Guest Post by Steven Goddard
Over the last year or so I have been taking an informal survey of a key news metric – Google news searches for the term “global warming.” A year ago, the ratio of alarmist/skeptical articles was close to 100/1. About six months ago, the ratio was 90/10, Two months ago it was 80/20, and today it hit 50/50 for the first time – including the lead skeptical story “A Cooling Trend Toward Global Warming“. One thing that has changed is the rise of blogs written by informed citizens, complemented by the demise of corporate newspapers which make money from keeping people continually alarmed about one thing or another.
Congratulations to Anthony and all the readers for being a big part of this. Democracy in it’s purest form – hope and change we can all believe in.
The top two items from Google news “global warming” search today. The distribution of all stories through the first few search pages was similar in makeup as seen below:
A Cooling Trend Toward Global Warming
The New American – 1 hour ago
With the election of a president who is solidly in the global–warming-alarmist camp – and with many high-level appointees who are bona fide climate-change …
Global warming and climate change: facts and hype Examiner.com
UN global warming stand criticized Delta Farm Press
UN Con on Global Warming Nearly Foiled NewsMax.com
Opposing Views – Atlanta Journal Constitution
House Democrats release draft energy, climate bill
New York Times – 8 hours ago
By DARREN SAMUELSOHN AND BEN GEMAN, Greenwire Democratic leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee today unveiled a 648-page draft global warming …
House Democrats unveil sweeping plan to reshape energy in America MiamiHerald.com
Waxman’s clean energy draft includes cap-and-trade proposals Oil & Gas Journal
US lawmakers present draft bill on ‘clean energy’ AFP
I have also been using Google news searches daily for “global warming” also informally, and unscientifically. Not only are there more skeptical stories now but more importantly the pro AGW stories have become increasingly more alarmist, while the skeptical stories remain more fact based and restrained.
After watching a few hundred Sham Wow commercials the public has learned how to recognize overselling hype. Every time I see a story such as “Global Warming causes male pattern baldness” I see another nail in the AGW coffin.
I see a tipping point on fishing and oceanic oscillations happening too. Interesting reason: from the 50’s on, fishermen started keeping track of wind, salinity, water temperature, weather pattern conditions, water layering, etc because they noticed a pattern of fish numbers tied to these parameters. Early on the industry did studies about this relationship inside Universities that catered to marine and agricultural business (which many did back then, such as Oregon State University). Then global warming turned the discussion away from the coupled observations and started screaming wolf that the impending global warming would disrupt this pattern. However, I am beginning to see a new interest in the extensive records these fishermen maintained. From the longer term data available, they can study multiple variables over multiple oscillations. While it may not answer the question of whether or not global warming can halt the cycles, it does theorize, based on the data analysis, that fish stock coincide with oceanic oscillations and not fishing practices. There is even a study out now that tags elk populations and mortality to PDO, not elk populations and mortality by hunting. Again, these are records that go back quite some decades and provide a rich data pool for further studies.
We also have the new hype that replaced the old. The economy.
Steven Goddard, thanks for the time and effort in doing this research — in addition to everything else. We — readers of WUWT — can begin to have some sense of a positive way forward if we remain true to the science. Something like old-fashioned truth and justice.
I know, we have a long way to go and a tough row to hoe if we are to help stop the $900 billion (if I have my numbers right) nonsense of the cap-and-trade tax which Totus Obama plans to use pay for the massive debt he has helped create and and will continue to grow through his policies. There is absolutely no science that proves any relationship of CO2 production to worrisome climate change. In fact, CO2 might add a tad of warming to a cooling planet and a quiet sun. It will help crops grow. And there is no hope for productivity in this budget filled with massive taxation.
And to John F. Hultquist (22:06:52) :
“Getting your letter published:
I send letters to editors of large circulation newspapers and magazines with the expectation that they will NOT publish what I might write because I am not known. Thus, I write to nudge them to pay attention to something – such as the recent ICCC in NYC. I suggest they may want to have a staff writer do a report on something.
On the other hand, small city newspapers will frequently publish a letter from someone responding to a story or editorial they have printed.”
A great idea.
I plan to write to Kurt Gottfried and Harold Varmus, editorial writers in Science Magazine, March 20 2009: “Recently…the precepts of the Enlightenment were ignored and even disdained with respect to the manner in which science was used in the nation’s governance. Dogma took precedence over evidence, and opinion over facts. Happily, as was made clear by two policy announcements by President Barack Obama on 9 March 2009, the break in the traditionally harmonious relationship between science and government is now ending.”
Can you believe this statement!?! Whose payroll are they on? Will they hold Obama responsible for policies based on science?
Reretably the BBC hasn’t yet got to the 1% accuracy stage. You yanks are lucky not to have your national agendas warped as the BBC do here (well ok not so badly warped & not on quite as wide a range of subjects).
Thanks for pointing out this “tipping point” Steven, but does it really make any difference?
