Guest essay by Eric Worrall
According to Dana Nuccitelli, climate “denial” will end when the current generation of “deniers” die off. But Nuccitelli glosses over why older people are so skeptical of climate claims.
A generation gap, when it comes to climate change?
By Dana Nuccitelli, March 15, 2019(Editor’s Note: Judging from recent letters to the editor, there seem to be a lot of young people who will be skipping class today to go on strike against climate change. And a lot of older people who are accusing them of just wanting an excuse to walk out of school on a Friday. It seems that there is a climate change generation gap going on. So we thought this would be a good time to re-print this 2016 article by climate scientist Dana Nuccitelli, about this little-acknowledged angle to the climate change discussion.)
A record number of Americans now view global warming as a serious threatand blame human activities as the cause. But there is apparently a generation gap out there when it comes to accepting the scientific evidence. And an ethnic gap, a gender gap, and a gap in political leaning—along with whether one can be considered one of society’s “haves” or “have nots.” So, who are these climate deniers? What is their profile?
A June 2014 Washington Post-ABC News poll asked a nationally representative sample of American respondents several questions about their support for climate policies. Specifically, those surveyed were asked whether they would be in favor of government greenhouse gas regulations that increased their monthly energy expenses by $20 per month. Overall, 63 percent of respondents expressed support for the proposed policy, including 51 percent of Republicans and 71 percent of Democrats.
Interestingly, there was a significant age gap among the responses. For Democrats under age 40, support for the policy proposal was 78 percent, as compared to 62 percent over age 65. Among Republicans, 61 percent under age 50 supported the proposed regulations, as compared to 44 percent over age 50. According to a Pew Research Center survey, younger Americans are also more likely to correctly answer that the planet is warming and that this warming is primarily due to human activities.
The climate acceptance age gap. Unfortunately, there’s been little research that investigates the causes of this age gap. It is tempting to speculate that perhaps younger minds are more open to new ideas—such as the potential for humans to alter something as large and complex as the Earth’s climate, ushering in a new “Anthropocene” geological epoch. Perhaps our educational system is succeeding in teaching these concepts to younger generations.
…
Climate denial caters to a small and dwindling population of old, white, conservative, American men. As with global temperatures, American acceptance of and concern about human-caused climate change is currently at record levels, and is certain to keep rising in the long-term.
Read more: https://thebulletin.org/2019/03/a-generation-gap-when-it-comes-to-climate-change/
The cutoff at age 40 seems to be quite sharp – a 17% difference for Republicans, 16% for Democrats. Although Democrat belief in climate alarm is stronger, the difference is almost as pronounced amongst Democrats as it is amongst Republicans.
One possible explanation for the skepticism amongst older people is the 1970s global cooling scare.
In 1978, Leonard Nimoy‘s iconic documentary “In Search of – The Coming Ice Age” aired on TVs across the world. I clearly remember seeing it on TV in Australia, my parents were worried about global cooling, everyone was talking about it.
Nimoy’s “In Search Of” series was wildly popular at the time, the Ice Age episode was arguably the most talked about episode of the entire series.
1978 was just over 40 years ago.
Older people are more skeptical because we’ve heard this nonsense before – but with the plot reversed, with human induced global cooling the villain, rather than global warming.
Nuccitelli wonders why there has been “little research that investigates the causes of this gap”, why older people’s lack of acceptance of climate messages hasn’t received more attention – though Dana leaps to the conclusion that the the skeptic demographic is ageing, despite not understanding the reasons for their skepticism.
It seems implausible that the gap has received so little attention, given the strong political motivation to increase acceptance of the need for more taxes to save the planet. More likely researchers know what the problem is, and don’t want to draw attention to it.
What does this mean for the future? Given climate scientists’ track record of disappointment with their defective predictions, I suspect the younger generation’s “In Search of” moment is rapidly approaching, at least for the older members of that demographic. Years of watching corrupt politicians trouser political donations from friends who are recipients of government climate subsidies and loan guarantees, and failed scientific prediction after failed prediction, can wear at even the most accepting minds.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Yes I haven’t seen the Nimoy video for a while but I think I remember one quote like ”scientists have been recording falling temps for 30 years” , or words to that effect. How quickly we (humans) forget!
It’s at 82 years old , I remember when.
