From Rasmussen Reports, some bad news for Al Gore and the Hockey Team:
The debate over global warming has intensified in recent weeks after a new NASA study was interpreted by skeptics to reveal that global warming is not man-made. While a majority of Americans nationwide continue to acknowledge significant disagreement about global warming in the scientific community, most go even further to say some scientists falsify data to support their own beliefs.
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of American Adults shows that 69% say it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data in order to support their own theories and beliefs, including 40% who say this is Very Likely. Twenty-two percent (22%) don’t think it’s likely some scientists have falsified global warming data, including just six percent (6%) say it’s Not At All Likely. Another 10% are undecided.
(To see survey question wording, click here .)
The number of adults who say it’s likely scientists have falsified data is up 10 points from December 2009 .
Fifty-seven percent (57%) believe there is significant disagreement within the scientific community on global warming, up five points from late 2009. One in four (25%) believes scientists agree on global warming. Another 18% aren’t sure.
Republicans and adults not affiliated with either major political party feel stronger than Democrats that some scientists have falsified data to support their global warming theories, but 51% of Democrats also agree.
Men are more likely than women to believe some scientists have put out false information on the issue.
Democrats are more likely to support immediate action on global warming compared to those from other party affiliations.
The national survey of 1,000 Adults was conducted on July 29-30, 2011 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC . See methodology .
Voters have been almost evenly divided on whether human activity or long-term planetary trends are to blame for global warming since May of last year .
Full story here at: Rasmussen Reports
h/t to Jer at Skeptics Corner (click and give him some hits)
It is full filling to see that the public is clearly beginning to understand the underhanded games that are being played by the climate alarmist scientists and their co-conspirators in the media. The incredible use of deceit, deception, exaggeration, erroneously manipulated data, dirty trick peer review process, outright lies, data and analysis secrecy, political bias, tax payer government funded greed, scientifically unvalidated models, incompetent global temperature data quality control, mathematical statistical analysis fraud, cherry picked weather and climate data, pure politically driven and scientifically unsupportable climate fear conjecture and much much more. These are the hallmarks of the climate fear alarmist scientists and their media groupies in the press which have tried so hard to destroy the centuries old principles of the scientific method and substitute in its place a completely biased and corrupt political consensus. Hopefully this window in the history of time will be the beginning of the end for the despicable shenanigans which characterize climate fear scientists and their brazen and purely politically driven motives .
Theo Goodwin
“How many news stories have there been about people who do not believe in global warming falsifying their data to support their lack of belief?”
Visit any warmist website and you will find mountains of allegations that non-warmists have distorted the scientific record or have deliberately lied or are in the pay of big oil, etc, etc.
So my comment that the survey question seems to be ambiguous is stating simply that – no more, no less.
The question looks as if it is asking whether climate scientists have falsified data to prove AGW. However,this implies that all climate scientists believe in AGW. Some don’t. Hence the ambiguity, which as I pointed out could be accidental (but because I can’t read the pollsters’ minds, I don’t know for a fact – it could be deliberate).
Similarly, you can’t read my mind. Your assumption that my comment is “utter and total Warmista spin” is precisely that – an assumption.
Jon Shively says:
August 3, 2011 at 7:19 pm
I do not take comfort in this poll.
A show of hands, who doesn’t trust polls?
Is man made climate change/ Man Made global warming a problem or actually happening in the real world?
Is it?
There are billions of scientists that say the earth is warming due to Carbon Dioxide (apparently) So if one hypothesis can be so accepted and then abandoned then whats the point of it?
I wish I was a qualified scientist, well actually I am, apparently it depends!
I will stick this whole scientific elephant out to it’s truthful conclusion, that’s a FACT.
From Phil’s Dad on August 3, 2011 at 6:54 pm:
This was alluded to in the Telegraph piece, note the caption under the pic of the browser icons: “The story reporting that Internet Explorer users have below-average IQ was a hoax, say reports.” But it did sound quite believable, given the many details. As the BBC piece notes:
Consider this another example of an impressive survey-based result, with impressive-sounding numbers, that ultimately just ain’t true. Sort of like that “97% of scientists accept AGW” one.
Mensa membership runs the gamut from PhD’s to high school dropouts. Notable members include porn stars, and formerly included the white supremacist who committed that horrific shooting at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in DC in 2009 until he didn’t pay his Mensa dues (ref).
The Mensa organization also appears quite worried about the reality of (C)AGW, and invited many (C)AGW-confirming speakers to their 2009 National Colloquium (Theme: “Weather or Not – The past, present and future of climate change”), including Dr. James Hansen, the esteemed peer-reviewed federally-funded anti-coal protester and climatologist.
It was quite brave of you to make your admission. Don’t worry though, we’re generally a tolerant bunch around here and won’t hold either of those things against you. 😉
@Sun Spot
I agree that there is certainly an element of pseudoscience involved, but the warmists have such conviction about something that they (or anybody for that matter) knows very little about, and they promote it as fact. In a lot of cases they are not even scientists, so how can they possibly use scientific method.
i just thought the Duggan-Kruger effect covered both sides of the argument very well.
Climate ‘scientists’ are now known to be less trustworthy than second hand car sales people, politicians, and those engaged in the real estate business!
And their response will be…’we need to communicate better’ (= more cutting and pasting).
There a large population that sleepwalk through their lives; without even a rudimentary knowledge of their own body or health. And that doubles or triples for anything to do with the Planet or it’s environment as most readers here know already.
While it is very heartening to find that the general public doubts the quality of the “Science” published by the Hockey Team it is depressing to note that with a few exceptions (e.g. the Institute of Physics) the vast majority of professional institutions and universities don’t recognise scientific fraud even when you rub their noses in it.
The cartoon scientist needs a bag of grant money in the other hand, partly hidden behind his back.
