people’s perceptions of global warming?
Yes they are. Enter the alarmism put through the media by Gore, Hansen, Susuki, BBC, Nature, Royal Society………………
Most people are not aware that the rate of sea level rise has not accelerated over the past 80 years. Most people aren’t aware that most Pacific coral island atolls have gained land mass over the past few decades. Most people don’t realise that Bangladesh has also gained land mass over the decades, polar bear numbers stable, ………………. Yet people have a misconception due to the media. Where is the balance!?
“Lead author Ye Li: “It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.””
Yes, that’s a bummer, isn’t it? Especially when all that money and effort really went into brainwashing, not “educating” people. Well, as someone who actually and literally lived the dream of the AGW crowd (i.e. Having lived under the rule of a totalitarian socialist regime punishing harshly any dissenting thought) I am afraid I have bad news for the respected quasiscientists who bemoan the waste of intellectual and fiscal resources on the ungrateful, stupid masses:
People are surprisingly adept at seeing through any brainwashing attempt ultimately aimed at restricting personal freedom and imposing additional taxes under whatewer do-goodist pretext. Czech President Vaclav Claus is onto something here.
I suggest society invests all that money into something better: forced introduction of all pro-AGW politicians and activists to the most basic principles of (non-politicized) science…
This is a little off topic. My Mother-in-law is seventy-seven. She says the peonies are always in bloom for Memorial Day. Not this year, not in this place. East Central Nebraska has had a very cool, wet spring. Surprisingly, we set record highs in many towns, May 8-10. Joe Bastardi pretty well called our Spring: cool, wet, violent storms.
We live in a fish bowl of information. We are very likely going to know if NYC is having a heat wave, or London & Spokane are buried in snow, or Joplin and Tuscaloosa are in ruins. “We” may be only vaguely aware, but almost everybody these days has an eye for the weather that sees beyond the local horizon. The truth is temperatures have been in an observable cool phase in both the northern and southern hemispheres for about five years. Personal weather observations are closer to home: But overall the, “it sure is hot” confirmation of AGW has taken a break.
Our own personal observations influence what we believe. Who would have thought?
Stephen Rasey,
Do you have precipitation data to go with that?
SteveSadlov,
Have not seen you around for a while.
Good to see you back.
Amazing… people are more likely to take first-hand experiance as an indicator of truth than the word of people they don’t know on the other side of the world using instruments that they have no familiarity with.
At one point, the label “scientist” gave a modicum of trust in the second-hand information. It no longer does, so people revert to their own experiances.
This is news?
Is there a link to this study, or has only a press release surfaced?
But…I thought the thermometers were supposed to be so accurate that they were capable of overcoming the two-feet away, silver-bottomed boat reflecting the Sun’s rays into the thermometer housing? And certainly accurate enough to fill in missing grids on the GISS global coverage map. So which is it? They are either accurate, or they are not. Can’t have it both ways.
Apparently, and I did not know this, thermometers come with an internal mechanism that shuts off when it is colder, thus giving a false reading, and turns back on when it is warmer, thus giving an accurate reading. And now I know. I am enlightened.
The places where the world is warming alarmingly always seem to be far away from where most of us live, like the Arctic, or where there are few thermometers (Arctic, also, I believe). I frequently refer to the story of Prester John, a supposed Christian prince in a country surrounded by “Muslim lands”. Prester John first appears in history around the time of the Crusades, when letters were sent to seek his assistance. Belief in Prester John persisted for something like . The similarity between the Prester John story and that of “global warming” is that both are set in a place far away and difficult for us ordinary people to check.
IanM
“the researchers found that perceived temperatures still had nearly two-thirds the power as political belief, and six times the power as gender”
===============
Of course we all knew that sex and politics are all that matters.
So the take away from this is to send out the teeming believers, in skimpy red, white and blue swimwear on warm days.
Its May 28th, here in the balmy east of England – and I’ve had to turn the central heating on…
For a different article that is somewhat related to this one, see:
http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/climate-weather/blogs/in-the-persuasion-game-beware-the-backfire-effect#comments-90938
“Chris Turner
In the persuasion game, beware the backfire effect
For a generation, activists have built their protest movement on the scientific facts of climate change. But the facts of another kind of science — neuroscience — indicate that this only reinforces the point of view of the unconvinced.”