It is easy to drive the statist like Dana of the world crazy. Simply ask, “Did President Trump cause global warming, or did global warming cause President Trump?”
Then watch their faces contort as their brain freezes, unable to form a cogent response, doubly true because you said PRESIDENT Trump twice in one sentence, they walk away never to speak to you again,
leaving your world a little more peaceful.
NEWS FLASH Dana,
If you are over 20 and not a Democrat, you don’t think with your heart.
If you are over 40 and still a Democrat, you have learned nothing from lifes lessons and don’t think with your head.
Luckily they have managed to “correct” that embarrassing 30 years of cooling. Now it is just a “plateau”.
It’s amazing to here the same media presentation the same “climate experts” logging data measuring and projecting linear “trends” of a few decades centuries or millennia into the future, yet the story line is the complete opposite.
Maybe unwarrented extrapolation of the linear trend is not the ultimate statistical prediction tool after all.
Its not surprising that an entertainment industry that is totally devoid of ideas has rebooted “In Search of…”
And, being even more devoid of casting ides, the “New Spock” is hosting.
I will bet a kabillion bitcoins that they will NOT have a “Coming Ice Age” episode.
“But there is apparently a generation gap out there when it comes to accepting the scientific evidence”
Yes sir. They must accept the scientific evidence. Here are two links. They present the scientific evidence that everyone had a moral obligation to accept.
https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/12/03/tcruparody/
https://tambonthongchai.com/2018/11/26/ecsparody/
Come on, you know those are done using cherry picked data. They started the murder data in 1898 to avoid the the Whitechapel killings in 1888. Talk about dodgy data just to avoid the “Ripper” spike.
Oops
I didn’t know you were here John. I would have been more careful had I known.
The “gap” is in critical thinking ability and education. As long as the youth insist on maintaining Stupid and ignorant while getting all news from Comedy Central we are doomed
30 years ago, we were told that climate disaster awaited us as sure as death and taxes if we didn’t radically change our energy use within the next 10 years. 30 years later, we’re told we have 12 years. we may be old now, but we’re not senile yet.
One of the major reasons older folk are suspect of the alarm is that they remember well the ridiculous claims about a population bomb, which was much more believable than a global warming-induced catastrophe. “Hard winters” are only good for killing pine beetles. The rest of the biosphere, not so much.
Glaciations are bad for children and other living things.
(Life-veterans will remember that slogan in a slightly different form.)
EXACTLY.
In addition to being old enough to remember all the old – and contradictory – scares, none of which came to pass, we remember the various iterations of the present global warming narrative, including goodbye, snow and global-warming-causes-increased-snow. But more importantly, we also learned history in school. It’s a shame that as a result of racism, old non-white people received poor education that didn’t cover history very well. But history is history, and in this case, the climate history is very well documented – it’s not something that “deniers” or “denialists” or whatever skeptics are called these days conjured up after the fact. Prior climate shifts are part of the historical record, and there is voluminous physical evidence of what grew where, and who could travel where, and when, and how, and where massive droughts occurred, all through the MWP and LIA. These events have been accepted since they occurred – and while we’re old, we’re not 1,000 years old!
The FACT of a MWP that was centuries long and as warm as it is today doesn’t mean that the present warmth wasn’t caused by us. But it does mean that the present warmth isn’t unprecedented, and thus cannot be assumed to be on the verge of causing a calamity that resembles a Hollywood movie. No such calamity occurred 1,000 years ago.
This episode also speaks to the credibility of the people trying to erase or re-write history. Look – the climate was not a political issue 1,000 years ago. There’s no reason for people to have faked all the evidence of warmer temperatures. And conservatives and oil company executives don’t have time machines. The people who tell us that we can expect more “bomb cyclones snowstorms” are the same people who said that snow would be something we would tell our grandkids about. But they’re also the same people who are actively trying to rewrite history. How can we believe the predictions of people who lie about the past?
Wrong again Nutter. I’ve been a “climate denier” ever since I was a young, white, liberal, Scotsman. I”ve since grown up and become a conservative.
It’s not the climate that we deny, that would be silly. What the alarmists called ‘denial’ is the refusal by skeptics to accept the IPCC as the arbiter of what is and what is not climate science.