Dear Team,
You should have know this was inevitable.
You should now know that an imminent poll will read,
69% Say Scientists who have falsified Global Warming research should be prosecuted.
Regarding the falsification of research, the Australian blogger Professor Bunyip has done a lengthy (and brilliant) analysis of the suspended Charles Monnett’s research on drowning polar bears (as seen in An Inconvenient Truth). He also wipes the floor with a local warmie who says Monnett is being victimized by Big Oil, which is the party line at the moment.
http://bunyipitude.blogspot.com/2011/08/bear-faced-facts.html
Robert of Ottawa says: “The nonsense will continue until government funding of the scam is halted.”
The Greens have infiltrated both major UK parties, effectively disenfranchising the people. Funding there will continue until the major parties are eliminated. The longer until this happens, the uglier it will get.
Because 100% of the people polled were not evaluated for competency this poll only means the hapless alarmists are losing the PR battle among possibly randomly selected citizens. The hopelessly hapless harlequins of science alarmism already know that as is evidenced by the plethora of new papers and news items where they are pushing everything that can possibly be nuanced from the alarmist data.
We are seeing tides, shellfish, grasses, alpine flora, droughts, heavy rains, 60 year cycles that have gone missing and its a travesty we don’t know why, dry lakes, over-filled lakes, carbolic acid spewing dams, etc. used as evidence to justify our shuttering down our lifestyles such that the dark ages will seem a luxury. I expect the hockey stick boyz to continue to influence the tabloid blogosphere with an even greater variety of humanity-shaming concoctions. Perhaps even more teacher on student snuff videos on YouTube.
Jo Nova’s site perfectly accessible from here in BC, Canada. Maybe the UK’s current Prime Minister, who is known to have written to the Australian PM praising her implementation of Australia’s new ‘carbon’ tax, might have put the word out on Jo’s site to UK ISP’s?
Of course that conspiracy theory probably has more to do with cock-up. Can I say that here without getting snipped?
My 1st thought was that the question was pretty bad, for a couple of reasons. Let’s see it again:
“In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?”
Chris1958 and Mike both had the same reaction to it — it doesn’t specify which (or whose) theories and beliefs. It could apply to those theories and beliefs that merely indicate anthropogenic global warming is occurring, those that indicate catastrophic global warming is likely in the future, those that indicate minimal warming this century, those that ascribe it to primarily to solar variability, and on and on.
Maybe less Democrats thinks so than Republicans because less Democrats read the sites and media outlets that are skeptical of global warming — sites that strongly promote the erroneous foibles of what could be termed the “consensus” climate scientists. (As I write this, I note that the question didn’t even specify climate scientists. The question doesn’t even indicate that the research data was about global warming!)
I would be much more curious about the responses to a question worded more precisely, such as:
“Regarding the current state of research, do you agree or disagree that climate scientists have conclusively determined that human activities are a primary factor contributing to the global temperature trends observed over the past 30 years?” (The standard responses would be Strongly Agree, Somewhat Agree, Neither Agree nor Disagree, Somewhat Disagree, and Strongly Disagree).
Folks, please realize that climate scientists are far from the only ones who cook the books! This type of nonsense goes on all the time in clinical trials, sociology, public health (my field) and virtually any scientific endeavor where policy funding is at stake. I’ve yet to figure out a way to fight the machine, but I keep on trying.
very soon it will reach 90% who dont believe in global warming the rest will be ding bats
TheTempestSpark says:
August 3, 2011 at 8:31 pm
“There are billions of scientists that say the earth is warming due to Carbon Dioxide (apparently)”
Nit-pick Larry’s comment. Billions of scientists, eh? That means at least 2 billion. What is the population of our fair planet? Let’s pick a friendly even number–say 8 billion. Then at least one out of every four randomly selected people is a scientist. Tempest, would you care to revise your estimate of the number of the world’s scientists?
The wording of question 5 suggests that it is just scientists that have fudged their data, it doesn’t say pro AGW scientists. This just suggests a lack of trust in scientists rather than AGW. There’s a lot of “sceptics” out there who I believe have fudged their data so I’d have answered very likely to this as well.
“5. In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?”
Hmmm…Interesting.
Link
And the schools are teaching their kids evolution too.
@kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
August 3, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Might what to check your fatcs :-
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/08/03/internet_explorer_iq_study_hoax/
Declaration of intrerest- I am a Mensa G2 level IE8 user.
Sir, one of the forgotten things about IQ is the disconnect that follows, that common sense is often lost.
The reality is simple, there are very few climate scientists, but there are lots of “climate scientists” like Hansen, The Team, plus Patchi and his gang. The relatively few real climate scientists in the world today don’t need to falsify/twist/torture/manipulate their data to reach their conclusions or make their models, but for the “climate scientists” there is no choice, there is an absolute need to falsify/twist/torture and manipulate – why?
Because the funding trough of comfortable salaries and big juicy grants – now an addiction – would be quickly cut off if there was not a continuous stream of scary and bogus predictions of imminent climate disaster.
SteveE says:
August 4, 2011 at 2:05 am
There’s a lot of “sceptics” out there who I believe have fudged their data so I’d have answered very likely to this as well.
Interesting. And what do you base this belief on? I suspect your supposed belief is as well-founded as the belief in CAGW.
While I agree that the wording could have been better, common sense (a quality sadly lacking in CAGW Believers) tells you they are referring to the “Consensus” climate scientists – the 97% figure the true Believers love to bandy about.
The truth is that the “consensus” climate scientists have a huge motive for being fast and loose with their facts, figures, and methods, and have been caught doing it, despite their cries of being “persecuted” and even of “death threats”. They are part of an enormous government-funded industry only purporting to do science. It is an industry that is now collapsing, thankfully.