“You don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows”
-Bob
Obviously people trust their experience. In the US there has been no warming recently. And the CAGW crowd tries to simulate, model, interpolate, and create warming in areas where not many people live (arctic) , so people can’t challenge the model with direct observation.
In light of the rotten spring planting season that farmers in the eastern half of the US are going through, the Alarmists lose another battle. The cooling mechanisms brought on by the recent strong La Nina and amplified sub-Polar Vortex, have caused flooding and severe weather from the Plains through the SE US, and a prolonged drought in the Southern High Plains. Where I live (Western Great Lakes), the farmers were 4 weeks late getting thier corn crop planted. And this week, they saw up to 18% of their farmlands flooded out. In the Northern High Plains only 20% of the Spring Wheat has been planted. And in the Southern High Plains, most of the Winter Wheat is a bust. Look for even higher grain prices in the near future.
You are too stupid to understand
the complexity of Global Warming;
so trust us Progressives to protect
you idiots.
“Global warming is so complex,……..said lead author Ye Li. “It is striking that society has spent so much money, time and effort educating people about this issue, yet people are still so easily influenced.”
Fancy that! The common man still elevates empiricism over climate models.
Seems they will need more training to be more responsive to the command of robots.
Well duh, we can either believe our lying eyes, memories and life experience or take the word of a group of self appointed persons who closely resemble the mythical Chicken Little. I live close to the Arctic and its cold right now end of May and we are still burning wood. Where is my global warming? My government promised it. We were told if we released CO2 into the atmosphere at our old 1990s levels, then the world would warm, especially in the Arctic. We Canadians did our bit, CO2 emmissions went up steadily but no warming. 2011 and its getting noticably cooler arround here.
So can we launch a class action demanding the warming be provided or a refund on the fuels we burnt, on govt advice, to bring on the financial advantages Canada would have gained in a warming world? Yes this is sarc, but seriously these fools have preached relentlessly and imposed real costs upon us.And we do pay attention to their lies, notice how well the Canadian Liberal Party is doing these days.Ditto the Greens.
Since my thermometer (in the country) runs nighttime lows consistently from 6 to 12 (yes 12) degrees F lower than the city of 100,000 24 miles south (and 220 feet lower) than me, YES, yes I do doubt global warming. I have a friend 20 miles west of town and 100 feet higher who consistently runs 4 to 10 degrees lower.
By the way, the city was about 10,000 souls 130 years ago when records began.
Why do we have trial by jury for life and death cases? Why don’t we simply have the judge decide?
Isn’t that what the scientists are saying. That the “best educated” person in the room should make the decisions about what is right and wrong. That the “group of average people” cannot be trusted with this, they need to be “educated”.
The reason we have jury trial is that it is much easier to fool 1 educated person than it is to fool 12 average people. You might fool 9 or 10 of them, but odds are that you won’t fool all of them. You can’t fool all the people all the time to quote Lincoln. Thus, to get a jury conviction, everyone in the jury must agree.
This is the role of the skeptic, the denier in AGW propaganda speak. The person in the crowd that wasn’t fooled by the “evidence”, that recognizes that something doesn’t add up. Maybe there was something about the body language of the witness, or maybe something they learned from personal experience, something that doesn’t make sense.
You can’t “educate” a jury to find your defendant “not guilty”. You can try, but that assumes the jury makes a decision solely based on cold facts. If that was the case, there would be no need for juries. Judges could simply decide every case based solely on the evidence.
The role of the public is see beyond the facts being presented and look at the behavior of the people pesenting the facts. Sure the science may add up, but then why did the scientists seek to undermine the peer review process? Sure the scientists may all agree, but then why has there been such a witch hunt by the scientific community against those who are skeptical? One only need look at the treatment of Judith Curry, once the darling of mainstream climate science, for daring to ask questions. Sure the evidence may be conclusive, but then why have the climate scientists been so reluctant to publish their data? Why have they fought so hard to prevent independent confirmation of their findings?
These are the sorts of questions that people ask themselves when making decisions. They don’t ask if the numbers add up for the radiative transfer, or if there truly is missing heat. They ask themselves why is the person behaving in such a fashion. What does the behavior of the person tell us about the information being presented.
So, when Al Gore tell us that the oceans are going to flood and then buys a house near the beach, most of us conclude that Al doesn’t really believe the oceans are going to flood. What he believes is that telling people the oceans are going to flood will cause some people to panic. This will drive down real estate values near the beach so that Al can likely pick up a choice piece of property at a great price.