Obama’s budget is wholly and completely dependent upon carbon cap-and-trade. He has bought into this nonsense hook, line and sinker, for whatever reason. He has made AGW federal policy. Regardless of the evidence that accumulates to the contrary, or the proportion of people that disagree with it, or any lawsuits that might arise, we are stuck with this AGW lunacy for at least the next four to ~shudder~ eight years and it is going to hurt us. The possibility of Obama doing an about-face and changing his position on this issue is zero.
This is a really sad time for our society. I don’t know whether to be angry, embarrassed or ashamed. We are supposed to be getting smarter, not dumber. Makes me consider that cabin way up in the mountains all the more.
I more excessive rejoicing in this thread than is warranted. We live in an Information-driven age, and the centers of information are firmly in the CO2-induced GW camp. These centers are Media-Entertainment, Academia, and Bureaucracy/NGO, and they do not seem to be interested in analyzing or examining scientific data.
This is part of what I wrote in a letter to the editor of our local paper about 2 months ago. It was published without editing.
“The Carbon Pyramid
The threat of man-made global warming is based on the working hypothesis that increasing atmospheric CO2 concentrations will drive up global surface temperatures at supernatural rates, perhaps reaching climate tipping points that will result in catastrophic, irreversible changes to Earth’s biosphere. This unconfirmed hypothesis is the tip of a colossal inverted carbon pyramid. The pyramid contains billions in research funds for scientists to study ‘settled science’, millions of ‘green’ jobs, thousands of political appointees and staff salaries, carbon market traders, carbon offsetters and doomsday prophets.
The problem with an inverted pyramid, of course, is its inherent instability. If the pyramidal tip’s hypothesis should ever come into question, the entire structure crumbles. This is the tipping point about which climate alarmists should be acutely concerned. A principle function for AGW ‘pre-cogs’ involves buttressing the pyramid’s apex, no matter how comical the claim.
And so the endless climate calamity claims continue, although many are soon dust-binned by observations and corrections to poor scientific method….
The global warming inverted pyramid is dangerously close to a tipping point that should spell its demise. This is partly due to a small cadre of respected scientists who, in the face of scandalous behavior by their peers, continue to participate in the scientific process. It is also partly due to an extraordinarily long solar cycle 23 and a likely weak pair of upcoming solar cycles 24 and 25. Coupled with a recent swing to cooler oceanic cycles, the likelihood of a major volcanic eruption, and a weak solar magnetic field allowing higher cosmic ray fluxes to impact Earth and likely create more low-level clouds, the globe could experience significant cooling over the next 25 years.
I for one hope the inverted carbon pyramid collapses before more damage is wrought on our economy and on the health of more than a billion people worldwide who today lack clean water, sanitation, medications, food, affordable energy and education.”
I agree with vg here. I used to regularly read New Scientist and visit and watch BBC programmes. Recently (well I say recently, I mean over the last 3 years or so), I’ve stopped completely. New Scientist has become alarmist to an extreme, never publishing counter articles (of which there are many). The BBC is still creating alarmist programmes that tow along the party line and has been ever since the scare over the hole in the ozone layer (we had propaganda aimed at children and teens with programmes called `the O-Zone’ back then!). I feel the same way about the Guardian newspaper, which I also used to read regularly but no longer do.
It’s true that to an extent we pick media with similar philosophical dispensations to us. But it also works both ways. There are too many preachers in some of these organs and not enough fact. Editors seem to have gone AWOL judging by some of the dross that gets through as Scientific these days. No disclaimers on model results can be found anywhere (model != fact).
I can honestly say the media has never been lower in my eyes and Scientists are rapidly sinking in esteem as well. By all jumping on the bang-wagon of “consensus” they are or will end up destroying any trust the public has in them.
It’s not necessary to do daily news searches. Use RSS gadgets on iGoogle and use iGoogle when you search on Google (if you have a Gmail account use that to log in). So whenever you start a search, you have recent headlines presented.
Go to Google News and do searches for “global warming” and “global cooling” and click on the RSS icons (orange dot with two arcs) to add those to iGoogle… if your browser has configured for Google iGoogle/Google Reader feeds.
And click on the RSS icon at the top of the WUWT home page to add this RSS feed too.
Surprisingly, alarmists are not entirely humor-challenged:
http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2009/04/01/scientists-worldwide-admit-global-warming-is-a-hoax/
Thanks Steven!
Here the link again: http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/942
Nevertheless this issue, from the beginnig I guess, was not a science issue and the masterminds of this new armageddon must be anxious to fulfill its goal: They are the ones, the liberators, the most reamarkable specimens of humanity!…really, the undertakers of civilization.
I suggest all Watts Up readers email a link to this post to their representatives. The politicians have not a clue about the science, but if they can see that support for Obama’s $900 Billion slush fund will be out of step with shifting public sentiment, maybe there is some hope.
I think there is still a chance the Senate can stop this. It needs a coalition of scientific skeptics, those outraged at the massive tax, and those worried about the economy (especially including some Democrats sympathetic to the loss of union manufacturing jobs that will be a byproduct of energy cost increases).