It’s irresponsible to allow a self serving bureaucracy with an agenda that requires significant man made climate change to have this much control over the science that will either support or preclude their reason to existence. Why isn’t this obvious conflict of interest first page news?
FYI, when I was young and stupid, the climate hysteria was just getting of the ground and as a freshly minted scientist, who was I to question other ostensibly intelligent scientists. That is until I did my own due diligence and I’ve been a skeptic ever since.
The only thing that could change my mind is a rational answer to the following question.
How can the climate system tell the difference between the next Joule per second of solar forcing and all the others so that the next one results in the 4.4 Joules per second of surface emissions required by an 0.8C temperature increase while all the others result in surface emissions of only about 1.62 Joules per second?
It’s not rocket science, it’s barely even simple arithmetic.
Yet more preaching to the choir.
Anthony, please slow the flow of this type of posts.
rgds
Richard Hill
Don’t read if it bores/offends you.
I appreciate each and every post
Why does it so offend you to be reminded of the Great Cooling Scare of the 1970’s?
He’s not offended, he’s just a “concern troll”. Don’t feed the trolls.
“According to a Pew Research Center survey, younger Americans are also more likely to correctly answer that the planet is warming and that this warming is primarily due to human activities.”
No bias here. Just hurling elephants with a side of dog-whistle bigotry.
White”. As if melanin content is a critical factor in understanding Climate.
“Male”. “Old”, ‘Conservative”. Why not throw in “Christian” and attach all of the trigger words to get the full emotional reaction desired?
Good to see that the spirit of “The Eternal Jew” is still alive and well in the hearts of Leftists Propagandists.
Three of my four girls were in High School in the year(s) after Gore’s movie was released. In one semester they were forced to watch it FIVE times in different teachers classes. Luckily they had a educated dad who sat down with them and went over the errors and propaganda. Sadly most kids did not have that grounding.
In another thread, I pointed out that as an old white guy, I’m looking forward when an entire generation realizes its been hoodwinked. I’ll live large on the schadenfreude because I’m a bad man (I’m told this every day in many ways, might was well milk it).
In the 80s I had to read “Entropy” and “The Fate of the Earth”. We had to watch “The Day After”, which is about nuclear war (the big thing back then), not “The Day After Tomorrow”, or DAFT, which was somehow made even though by the year 2000, even if we hadn’t blown ourselves up, we were going to all starve, or get killed by bugs, or run out of oil, or…or…or.
They will never know. It will just quietly go away.
Hmm, old, white, conservative Americans. Well, Dana, 3 for 4 isn’t too bad.
Maybe it’s because we still have the ability to think independently, having avoided the propaganda in schools. Maybe its because, as said above, we remember “global cooling”. Maybe it’s because some of us have a technical education (without propaganda) and can actually see through the rubbish. Maybe it’s because some of us took thermodynamics and actually learned it. Maybe it’s because we read the ClimateGate E-Mails and see the perfidy behind the “settled science”.
Excellent ,good to know there are others who see ” the perfidy”. Having a fresh look at the evidence by the “Red Team” may allow others to ” see through the rubbish”.
Maybe it’s at least partially due to the fact that those of us who have now reached an advanced age came from parents and grandparents and had teachers in school who had all lived through the “reality” of the great depression and many of whom had experienced the reality of combat action in WWII. Those fading memories that were passed on to me seem to harbor no rosy scenario delusions or illusions about life on planet Earth.
At virtually the exact time that I was being born and coming into this world, my Dad was marching into the city of Naples, Italy on the day that the Nazis surrendered the city to the allied forces.
It has nothing to do with age or race, but is the consequence of a far left leaning media with it’s constant drone of alarmist propaganda in support of its political benefactors. It’s exactly as Goebbels said. Repeat the same big lie over and over and people start to believe it and there’s no bigger lie than the feigned support for climate alarmism.
I hope to outlast the older white guy alarmists like Gore, Nye, Wirth, Hansen, Ehrlich, Mann, Oreskes, McKibben, etc. who are all older and whiter than me. Nuccitelli ought to look into a mirror himself.
But I think the important thing is the truth will out.
I think you’ll find Hansen is “black” actually. According to liberal assessments where Colin Powell was penned to be a potential “black” presidential hopeful.