Surprisingly, many politicians and environmentalists that tells us the oceans are going to flood us out have waterfront property. You would have thought that if it was such a risk they would have sold and moved to higher ground.
Many more politicians and environmetalists tell us we need to reduce our carbon footprint, while they lead a jet-set lifestyle consuming well in excess of the average person. Should they not as leader actually lead? Surely if they want us to take the bus, they should set the example. Surely if they want us to cut down our air travel, they should stop travelling and teleconference.
When the politicians and envirnmentalists tells us we must change, while they don’t, this sends a message loud and clear to the average person. The message is much louder than the propaganda running on TV and in the newspapers. There is a reason most politicians are lawyers and the words lawyer and liar sound the same. Politicians are professional liars. They get paid to tell lies and the best of them are very good at it.
“Global warming is so complex, it appears some people are ready to be persuaded by whether their own day is warmer or cooler than usual, rather than think about whether the entire world is becoming warmer or cooler,”
It isn’t that complex at all. In fact it is summed up nicely in the above sentience, global warming or climate change is about whether the entire world is getting warm or cooler, and the answer is that since 1998 it hasn’t done much of either. There, what was so hard about that? Even people from Colombia Business School (my father’s Alma Mater) should be able to figure that out.
So people believe their eyes- and ears, and shivers. Thank God!
So when they say “We have a consensus” does that mean its just a hot day? That would explain a lot.
See, we were told that observations weren’t actually useful …
The problem with thinking about whether the earth is getting warmer or colder is that we don’t know if it is warm or cold to begin with we only have anomalies from a base year to guide us. With our local temperatures we have our experience to guide us on how warm say 30c or 80f is but we have no experience of global warming. I don’t believe the Earth is very warm historically at the present time,we have ice at both poles all year round ,every winter the northern hemisphere is covered in snow(every year for as long as we have records-not just the last few winters).I think that the videos by Bob Carter -climate change is co2 the cause give us a “prospective” of how the earths temperature is compared to geological periods.
If ownership or possession of thermometers is dangerous, we should consider enacting Amendment II.2 of our Constitution to prevent infringements upon the right of the people to keep and bear thermometers.
Fred Berple: Judges are too frequently not the smartest people in the room. In fact they can be some of the least smart. Frequently, persons who become judges lack broad professional experience, .i.e get elected or appointed to a trial court after few years work as a public defender or deputy prosecutor. Their professional experience is narrow and specialized while trial court judges hear every type of case from petty crimes to complex civil cases involving anti-trust violations or business transactions.
Judges in many states and locales are paid poorly compared to what lawyers earn in the private practice. However, a regular pay check without any overhead makes the judiciary attractive for lawyers who less able, that is those with little experience or who earn make substantially more than a judges’ salary. Then too, there is the advantage judges, once appointed or elected, have over potential challengers, encumbants are difficult to get rid of.
Federal judges are appointed for life. Too many get appointed as a reward for political favors and support of a political party and its elected officials rather than based upon their talent, experience and accomplishments. Some of them a first class hacks and terrible judges. The only way to get rid of them is impeachment.
The best and brightest of lawyers can earn far more in the private sector than as judges. The pickings for those seeking judgeships is often slim.
Maybe people are swayed by the fact they decided to take into account a hundred thirty years’ advancement including the invention of the electrical, electronic, space age, with satellites, sophisticated aircraft and devices not one of the people who believed in A.G.W. in the NINETEENTH CENTURY when it was GUESSED the atmosphere worked as a
“big, warm, blankie”
would have been able to dream possible.
Maybe, the people of the world looked every day online at the raw data posted there by law and saw the temperatures seem to plateau around the mid nineteen nineties,
then everyone saw Phil Jones confess in 2005 that the scientific community would come down on him in no uncertain terms, if – and I quote –
“I said ***THE WORLD HAD COOLED SINCE 1998.***
***OK IT HAS, but it’s only seven years of data (every year SINCE ’98 to ’05) and it ISN’T STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT.”
Maybe THE ENTIRE WORLD REMEMBERS IN 2005, SAYING BETWEEN OURSELVES, “Hmm the DATA I’M READING RAW ONLINE SHOWS NO WARMING SINCE ’98, and in FACT, some STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT COOLING.”
Maybe we all remember THAT part about our THERMOMETERS.
