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)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Let’s be careful not to resort to science based on polls like the warmists have.
Personally, I blame the new breed of scientists such as Mann, Romm et al who seem to be more interested in their own personal standing rather than the science. As a result of this they seem to have jumped into bed with political and media groups to apparently bolster their standing within the scientific community. One might also look at how the financing of research projects has made this apparent unseemly grab for attention seem so necessary. That is not to say that this is a new occurrence. It just seems the swathe of government and green funds has accentuated this phenomenon of self publicising scientist.
At least when science was funded by industry or to solve ‘real’ problems for society, then those funding the research at least expected tangible results for their investment. Not seemingly endless soundbites and results targetted at self promotion and the support of a small but controlling clique.
Maybe it is time we went back to funding the most effective scientists not the loudest or most popular?
I do not think this is the tipping point that will prove Mann made warming!
(sorry I just had to get the one in print!)
To err is human! To lie, cheat, falsify, destroy data, hide the decline, misdirect, cover-up, and thereby damage wealth by trillions is criminal vandalism and fraud.
I wonder what a list would look like, that was prepared, according to the following criteria.
Prosecution: Mainly those that hold positions of public trust or public funds found knowingly deceiving and defrauding.
Censoring: barred from future grants and prohibited from public teaching positions
Actually, I think, I will stop here as I am beginning to scare myself!
Still… I wonder what such a list would look like? GK
I wonder what the results would have been in another area of contentious science, say human genetics or cloning?
Tying this altogether — if 10% of the population strongly believes this, then won’t it become the new consensus? (http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/07/27/tipping-points-and-beliefs/)
The internets, the toobz, and the googles are telling me that that quote is attributed to Abraham Lincoln.
Adriana Ortiz says:
posted this story twice under ice posting today. BTW what is really significant is that from what I can tell Google is suppressing this story under news “climate” or “global warming”, even “Rasmussen climate etc” doesn’t bring it up. This would be extremely distressful to Climate Team. I’m sure the team is on the phone to their pals at google to stifle this urgently.
While I don’t have much faith in Google, let’s at least be fair – this was published only yesterday, and it takes the Googlebots sometimes many days to pick up and index new pages. The results on a web search are not necessarily instantaneous.
Click on “News” and it’s the first hit.
Bystander says:
August 3, 2011 at 3:15 pm
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,
So that is acceptable to you Bystander?
If they were drug safety researchers would you still accept it?
You feel that climate ‘scientists’ should be held to lower ethical standards then?
chris1958 says:
August 3, 2011 at 7:38 pm
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.”
You changed the subject from news broadcasts to Warmista websites. I will concede that the question is ambiguous for Warmista, but so is reality.
Mebbe would should just start greeting climate boffins with “Hello liar liar pants on fire!”
re; Google suppressing the story
I think that’s nonsense.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=&q=%2269%25+Say+It%E2%80%99s+Likely+Scientists+Have+Falsified+Global+Warming+Research%22&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS290US290&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS290US290&q=69%25+Say+It%E2%80%99s+Likely+Scientists+Have+Falsified+Global+Warming+Research&sa=X&ei=cd46TreZEIGx0AGCmZXKAw&ved=0CCAQgwM&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=ce1bbbb46c45a76&biw=1280&bih=615
The third hit from the top on Google web search is this article on Watt’s Up With That. There are thousands of hits on it already.
Conspicuously absent are hits Google news search. I don’t believe that’s particularly unusual until the AP picks it up, if they pick it up at all. It’s not google’s fault when major news outlets don’t choose to carry the story.
Dave Springer … if Google News drops WUWT from the sites scraped AND only uses biased media like AP, then Google is censoring.
Smokey says:
From the Climategate leak [Harry_read_me file]:
“Here, the expected 1990 – 2003 period is missing so the correlations aren’t so hot!
Yet the WMO codes and station names /locations are identical (or close).
What the hell is supposed to happen here?
Oh, yeah – there is no ‘supposed’, I can make it up. So I have.”
While I have not yet read all of the files, I personally find that one statement to be the most damning.
Andrew Harding – It was Abraham Lincoln .
Every time I write off the American people as being too stupid to breathe, they come back and get intelligence! It is a good sign.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
In equally important polling news (/sarc), coming from an innovative online method, it has been reported that Internet Explorer users ‘have below-average IQ’.
This being a hoax has been discussed. More concerning to me, and somewhat relevant to the topic of CAGW, is how easily the news media was duped with this story. No real credibility left, but they’re considered credible by so many. And even after incidents like this, they suffer no stains to their reputation at large.
I WAS talking about news media, right?
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
August 3, 2011 at 4:00 pm
“In equally important polling news (/sarc), coming from an innovative online method, it has been reported that Internet Explorer users ‘have below-average IQ’.”
What about me? I use both. I use windows explorer with security set to high with the exception of allowing already installed ActiveX controls to run and files can be downloaded. This allows me to view pdf files online and most websites work fine with security settings that high and I don’t get a single damn one of those annoying google interstitial advertisements, cant be redirected to hell and back, or anything else that’s even mildly annoying or intrusive. The few websites that don’t work properly under those high security settings that’s what I use Firefox for. I run that with default security settings.
This poll has no way of including people like me who have multiple browsers preconfigured for different situations. Which browser they found me using would be totally dependent on whether the test could be done using Internet Explorer with highest security setting. If not I’d have used FireFox to take the test.
My motto is dont believe everything your told. Just think it through and decided what you believe and do base it off of what politicians, TV, or friends are telling you.
I read as many replies here as I could and was surprised to see that most people agree with the polls. There have been ideological shifts in the US and UK that I would never have thought possible years ago. In 2008, people were very much in favor of socialism and ready to put the breaks on unfettered greed. This has since grown into a general distrust of the authorities. The next good step would be to back a third-party candidate in the US in 2012, because our two choices have been really narrow and limited in mental scope: religious fervor and panic on one side, cold intellect and weakness on the other.
P. Walker and Andrew Harding;
That’s a butchered version. Here’s the real deal.
“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time. But you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”
Good thought, but garbled grammar.
Let me fix it:
@bobd Dunning-Kruger effect? Yes, I agree that the opposition to anthropogenic global warming does seem to have an enormous number of people who are delusional or irrational.
@MorinMoss you can believe it whichever way you want, but I think you have got it backwards.
The only people who seem to be totally convinced that the science is settked are the pro ADW “experts” and I use that term very loosely.
I find that most “deniers” of the faith have an open mind and do not accept the wisdom without proof.
[Snip. Multiple use of “deniers” label. Read the site Policy and abide by it. ~dbs, mod.]