BUMPED for visibility. Originally published on 6/24. Bumped on 6/28 and again on 6/30
This poll will gauge reader perception to the issue that Dr. Hansen of NASA has recently raised that I cover in my post here. One vote per computer, and please spread this permalink to the poll far and wide to get a good mix of input across the blogosphere.
Click on a dot, then click the little yellow vote icon. Poll closed.
I will run this poll 1 week until next Wednesday at 9AM PST, at which time it will close. The results will be submitted to a member of the U.S. Senate for distribution, NASA’s director, and will also be mailed to Dr. Hansen at NASA GISS.
You can subscribe to the results of this poll by RSS. Simply copy the link below into your RSS reader.
http://polldaddy.com/pollRSS.aspx?id=49940E93EC30ACAF
NOTE: A couple of Pro-Hansen sites have staged a “crash party” for this poll. This has accounted for a huge increase in the votes for the first question overnight. This sometimes happens with online polls when agenda driven activists decide to skew it, which is the biggest weakness of online polls.
Addendum: Some other sites that are not Pro Hansen have also now linked to this poll, so I suppose it is becoming a battle between opposing views now. Agenda driven activists on both sides are at work now.
Update 7/1 It appears that about 8000 votes were added for question 1 overnight. -Anthony
Update 7/2 9 AM PST Poll is closed, more here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Here’s my take…
Dr. Hansen has the _duty_ to be controversial if necessary;
it’s part of his job. NASA hired him to think. Many of you have
no concept of this. If his field of inquiry leads him to a conclusion
then his job is to present that. His conclusion is that the situation
is dire. What if Dr. Hansen was warning about Hitler in 1937 and was
controversial in doing so? Today we’d view him as a hero. Say what
you will, but clearly Dr. Hansen sees himself as a white hatted good
guy with a dire situation at hand. Do you people really think what
he is doing doesn’t take guts? Do you think for a moment he figures
he’s safe and secure forever, and that up to half of the population
is _not_ going to ask for his head? Think about that. NASA isn’t in
the habit of hiring stupid people.
Dr. Hansen’s GISTEMP code looks like crap but also appears to work.
My guess is that he’s right. Temps have gone up in the last century
or so, and his algorithms seem to be proper for the job. They’re
looking at the code on climateaudit. The code is messy but I think
the overall conclusion will be that it doesn’t artificially make
anything change.
That said, his assumption that it’s CO2 is plainly wrong; e.g. the
temp records are pretty clear that the northern hemisphere is the
one that’s warming whilst the southern remains fairly flat. “Warmers”
dismiss this with hand waving and theoretical possibilities of all
sorts of clever ocean current inventiveness (no data, just theory.)
Meanwhile it’s clear that land use changes result in warming, and
what is there in the northern hemisphere but a lot of land use change
over the last 100 years? One would presume that when one says global
warming one is referring to, well, the entire globe, and if it’s
truly CO2 then common sense says that the atmosphere ought to be
hemispherically insensitive to say the least.
In addition, I find it quite remarkable that nobody has seemed to
twig on the simple fact that computer models designed specifically
to look for CO2 influence seem to always discover CO2 influence.
Rather funny how that works. Climate models aren’t really very good
at land use changes, nor are they very good at svensmark’s solar
influence on cosmic ray theories. Climate models don’t discover
anything. They’re programs, and at their core, not very bright.
GISTEMP may “work” but it’s not showing the truth of temperature trends.
Look example Australia, Brisbane, Eangle-Farms
Non-adjusted (cooling trend visible)
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=501945780000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Adjusted (warming trend visible)
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=501945780000&data_set=2&num_neighbors=1
See this for longer temperature trends.
http://lustiag.pp.fi/MTP_231007.pdf?bcsi_scan_F28E09D73845DEF5=K5VtePAJhpowJAAuNEvhokwAAADKknMz&bcsi_scan_filename=MTP_231007.pdf
A person with a delusion is absolutely convinced that the delusion is real.