Bill McKibben bemoan not being black, so he could play the victim role. So that probable means he self-identifies as being at least non white.
If any of those named looked in a mirror they would see no reflection.
Naomi Oreskes is an older white guy? Are you being naughty, RS?
That’s how we identify it.
Must have been a slip, perhaps from my inner Roseanne.
I think that Reality will out…
Maybe it’s just that old, white, conservative, American men are the hardest people to fool.
It’s not that their harder to fool, it’s that they have been fooled before.
Exactly. The longer one has lived the more failed predictions of every kind and sort have been experienced. Also, the longer one has lived the more one understands just how biased people, including PhD’s, can be when their professional and financial interests are involved.
It’s not that their harder to fool, it’s that they have been fooled before.
for some reason that brought to mine that famous (mis)statement “fool me once, shame on…shame on you. Fool me — you can’t get fooled again”
If “Climate Denial caters to old, white, conservative, American Men”, what does Climate Alarmism cater to?
Young white gullible alarmist American women?
AOC……
#metoo
ITYM Climate Hysteria.
It’s reasonable to be alarmed about something. It’s unreasonable to be hysterical about it. Which do you think describes them? Alarmed or hysterical?
There is nothing wrong with having fears. The challenge is to be afraid of the appropriate things.
As I’ve said before: if more people were better at math, they’d be less afraid of most things the MSM and politicians (sorry for the redundancy) were going on about, and perhaps a little more afraid of some other things.
Seriously, I’d put CAWG well behind “super volcano popping off” or “electrical grid failing widely”, but that’s just from 30 years of using healthcare statistics day-to-day, what do I know?
The simple minded.
Speaking of those who adore old white guys-
‘on Tuesday the deputy governor of the Reserve Bank, Guy Debelle, delivered a speech titled “Climate Change and the Economy”.
It was a landmark speech that sets a precise point from which you can say you are with reality or you have thrown in your lot with idiocy and avarice.
The RBA is not an institution given to radicalism, and so when one of its most senior members states that “both the physical impact of climate change and the transition are likely to have first-order economic effects” it’s a big deal.’
https://www.msn.com/en-au/money/markets/the-rba-has-sounded-the-climate-change-alarm-time-to-sit-up-and-take-notice/ar-BBURNj6
‘Leadership requires boldness – a boldness now supported by very clear warnings from our most sober economic institution.’
Whenever it suits eh Dana, et al?
“old, white, conservative, American men”
Where do middle aged, white, non-aligned Australian men fit in? Some of them don’t exactly fit in CAGW believer’s camp despite what our Reserve Bank says. Droughts and floods at the same time. I would like to see that.
Oh well back to “the rotting carcass of climate-change denialism” Not for profit mind you, just a stubborn reluctance to accept that .004% of anything can push the remaining 99.996% around.
…until you realize that the “.004%” are climate alarmists who are attempting to push the “99.996%” around (and perhaps right off a cliff). They may not succeed, yet the effort will not be without be without significant unnecessary costs of self-imposed hobbles.
Well, my kids all grew up, went to college (saw through the liberal garbage, too. phhhewww!), got jobs, started traveling on their own, decided that Mother Earth is doing just fine, and settled down. All the disaster scenarios they had been afraid of, the bad stuff they were taught they were doing, hasn’t happened in their real lives. They’ve figured it out.
You want to see a generation gap?
Put little boy Dana and any set of current “climate scientists” up against Einstein and Feynman.
There’s your “generation gap” (and both Einstein & Feynman actually have Nobel prizes).
Einstein and Feynman would be smart enough to see the danger of global warming. As would Galileo.
I don’t know why you think that these titans would support the fossil fuel agenda.
Both Einstein and Feynman are noted for saying that just ONE fact that disagrees with the hypothesis is sufficient to shoot down the idea completely.
The Sun is a variable star, not as wild as the Mira variables but still it can vary by a few percent.
Back in the 70s we had the environmental movement that mandated we clean up the atmosphere. All those sulfate particles thrown high in the air were unhealthy and blocked the beneficial sunlight. So we had a massive clean up effort that removed the radiation blocking sulfates, an lo the sunlight reached the surface and was adsorbed. Thus providing the global warmers with “proof” that the end was neigh. Forget the fact that astronomers had discovered that just about every planet and moon with an atmosphere was warming, and that there was more CO2 above every square foot on Mars than there was on Earth, but no run away heat action.