Maybe we all remember that MICHAEL MANN and JONES and BRIFFA THOUGHT THEY HAD INVENTED A WHOLE NEW FIELD OF MATHEMATICS, with which they FURIOUSLY CALCULATED DOOMSDAY, and TOLD US we have to stop USING FIRE because of the potential for DEVASTATING OUTBREAK of SLIGHTLY BALMY WEATHER.
And then of course we remember the HEAD of the ROYAL STATISTICAL SOCIETY telling THEM that not only was “CLIMATE STATISTICS” not EVEN STATISTICS,
but that in fact
NO ‘Climate Math’ IS EVEN MATHEMATICS of ANY kind.
And maybe we still can’t forget like I already said, THEY WERE FURIOUSLY CALCULATING DOOMSDAY WITH IT and ADVISING we SHUT DOWN CIVILIZATION. That it was uh, what was that phrase?
T.H.E. E.N.D. of A.L.L. MANKIND from APOCALYPTIC HELLFIRE in the SKY.
Yeah that’s it.
Maybe we remember that.
Or, maybe we remember the now INFAMOUS “The answer is blowing in the wind” paper where one of them CLAIMED to have OVERTHROWN ALL LAW of INSTRUMENTATION and WRITTEN a PROGRAM on his LAPTOP wherein
SPACE AGE INSTRUMENTS were MADE OBSOLETE and he CALCULATED the TEMPERATURE more ACCURATELY, using – uh, WHAT?
using WIND SPEED.
Maybe it’s that we remember THAT about how our thermometer seems to still be on sale at the store but we don’t hear about anyone using that H I C K’s fake program.
Maybe it’s the fact that we COMPARED their grasp of photonic physics, and found they BELIEVED that the PHOTONS VIGOROUSLY JERKING GAS ATOMS outward toward the SKY, had suddenly, begun JERKING THOSE ATOMS DOWNWARD: until of course they RELEASED and THEMSELVES RADIATED DOWNWARD,
instead of upward,
like they have since the beginning of time.
Maybe we realized these people were trying to tell us, that HOT AIR NOW FALLS.
Or the PHOTONS PREVIOUSLY TOWING them UP
were now towing them DOWN.
Maybe it was that REVERSAL of POLARITY of GRAVITY thing.
oR, maybe it was that whole “There’s MAGIC GASES that’s a gonna make the SKY ketch on far! You kin SEE IT in tha GRAFFs I wuz a REED’n!”
from Trenberth, the HILLBILLY who showed us C.E.R.E.S. graphs that’d put a submarine sonar technician to sleep and proclaimed it was – what was that?
Oh yea, “APOCALYPTIC HELLFAR in tha SKY, YA’LL! It’s thuh EEyund, ah’ TAYuLL ya, tha EEYUND!”
And, then maybe we checked those graphs and concluded he’s either a liar, or high.
And then maybe we checked those EMAILS where he ADMITTED,
he is just lying.
Maybe we invented those instruments these lying government employee/politicians are LYING about the readings of, and we just can’t prosecute them for murder or at least the negligent homicides associated with their false weather mitigation forecasts.
Maybe we just don’t have the ability to hold them accountable for their massive coordinated crime spree(S) so we just remember that we know they are going to get theirs, and since civilizations have to endure the frauds of power crazy religious zealots, we don’t take up pitchforks and torches and put an end to their F.R.A.U.D.s and HOMICIDAL POWER GRABs.
Yes I said HOMICIDE. That’s a HOMICIDE when someone KNOWINGLY EXPOSES ANOTHER to DEADLY CONDITIONS when they are paid MONEY to SPECIFICALLY PROTECT the person(s) exposed, and CERTIFIED to have the CAPABILITY of telling whether they are delivering realistic evaluation of likelihoods.
That’s a DEATH occurring in CONNECTION to a FRAUD devised for MONETARY GAIN.
So that’s a HOMICIDE.
So MAYBE we just all have lost ALL RESPECT for the HOMICIDAL MANIA that leads these people to LIE
claiming HEAT: that NO INSTRUMENT on EARTH has EVER DETECTED
is threatening apocalyptic hellfire from the sky if we don’t all become demonic rat tree hunchers.
Maybe we looked into our optical telescopes for the EVIDENCE of HEAT in the ATMOSPHERE, MAGNIFIED THOUSANDS of TIMES, in the form of MOTION on GAS: the definition of HEAT on gas –
and maybe we find .NOTHING.