I recently looked at my own Representative’s and Senators’ web sites to see where they stood on the Cap and Trade issue. They were all rather vague or ignored it completely. It could be they are waiting till crunch time to see which way the wind of public sentiment is blowing.
Sorry to burst a baloon.
I took a look at the link to the search results and three of the first six were certainly Anti AGW, … Gore admits hoax, Vail not warming, Nobel committe withdraws prize from Gore…
but
Have you looked at the date.
I suggest you rerun the analysis tomorrow April 2nd.
S
Mark N (21:44:53) :
It`s the following I’d like to see change:
The Economist
New Scientist
Nature
And change they will as the public continues to awaken to the colossal foolery that is AGW. People of sound mind will demand those who knowingly supported the distortions of AGW – be fired. All that need happen to straighten these journals out is to clean their editorial house.
Except perhaps for New Scientist which should simply be shuttered. The post AGW challenge will be to finger the worst alarmists. Who chose to subvert scientific method in pursuit of an agenda? No matter how beneficial the agenda was wished to be. Next, will be rebuilding MSM and returning to the democratic principles *real* journalists practice. Criticism. Skepticism. Investigation. Exposure.
But the greatest lesson to be learned is that computer simulations of complex systems are deeply, perhaps endlessly flawed. Attempting to make policy based on artificial intelligence – is the real catastrophe. Expecting machines to replace in-person observation is destructive to good science. And finally, legislation to prevent recurrence – is the best defense.
OT: “EU Carbon Emissions Likely Fell Less Than Expected”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ase.G2_vUyJw&refer=home
The AGW crowd will simply shift from ‘saving the planet’ to ‘saving natural resources’. Most human produced CO2 comes from burning fossil fuels, which are finite, so we must save them for the future. To do that requires higher taxes, which will conveniently fund all the other good things we need to do.
It’s what they have been saying all along.
Was that Eastasia or Eurasia?
“Chuck (21:11:56) :
Although i agree that more and more people are questioning global warming, i think the change in terminology from “Global Warming” to “climate change” might have a bit to do with it.”
This is exactly right. The trend he identified is by no means a reduction in alarmist rhetoric in the media, but instead a shift away from the term “Global Warming” to “Climate Change” by those who seek to link anything and everything to the CO2 boogieman.
This is interesting and could make for an interesting debate
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7970921.stm
I lived in India for 18 months. Before that I believed in global warming hysteria and all that nonsense. By the time I left I no longer believed in it.
What caused that change? The change was that I realised that in the developed world we complain about such pathetic, irrelevant and even non-existent things. The slightest bit of discomfort to our comfortable lives causes us to lash out in anger and demand drastic action.
Yet in countries like India they don’t have it so easy and so their priorities are completely different. They are the same priorities we used to have when we had an entrepreneurial forward looking society – jobs, human rights, freedom, education, food. In the BBC article above we see a popular desire for an accountable, democratic capitalist system to make their priorities a reality.
Compare that to all these well fed protestors on the streets of London today, many of them who have never worked in their lives let alone worked on the pavements like those Indians do, who are complaining capitalism has failed and we need either anarchy or communism to save the planet from climate change.
It’s clear that some people are living in fantasy land and have lost sight of what the human priorities should be. The post-Berlin Wall generation has had it too too easy.
Aron (02:39:17) :
Aron, don’t you get it! That’s why it’s now “climate change” No need to specify which direction is up anymore. Up is down, down is up… it’s all caused by “climate change”.
PHE
I see your point, however you are incorrect in your assertion that there were no chemical weapons found or indeed that their was no evidence of nuclear weapons programs found. According to documentation that was turned over to the allies after the golf war Saddam still had 6500 tonnes of chemical weapons, mostly nerve agents, at the time of the invasion that were not destroyed and not accounted for. However, just over 550 weapons had been found in the year following the invasion. As these are mostly large artillery shells the total is a few dozen tons; far less than expected. About 1 ton of the nerve gas material was recovered in a botched terrorist attack in Amman about that time. (Remember though “Saddam didn’t support terrorism”)
The claim that there were no weapons of mass distruction is a deliberate fabrication by the same media often the same people that promote AGW scare stories.
“Golf War”?
“Secret U.S. mission hauls uranium from Iraq ”
“Last major stockpile from Saddam’s nuclear efforts arrives in Canada”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/
looks like one of the college writers has finally caught on to this being a Hoax
http://madrad2002.wordpress.com/2009/04/01/why-i-hate-the-environment/
This could be a another contribution to the media “Tipping Point” too!
Although I am always cautious about publications that appear around April Fools Day
(like this posting: http://scienceblogs.com/eruptions/2009/04/eruption_at_yellowstone_lake.php, if true this is a real “WHOPPER”:
Obama intimately tied to carbon trading:
http://ilovecarbondioxide.com/2009/03/obama-intimately-tied-to-carbon-trading.html