I am a real scientist (chemist) so I try to assign cause and effect. Manmade Global Warming is real, we did it by removing the sulfates which some propose to reverse to stop the warming that has not happened in over 20 years but which is forecast to happen real soon
One error found in the hypothesis, thus any true scientist is compelled to reject the hypothesis as stated.
“true scientist”.
John Brookes thinks he has paranormal powers.
John, what is the “fossil fuel agenda” and where can I find it?
No-one is forced to use fossil fuels, why not try living without using anything produced by or with fossil fuels for just one day.
The “fossil fuel agenda” is to find, produce and sell coal, oil and natural gas to consumers for the purpose of generating a profit for the owners of fossil fuel companies. If Einstein and Feynman drove automobiles, heated their homes and made use of electricity, they supported the fossil fuel agenda… 😉
Gee, and I thought all along that the Fossil Fuel agenda was to sell, at a reasonable profit, reliable affordable energy sources to the general public
Indeed. Galileo especially knew the dangers of religious orthodoxy standing up against a model that was shown to be supported by the data as the”no perceptible human effect on the climate” model is…
And Einstein and Feynman would have been familiar with Karl Poppers work and have defined AGW as ‘metaphysics’ and not science at all.
The great danger of ‘climate change’ is that it has dragged science into the gutter and stamped on its face, and when science – proper science – identifies a real crisis the reaction is likely to be a chortle and ‘climate science is it? hahahahaha!’.
Propaganda is beneath us all, and consuming it diminishes the consumer. As such, romanticizing Galileo helps nobody. Galileo ran aground *because* he tried to invoke religious orthodoxy; which incidentally was actually why he was censured.
Indeed, his theory was, in loose generalities, correct. Even so, his case has a number of flaws:
1. He demanded that the heliocentric orbits were perfect circles. This actually made for some glaring holes in calculating the celestial position of the planets. Galileo’s model was thus, comparatively inconsistent with the observational data in his day.
2. Pope Urban VIII was no slouch in mathematics and the sciences. He was, after all, the guy paying for Galileo’s research. That said, the greatest case against heliocentrism was the observational lack of a parallax, not some appeal to scripture or doctrine.
3. Having no rebuttal to the issue of the missing parallax, he published anyways. Not only that, he included an insult to Pope Urban VIII (again, the guy paying his bills).
It’s not like Galileo was the only scientist on the payroll, nor was the political scene in Rome purely religious. There were factions and rivalries. Even the Pope’s own position wasn’t secure – there was an attempt to unseat him in favor of the Spanish faction. In such an unstable environment, making unnecessary enemies does not make one a martyr.
Saint Galileo insisted on circles even Kepler had proved it was ellipses…
John Brookes
Because they, like you, would be unable to find a credible, empirical, scientifically acceptable study which demonstrates atmospheric CO2 causes the planet to warm. That’s not one, ever.
They would also observe, as NASA has, that the planet has greened by 14% in 35 years of satellite observations, 70% of which is the only observable manifestation directly attributable to increased atmospheric CO2 and likely believe that, on balance, what little warming there has been is entirely beneficial.
Imagine that. According to one contributing NASA scientist, that’s two continents the size of mainland USA worth of extra vegetation thanks to an increase of ~50 ppm Atmospheric CO2.
The only danger were at risk of running is that over the next 35 years and hopefully, another 50ppm increase of atmospheric CO2, is that we’ll be mowing our lawns every day!
They would also doubtless conclude, like Tyndall (remember him – the first man to correctly identify the radiative qualities of greenhouse gases) that water vapour is by far the dominant greenhouse gas (@ur momisugly~95% of all greenhouse gases, with CO2 ~3% and 0.04% of the atmosphere) and that man’s contribution to the atmosphere @ur momisugly~0.012% is inconsequential.
And the usual juvenile response to these obvious facts are that:
1) Bacteria can multiply from much lower concentrations – Except that bacteria is a self replicating organism, CO2 isn’t, and;
2) A small concentration of cyanide will kill a person – Except that CO2 is not poisonous to man at levels below 10,000 ppm atmospheric concentration.