Examples …..
Dr. John C. Mather is a Senior Astrophysicist in the Observational Cosmology Laboratory at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center. He was awarded the 2006 Nobel Prize in Physics, shared with George F. (“fingers of god”) Smoot. Mather writes big bang fiction like ………
“The cosmic microwave background (CMB) spectrum is that of a nearly perfect blackbody with a temperature of 2.725 +/- 0.001K. This observation matches the predictions of the hot Big Bang theory extraordinarily well, and indicates that nearly all of the radiant energy of the Universe was released within the first year after the Big Bang.”
Dr James E Hansen is director of NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies and he in fact wrote his doctoral thesis on the climate of Venus highlighting CO2 as a problem that caused a runaway Greenhouse effect which is all bogus. But with AGW we see Hansen’s incorrect assumption in all its glory expressed as the deductive method chasing and distorting data to make it fit. Who can forget his recent “destruction of Creation” epistle that Steve McIntyre observed as a Jor-El complex. Now this frothing delusion is likening fossil fuel CEOs to those of cigarette companies and calling for trials. What next?
Fascinating.
Absolutely fascinating.
That’s quite a change in the poll numbers overnight.
Checked the numbers then went to fix breakfast; ten minutes later there were 52 new votes calling for there to be trials on energy company execs but only 2 new votes calling on Hansen to be fired.
Looks like there’s been a panic attack since yesterday, when 48% of the vote was for Hansen’s firing (now only 22%). Do you think that maybe the word’s gone out to “The Movement” to ensure a correct result? That or maybe enough True Believers with volatile ISPs stuffing the ballot box. Having seen the vitriolic venom with which True Believers respond when feeling attacked, I can believe both.
I have been watching the poll results over the past 24 hours and it is quite clear that there has been an invasion of watermelons. Option 1 (pro-Hansen), which was trailing by a huge margin for a long time is now “in the lead”. Such a change clearly indicates that such polls are useless without verification of identity and elimination of multiple voting. I’d scrap it if I were you, Anthony.
Otherwise, an excellent site!
clearly Dr. Hansen sees himself as a white hatted good
guy with a dire situation at hand. Well, at least you got that part right, G. Alston. This puts him squarely in the same megalomaniac camp as Gore. Of course he’s being paid to think – as a scientist though, not as a politician.
As a scientist, Hansen is a disgrace. His mind (or what’s left of it) has become infected by AGW Religion, and he is on a Torqeumada-like crusade. My vote was that Congress should ignore him, as megalomaniacs hate that, but I could just as easily have voted that he should be fired. I really couldn’t care less about the martyr issue. So what? Let the pathetic, whiny AGWers have their martyr.
I see that the poll results have changed dramatically overnight. It appears that Hansen supporters are now running the show.
Does everyone realise that ‘Warmists’ are crashing this poll and voting in favour of Mr Hansen’s view. See here http://hot-topic.co.nz/2008/06/26/the-denial-twist/
The only problem with having this case go to trial is the jury.
Why do people think that 12 people, who probably believe that Hollywood is the source of all wisdom on the planet, will do a better job of judging the facts, then they did in the OJ trial.
The number of votes has roughly doubled over the past nine hours (12:30 – 9:30 pm, Australia 26 [USA 25] June).
The manner in which the percentages have changed in this time span causes me to speculate the poll has been highjacked in a stacking ploy by AGW extremists.
Whereas in the first 24 hours this poll seemed to show a very nice balance, a balance I would expect from the kind of thoughtful people who read here, it is now beginning to show an imbalance.
If this imbalance continues I believe it will render the results suspect, and therefore of very little (to very negative) value.
Everyone that supports Hansen should just turn off all electric devices, stop driving gasoline cars and stop heating their houses with electric or natural gas. Plan on living in a sod house and I would say ride a horse but they give off methane. You cannot play the game like Al Gore and his 230,000KW electric usage.
