People send me stuff.
I’m sure readers remember the billboard put out by Heartland that didn’t go over at all well with many. Here’s another asking “Who do you believe”?
It’s a tough question for the pro AGW side, and an easy answer for everyone else. You can choose your answer in the poll.
This billboard was done by CFACT.org
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
That was a tough question, I instinctively disbelieve anything either of them say.
However on that one quote alone, Obama was correct.
Um, they are politicians. Believing and that profession are almost mutually exclusive.
The question should read “which statement is accurate?” considering politicians are politically motivated.
For the full picture include Obama calling skeptics “Deniers” Nothing else need to be said wrt his credibility.
Much as it pains me to do this, I had to agree with Obama. (Oh, that hurt)
Wow! Obama got something right!
Even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Obama, not that often, but once in a while.
Clearly, in this case, President Obama is right.
I voted “neither.”
Response to BO: at this point, we can’t even attribute global warming to global warming.
I’m sorry – the banner asks WHO do you believe, not “which statement do you think is true?”
As a result, I opted to vote for “neither one”. Ya get that. 🙂
If Obama’s lips are moving, you can bet the farm he is lying. Same for Gore, but at least he isn’t also violating his oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution at every conceivable opportunity.
I’m not clear why the two statements are in conflict. Even if we don’t attribute individual weather events to “global warming,” it would still be true that storms such as Sandy are a “disturbing sign” of what would happen more frequently if the world does in fact get warmer. Perhaps I am missing the point, or my dog whistle ears are not sensitive enough to hear the implied message. Can someone spell it out for me?
I believe both. It was a disturbing sign of what will happen to the sandbanks people built their houses on the next time they’ll be washed over. And I believe Obama – no, hasn’t anything to do with Global Warming (hasn’t warmed the last 17 years so how could it).
Actually, Al may be right as the planet returns to it’s normal, cyclical weather patterns. Less wind shear where the tropical cyclones form (i.e. a return to the temps of the 1960’s and 1970’s) will bring the Hurricanes that people who remember those decades. And the mantra during those decades wasn’t global warming even though real hurricanes were actually making landfall on Long Island, not tropical storms).
At the moment it is 62:1 Obama over Gore (Perhaps Gore has voted for himself?).
Curses! I had to vote for Obama.
I believe Ken Hall has it right
President Obama’s statement is correct “We can’t attribute any particular weather event to global warming”. But, “who do You believe” is the question! hmm, that’s a tough one.
In that quote, Obama is correct. But I adhere to that assertion for reasons that have nothing to do with whether I believe a politician.
Taking their actions and not just their words; neither hands down.
Obama would say anything to get votes. Now that he won the election, he’s going to “evolve” and say that it’s our fault for global warming.
This billboard is a loss-leader question, plain as the nose on your face. It is designed to collect information for another purpose altogether. I’m not biting, even on the WUWT pole.
That’s a tough question. If Global Average Surface Temperature were to rise 8 to 10 C, then I have no doubt that weather patterns would be affected and individual storms could become more intense.. The real question is: does a rise in Global Average Surface Temperature from 288K to 288.8K make any discernible difference in storm intensity? I’ve not seen any evidence to suggest it does. Gore’s quote is clearly wrong. If Obama’s quote were, “we can’t attribute any *recent* weather event to global warming”, then I would agree with that. But if significant global warning were to happen (I don’t think it will), then I think we could attribute weather events to global warming.
Logicially, it’s possible to answer “both,” i.e., a storm could be a “sign of things to come” even if, as one event, it’s not “attibutable to global warming.” It is perfectly logical to answer “neither,” though I suspect it would be a lonely position indeed. Both the poll and, especially, the billboard, commit the fallacy of the false dilemma.
One thing that seems to corelate well with Glowball Warming . . . lying, thieving, cheating, clueless politicians getting rich off the scam.