Because there IS no G.H.G.E. of ANY kind.
IF there WAS, maybe our INFRA RED TELESCOPY FIELD PEOPLE would have been SCREAMING BLOODY MURDER (pun NOT intended) about the EVER RISING
INFRA-RED
POLLUTION
affecting their
INFRA-RED VIEWING
equipment.
But there IS none so maybe we just understand, these ECO-NUTTER POWER FASCISTS have all become MASSIVELY DELUDED into believing a NINETEENTH CENTURY FALSEHOOD that a
miles deep
heat conductive
convective cell spawning
compressed fluid
FRIGID
IMMERSION BATH
held in place by gravity
was warming the rock submerged in it, like a “big warming blankie,”
to the point where it might “burn us all in hellfire for our sins against Gaia.”
Maybe we just all realize these frauds are part and parcel of a civilization whose very thoughts aren’t whether they are KILLING PEOPLE but whether they have “had a good feeling about what I’ve done” when they LIE
contriving FALSE INSTRUMENT READINGS
that lead to FALSE EMERGENCY PREPARATIONS
that lead to HUMAN BEINGS BEING KILLED DUE to it.
Maybe we just don’t have the respect for that kind of person we’d have for a mad dog frothing on the side of the road.
At least the mad dog has an excuse, that he didn’t know how he got that way.
For whatever grammatical incorrectness is found above I apologize; but we all know:
nothing anyone says EVER thwarts a sociopath who lies simply to get your things.
Frankly I don’t care about temperatures anywhere but where I live, work and play. And I have noticed it was a cold spring here in Maryland. And my wife’s berry bushes and strawberry plants have also. So the researchers are at least partly right – I believe in global cooling (my part of the globe anyway) based on my own personal observations. However, my opinion that AGW is a hoax is not based on what I observe in my immediate surroundings. It is based on reasoned research and skepticism.
That is a very interesting subject (in the linguistic sense) to use: “society” has spent so much…. ‘Society’? I don’t think so. Society is actually those he is accusing of being “so easily influenced” by real observations of the real world around them. His own ’cause’ has been expending the “money, time and effort” in an attempt to educate (indoctrinate?) this “society” with the use of the output of models forecasting doom and disaster.
And failing, it would seem.
“These results join a growing body of work that shows how irrelevant environmental information, such as the current weather, can affect judgments and opinions on climate change.”
I wonder what Bill Nye has to say about this.
Could it be that the authors of the study have mixed up cause and effect. If you believe in Global Warming, you might be more likely to believe that an average day is in fact unusually hot.
I wonder what his hick-ness has to say about the fact that in all these decades, not one instrument, such as an optical telescope or an infra-red one, has shown ANY additional MOTION
hence HEAT
in the GAS
of the atmosphere he claims is about to catch on fire.
I wonder how he feels about the fact, the people he takes up for, were furiously calculating doomsday with non math they all thought were indistinguishable from college statistics.
I wonder how he feels about the fact that when Phil Jones said he knew it hadn’t warmed since ’98 but had in fact cooled,
Jones’ private assertion of true global temp just happened, to mirror PRECISELY, the RAW INSTRUMENTAL DATA POSTED ONLINE BY LAW to STOP people like JONES from RUNNING WEATHER SCAMS.
I wonder how he feels about seeing Steven Schneider write that ludicrous paper in which he claimed (1)all the world’s thermometers are worthless, and that (2) he wrote a paper OVERTHROWING the LAWS of INSRUMENTATION, calculating TEMPERATURE from WIND SPEED.
I wonder how embarrassed his hillbilly person is, knowing he represents the bunch of galoots who pushed all the above as ‘scients’.
I wonder if he is curious about how the people he thought were furiously teaching each other to calculate doomsday had to be told by the Head of the Royal Statistical Society that not only was none of that ‘climate statistics’ not statistics,
but that NO so-called CLIMATE MATH was even MATH, AT ALL…
Wonder what that does in Nye the ignorant’s head, to all those furiously authored TOILET PAPERS by the UnRealClimate Science-Law Revision crew.
From what I read, the conclusion could just as easily be turned around -one’s belief (or not) in AGW determines whether they “thought the current day was warmer than usual”.
Sounds like no thermometers were used in the study, just what people “thought” the temperature was. Or am I misreading?