6/26AM–I wonder if the poll has been gamed overnight–there are a _lot_ more votes for positions that don’t seem to be supported by the comments. Is it possible to fake the computer ID?
Have you noticed recent poll results!
It would be interesting to know what has caused the influx of pro Hansen votes.
REPLY: A couple of sites have started a “crash” campaign, it happens.
Well, the code “works” in that it gives the desired outcome. That doesn’t mean the station adjustments are valid in the first place.
Do you people really think what
he is doing doesn’t take guts?
To be very clear, no guts, whatsoever.
About as much guts as shouting, “Ho-Ho-Ho Chi Minh” on Columbia campus in 1968.
James,
Consult 5 theologians and have them deprogram your challenger.
Global warming is Al Gore’s religion it’s called Warmonism and it’s devotees are called Warmons.
Lessee here. Agenda driven activists crash poll to try to prove that their side is right and not populated by agenda driven activists.
Ok, my irony meter just exploded.
[…] e-mailer suggests voting at this Internet poll about “what should happen next?” now that James Hansen has called for criminal […]
A shame, how this poll has been hijacked by AGW activists.
This is another attempt to suppress a public or scientific debate.
As climate facts continue to shatter AGW models and predictions, I hope that 2nd tier scientists out of the centers of the global warming agenda will come forward and speak against their bosses, for the sake of their children, their families, their countries and mankind.
I think the first question is actually what everyone should tick. That would be enormously funny and if congress actually even pondered that option, it would show the stupidity of Hansen’s remark.
There is a reason that media have buried Hansen’s comment.
I had the poll results open from last night, so I thought I’d make a link everyone can track the progress on. I’ll add results as we go forward. Hopefully Anthony can chart the results over time… Mike.
Hansen Poll Before Crash Party
Fred, that is no mistake. It was asked if papers existed supporting skepticism of AGW, this paper clearly does. While you might disagree with it’s conclusions as I do with those that support AGW this has nothing to do with it existing. There exists various degrees of skepticism and to shut out one because it does not agree with your position actually does more of a disservice to skepticism as a whole.
Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics
(Physics, arXiv:0707.1161)
– Gerhard Gerlich, Ralf D. Tscheuschner
Perhaps the problem is the limited number of people who read this blog. Anthony, I thought you would be happy that the larger number of participants in the poll has resulted in a better representation of the views of those in the blogsphere who’re interested in AGW.
REPLY: If you define “limited” as having more traffic than RealClimate.org, then I’d guess you’d be correct. – Anthony
Well need i say that i find this whole war on carbon emissions a top shelf derangement and a joke of cosmic proportions if it wasn’t so tragic.
Like the bigbang universe nonsense this AGW is a paradox. When you have a paradox then you know you have the wrong assumptions. Just as there is no way everything can be created from nothing …. and as if “nothing” could exist too, with AGW we should know that it has no chance of even getting past its first assumption of catastrophic warming because of earth’s one-way cooling bias. Its second assumption of depleting carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is a bizarre, anti life bias with no hope of success.
Cripes this AGW is an extraordinary, twisted, religious playpen with high priests like Hansen promoting when you should die, that you are not welcome to this world, that you are a burden until you die, that we are all guilty of this carbon sin. Just why should we be so damned respectful of this lying, superstitious belief with its weird respect for lazy minds living in ratbaggery? Are people just so naive or stooopid not to comprehend that carbon is life which should induce a modicum of humility as the reason for our very existence?
I’ve never felt it unexceptional to have seen through all this religious poop at about eight years of age although perhaps i may have come endowed with reasonably sensitive crap detectors. When one looks around today it just seems so absurd to have let the world fall sucker to these religious deadheads with their weird psycho brain problems, …….. that get themselves into high positions in science and politics.
I would like people like Hansen to be put on trial to account for their corruption of science. Only then will it be possible to flush these charlatans down the dunny.
[…] this blog post isn’t about Diebold, but rather about Anthony Watts’s on-going online poll regarding James Hansen’s remark […]