Yesterday, there was wailing and gnashing of teeth among the usual climate activists over the lack of interest in climate change during the presidential debate. Serial climate doomster Joe Romm, of the hopelessly compromised “Climate Progress’, who has been outed in the Wikileaks Podesta emails as nothing but a paid political operative, called the lack of interest by moderators “criminally irresponsible’, which is hilarious in the context of his own behavior.
On Twitter, admitted document thief and poseur Dr. Peter Gleick also had some sharp words:
Dear debate moderators,#Climate change is a far worse threat to us than terrorism, economy, or anything else.
ASK A DAMN CLIMATE QUESTION.— Peter Gleick 🇺🇸 (@PeterGleick) October 5, 2016
Even the NYT got into the act:
The failure to ask about climate change during any of the debates "is a failure of journalism" https://t.co/HOfRd2Irsu via @nytopinion
— The New York Times (@nytimes) October 20, 2016
In September, the League of Conservation voters, got into bed with some other politically motivated doomsters (like Daily Kos, Fiends of the Earth, and Media Matters) to get a petition with over 100,000 signatures asking, nay, demanding that climate be given attention during the debate.
Except, LCV was still running this petition as of this writing today (linked off their main page at http://lcv.org seen here:
….and somehow, they only seem to have gathered 22,091 signatures according to the signup page linked from the LCV website:
Obviously, LCV must be using the time honored climate science method of using adjusted data in their press release. Either that, or they wrote the press release to say 100,000 before they actually gathered signatures. In their press release, (archived here) they don’t actually give any data, and I’m sure Steve Mosher will be on their case soon, demanding they publish their data and methodology.
It is pretty lame when even the far left can’t rouse their base and has to inflate numbers. But, given what we’ve seen from Wikileaks lately, I suppose this inflation of climate numbers is more of a modus operandii than we previously realized. Sadly, it looks like the American Geophysical Union (AGU) got suckered in with that LCV press release and didn’t bother to check the numbers. Well, that’s today’s science method, I guess.
Well, geniuses, here’s why there were no debate questions about climate, and it isn’t some failure of the already irresponsible journalism practiced there. It’s just that beyond the climate zealots, in the real world, few people care anymore.There are far bigger problems to be worried about.
In this survey of U.S. Voters, climate change came in dead last:
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation h/t to “PCGamerLT” on Twitter
Other polls show similar lack of interest in climate. For example, this worldwide poll conducted by the U.N. that we covered on WUWT in 2015, still ranks climate dead last in 2016 with almost 10 million votes cast:
Oh, the pain!
But most telling is this September 2016 poll from the Associated Press that says:
When asked whether they would support a monthly fee on their electric bill to combat climate change, 42 percent of respondents are unwilling to pay even $1. Twenty-nine percent would pay $20, an amount roughly equivalent to what the federal government estimates the damages from climate change would be on each household. And, 20 percent indicate they are willing to pay $50 per month.
Almost half say not one dollar, with nearly a third saying it’s only worth the cost of lunch in most cities ($20). Yet somehow, failing to ask climate questions in the presidential debate were a “failure of journalism” and “criminally irresponsible”.
Riiiight.
Why do politicians lie? If they didn’t they would be required to work for a living. Just how many people would vote for someone who said he/she would raise the voters taxes by 5%?
At least I got a new one for my “Climate crap” list – “Climate questions”:
Climate action
Climate agenda
Climate agreement
Climate anxiety counseling
Climate blueprint
Climate budget
Climate catastrophe
Climate challenge
Climate chaos
Climate consciousness
Climate coyness
Climate crisis
Climate danger
Climate d*nier
Climate disruption
Climate fatigue
Climate finance
Climate justice
Climate mitigation
Climate policy
Climate punishment
Climate questions
Climate refugees
Climate resilience
Climate risk
Climate scenarios
Climate timeline
Climate weirding
My current favorite: “climate loss”.
Thanks, added.
I can’t see “Climate anxiety counseling” being supplanted as my fave though.
The 5% [Kaiser Family Foundation] that indicate that climate change is the most important issue regarding the vote seems the astonishing thing.
That’s a whole lot of people in need of counseling.
The people bothering to sign only amounted to 0.575% of the population of the US. 10 times less. Maybe most Americans aren’t crazy after all. We will always have people willing to drink acid laced Kool aid, but that doesn’t mean I will. And it seems that not everyone that did go that route was willing, especially the children.
Whether it’s here or the afterlife, most of us don’t want to just live, but thrive.
” the highest honor in heaven is to be asked to work “
100,000 is of course the more accurate number as it was developed by computer model. Actual measured data will have to be re-calibrated to better reflect reality.
Is there a 30-year pollatology baseline? Is there an anomaly calculation? Inquiring minds want to know! /sarc
The difference between what you read in the twittersphere, on the blogs or get fed by the MSM, compared to what ordinary people say, is astonishing.
They are pretty cynical, anyway, and renewable energy – well ‘it dont work, do it, mate?’ is becoming the sort of response one gets.
Of course there is little interest among voters. Because the we electorate is stupid. Just ask the left,they will confirm. Funny how these morons can ignore an actual consensus.
