From the “you too can be a professional climatologist” department comes this very interesting graph. Reader Shawn Fitzpatrick submits this graph after reading our earlier story “Climate burnout is fast approaching“.
What it shows is climate science on the downturn, back to 2008 levels.
Source: http://www.indeed.com/jobanalytics/jobtrends?q=%22climate+change%22&l=
This goes well with Google’s trend numbers:
Source: http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=climate%20change%2C%20Global%20warming%2C%20climate&cmpt=q
Overall, interest in climate and global warming seems to be trending downward lately, be it from Internet interest or jobs.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Hopefully other governments will follow Australia’s example, and realise that in these economically difficult times, with trust in climate science at rock bottom, nobody cares if you fire a climate scientist.
Dang. Missed out. They might have to get a real job.
“Climate” obviously is not that closely associated with either GW or CC – it is down, but nowhere the bottom like the others.
Makes you wonder how our governments can be spending more money on climate change then.
Has anyone ever asked the warmist crowd how they plan to maintain a healthy level of CO2 if they shut down all of our carbon emissions?
Now, image having a resumé where being a climate scientist is your only job. In these times. Jees, that sounds hard. You got into it to save the world, and now you cannot save yourself. But in all fairness, you pretended to do science and now life is going to pretend it is rewarding you.
Hopefully they will not turn to K-12 education. Alarmingly the NRC just released its report today from a Workshop last December in DC on combining the “Next Generation Science Standards and the Common Core for ELA Standards.” ELA is English Language Arts.
It is not to be Huck Finn or Shakespeare anymore.
It’s not to be science in the traditional sense anymore. But as the Bishop Hill story today reported, it will be a grand narrative. Factual or not.
The new word is “skepticism” baby:
http://www.indeed.com/jobtrends?q=Skepticism&l=
http://youtu.be/PSxihhBzCjk
Gee Wally, big surprise!
Their predictions are actually coming true. Its the end of the world. No wonder they were all alarmed. They were actually talking about the climate OF change all along. They’re going to lose their jobs.
What with the science being settled and all, the climate science jobs should be going away. Funding needs to go to the next big crisis… “How to get H!llary reelected!”
Hopefully the /sarc tag is not needed. 🙂
Marc Morano has some helpful suggestions for eco-scientists looking for a job 🙂
http://www.climatedepot.com/2010/01/19/time-for-next-ecoscare-already-as-global-warming-movement-collapses-activists-already-testmarketing-the-next-ecofear-laughing-gas-crisis-oxygen-crisis-plastics/
I can’t, for the life of me, see why we would need any more climate research done.
Every single possible impact has already been published in 10 different studies. The science has been settled since 1980. The science will not accept any changes to the basic principles. Millions of people have been captured by the end-times philosophy. The models don’t predict any short-term trackable trends, just the ones going out 50 or 100 years.
I think we can call it “done” now.
Just move on to see if it is true (and see if the raw temperature records can be resurrected from the dead some day).
I’m curious as to how they define “climate change jobs”…
..is it someone with a degree and education in climate science
or a plumber that wrote a paper on climate change affecting pipes
Cool!
You do of course realise that when that graph hits rock bottom there will be no more need for WUWT!
The well is running dry. European nations are bankrupt, and the US has not had a budget since Obama’s been in office. Continuing Resolutions do just that. Continue spending, they increase it for the baseline, but essentially add no more.
on earlier threads (yesterday), i posted the nyt/justin gillis article about the report for Risky Business’s unholy CAGW trio – Hank Paulson, Tom Steyer & Michael Bloomberg. obviously plenty of “climate aka carbon trading” jobs on offer from this lot.
the full 202 page (?) report is now available. according to the gillis article, Rhodium “sought to insulate the findings from the political opinions of the sponsors, in part by setting up a committee of leading climate scientists and environmental economists who reviewed the work”!
“.pdf: (202 pages) June 2014: Rhodium Group: American Climate Prospectus
Economic Risks in the United States
Acknowledgements: Members of our Expert Review Panel– Kerry Emanuel, Karen Fisher-Vanden, Michael Greenstone, Katharine Hayhoe, Geoffrey Heal, Douglas Holt-Eakin, Michael Spence, Larry Linden, Linda Mearns, Michael Oppenheimer, Sean Ringstead, Tom Rutherford, Jonathan Samet, and Gary Yohe – provided invaluable critiques during the development of this report. We also thank Sir Nicholas Stern, who provided excellent input and guidance, and William Nordhaus, for his pioneering work in on climate economics and scoping suggestions early in the project
http://rhg.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/RHG_AmericanClimateProspectus_June2014_LowRes1.pdf
So heyday of “Green Jobs” is past. Now people will need to get a proper job rather than sitting around telling other people what to do!
Well, the science is settled, as you know, so we don’t need so many climate scientists anymore. Actually job numbers will increase when global cooling kicks in.
Well, interest in “climate” has a nice peak in December, 2009. Those little letters in the chart give headlines in the media that Google apparently thinks inspires the interest surge. F, G, and H refer to articles about Copenhagen and a BBC story. But the real cause is obvious to us deniers – “climate” is the first part of the longer word “climategate”, which broke in late November. Think that might have sparked some interest? Google doesn’t think so.
The big spike in “global warming” interest in February-March 2007 baffles me. Any ideas?
@EricWorrall, while this is primarily a technical site, we are finding with Obama’s executive actions and a complicit media that facts appear to matter less and less. Anyway, we all know that the alarmists are looking to COP21 in Paris (Dec-2015) as an opportunity to correct for relative failures since Copenhagen (2009). We appear to have Australia, Canada, and India taking a stand at minimum (I may have overlooked some other nations). Would that be enough to block any global carbon agreement? This could merit a review of some kind in terms of the current state of play wrt. COP21 because like it or not that is the elephant in the room right now.
Aarrrggg!!! Somebody please run a FFT on that yellow Google trend curve! Looks like an EKG.
Eric Worrall says: June 24, 2014 at 4:15 pm “nobody cares if you fire a climate scientist”
……………………
Not so, Eric, this Australian cares.
Climate scientists are people with feelings. Don’t be harsh.
If large numbers of employees are fired, that can lead to higher unemployment and that can trash the national economy.
Prime Minister Tony Abbott has said, and I agree, that in relation to ‘climate change’, he is not interested in policies that trash the economy.
Geoff Sherrington says:
Climate scientists are people with feelings. Don’t be harsh.
If large numbers of employees are fired, that can lead to higher unemployment and that can trash the national economy.
…………………….
Geoff – this Australian can point you to the carbon tax, mutli billions worth of desal plants sitting idle, the roof batts debacle, wind turbine farms and roof solar panels we all have to subsidise forever.. the list goes on. I don’t cry for them – the damage done by “Climate scientists” is immeasurable. Enough is enough.