Climate change issues is one of the most important issues for me regarding this election, but not because action is warranted, but because anyone who thinks it is demonstrates exceptionally poor judgement and is not deserving of my vote.
Does the statistic showing that 5% of voters think climate change is a deciding issue consider the fact that many of these voters might think that addressing false claims of a climate catastrophe is where the danger is?
Exactly. Regardless of whether the phony climate change scam is on most peoples radar or not, the crooked politicians keep inching their destructive and even murderous climate change policies ahead.
Anthony I think what you’re missing here is that for true believers this is just more evidence that they’re the only ones who care about saving the planet. Instead of telling them that most people don’t really care about climate change as a political issue it just reinforces their existing beliefs that they need to save the world because they are the only ones that truly understand the threat.
The point is that political support for the Warmunist movement is tanking badly. They have come up with many, convoluted “reasons” for this failure, including the idea that they just haven’t “communicated climate change” well enough, and/or that the “fossil fuel industry-supported D nilists” have managed to sway people, but they are only fooling themselves.
That’s a valid point.
http://www.minddisorders.com/Br-Del/Delusions.html
Where’s the funny part? I was expecting a cartoon by Josh.
A climate question would have been a nice chance for Trump to say how much Hillary will raise your electricity bills.
“Twenty-nine percent would pay [per month] $20, an amount roughly equivalent to what the federal government estimates the damages from climate change would be on each household.”
And “climate change” is supposed to be the end of the freakin’ world? Twenty dollars a month??? That’s the catastrophe aversion of which requires [your choice of expletive] crippling industrial civilization? And just to add criminal insanity to dementia, the GHG reduction regulation already in place – let alone what’s pending or proposed – costs more that that, arguably far more.
NYT “failure of journalism”” …. talking about themselves
I think Hillary’s plans for war with Russia are a teensy bit more worrying than a possible 0.2 degree increase in temperature.
How many of you have heard about this?
http://truepundit.com/pentagon-hillary-clinton-should-be-arrested-for-leaking-top-secret-nuclear-intelligence-on-national-tv/
“Hillary Clinton divulged Top Secret nuclear security intelligence to tens of millions of worldwide television audience viewers Wednesday night during the third presidential debate, according to high-ranking Department of Defense personnel.
Clinton, responding to opponent Donald Trump and a question posed by debate moderator Chris Wallace, boasted specific and “damaging” details about the United States’ nuclear response time to retaliate during a nuclear attack. Clinton said:
“But here’s the deal. The bottom line on nuclear weapons is that when the president gives the order, it must be followed. There’s about xxxx minutes between the order being given and the people responsible for launching nuclear weapons to do so.” –Hillary Clinton, National TV Appearance
“Secretary Clinton proved tonight she is unfit to be commander-in-chief,” a top-ranking DOD intelligence source said. “What she did compromises our national security. She is cavalier and reckless and in my opinion should be detained and questioned so we can unravel why she did what she did.”
According to Pentagon sources, the information Clinton disseminated publicly is Top Secret intelligence governed under the U.S. Special Access Program (SAP) which dictates safeguards and protocols for accessing and discussing highly classified and Top Secret intelligence. The specific details of the country’s nuclear response time discussed by Clinton, sources said, are only known by a handful of individuals outside top military brass, including the following “need-to-know” (NTK) officials:…
“Sources said late Wednesday Clinton likely violated two different types of Dept. of Defense SAP protocols. Since nuclear response is part of the sensitive national plan for nuclear war operations, all of its schematics are covered under both “Intelligence SAPs” and “Operation and Support SAPs,” sources said. Both contain Top Secret information.
“Targeting options by ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missiles), air or sea, launch order, launch procedures and response are some of the most secretly guarded tenets of national security and nuclear war policy,” a Pentagon source said. “It’s truly incredible that (nuclear) response time as part of an ERO (Emergency Response Option) is now out there in the public domain to our adversaries.”
U.S. Defense sources said according to developed U.S. counterintelligence, military officials in China, North Korea, Syria, Russia, Iran and even actors like ISIS had no previous definitive intelligence to determine the U.S. nuclear response time, especially during an ERO, prior to Clinton’s admission Wednesday night. Sources reluctantly acknowledged her calculations were accurate.”
Jail is much to good for this treasonous harridan. Her deserved fate should include no last cigarette or blindfold.
mods I recently posted a comment was it trapped in a filter?
http://truepundit.com/pentagon-hillary-clinton-should-be-arrested-for-leaking-top-secret-nuclear-intelligence-on-national-tv/
..I still don’t understand why she even mentioned it !!
Trump knows climate change is a hoax,problem is he doesn t seem to know the how when and where of how the con was made.if he did he could tell voters how the fight agaainst it is useless and will raise the cost of everything. A huge tax on us all, which we are already paying
Al Gore has been sighted (with Hillary). Grab your coat.
Same sore-ass loser who alleged election fraud in 2000.
But That Is Not What Is Important Right Now, says the press.
I thought you were going to say grab your coat, it’s going to get cold. The ” Gore effect”.
Why pick on climate? We could make a long list of other religions no one’s asking about, even Islam.
We should elect Trump because he’s impeachable. Hillary’s unimpeachable. Ask about that.
You can’t have a questions about climate change in a debate. Haven’t you heard? The debate is over!