Maintaining that atmospheric CO2 is the single control knob of the earth’s climate is the most preposterous concept ever conceived. It is not logical, it is not scientific nor has it been empirically demonstrated to acceptable scientific standards.
And, according to this puerile ABC News Poll, as Einstein and Feynman died old men they would entirely likely fall into the category of ‘deniers’ simply because they were old, white, men.
*SNIP* are you smoking?
Excellently written. May I borrow this for an appropriate moment in my next online discussion with alarmists? I would be happy to properly attribute it to you as the source, but I understand you may not wish to put a real email or name out in public. If you are ok with this let me know at biker@ourstrand.com.
” don’t know why you think that these titans would support the fossil fuel agenda.”
They would have no reason not to support using fossil fuels. There is no evidence that CO2 is causing any harm to the Earth’s climate. Einstein and Feynman would require some evidence before giving a “thumbs down” to fossil fuels.
I assume from your reply that you think there is such evidence. If that’s the case, then you ought to be able to provide that evidence to us, and then we might see things like you do. Give us one piece of evidence that establishes that CO2 is causing the Earth’s atmosphere to do things it wouldn’t otherwise do, and then all of us will stop being skeptical. Until that time, we remain skeptics.
I don’t expect that you will provide any evidence. You could prove me wrong. No, on second thought, you cannot, because there is no evidence for you to provide, so you can’t prove me wrong. But you can try.
Just an FYI:
If this is the same “John Brookes” who spent years at JoNova’s, don’t waste your time on him. He is a complete, true “believer” in the Anthropogenic Global Warming (or climate change — — whatever this week’s meme is) myth, so no amount of evidence or data will ever persuade him to open his mind and see the myth.
By the way, John, Anthony has graciously kept Bill Illis’ 750-million-year’ chart of CO2 vs. Temperature. It is kept under the “Reference Pages”, and ‘Paleoclimate’ tab. You can easily run a cross-correlation between CO2 and temperature, and report your results.
So funny how no one will ever report their correlation coefficient to me. I can’t help but wonder, is it because the two are anti-correlated that I never find out the “believers” result?
Regards to all,
The Depraved-est and MOST Deplorable-est Vlad the Impaler-est, a crashing-est bore-est and and even bigger-est bully-est (according to C.T. at JoNova)
John,
There’s no ‘fossil fuels’ agenda except if you mean the agenda of the IPCC/UNFCCC to gain global economic control by constraining energy supplies with green nonsense which is supported by demonizing the competition, i.e. the fossil fuel industry.
Mankind’s development of a fossil fuels based economy is exactly why you can sit at your keyboard and spout meaningless tripe whose only purpose is to make you feel good about yourself. Otherwise, you would be pursuing a primitive hunter/gatherer existence and most likely be dead by the ripe old age of 35.
Feynman considered the question and believed that CO2 was insignificant.
http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/I_40.html
Einstein and Feynman would recognize the “consensus science” surrounding climate science today for what it is… not science.
John Brookes: Congrats! Your appeal to authority has put us all in our place. I was very skeptical, but when you explained the titan’s position, it was an epiphany. How can I oppose Einstein and Feynman and (gulp) Galileo? If you could just post here more often, the whole skeptic crowd would simply melt away, I bet.
Did I mention I’m, like, the world’s worst gambler?
“At the beginning of 2012, the world population surpassed 7 billion with people under the age of 30 accounting for more than half of this number (50.5%). According to the survey, 89.7% of people under 30 lived in emerging and developing economies, particularly in the Middle East and Africa” (UNESCO).
A bit out of date but I doubt the general demographics have changed much.
My point is that 90% of the world’s under 30s most likely are profoundly disinterested in that First World obsession aka Climate Change™.
Since Dana Nuccitelli’s article in 2016 the global av. temperature has fallen ~0.4C.
Given the fact (reported here in Watts Up With That) that, in a UN poll of a fairly large number of people around the world (maybe 10,000,000, if I recall correctly), when asked about their priorities on a number of issues the UN presented to them, climate change/global warming finished dead last (this despite the fact that the UN tried to stack the deck by putting climate change/global warming at the top of their given list), I have my doubts about a “generation gap” anywhere else in the world save for Europe and the U.S. The rest of the world isn’t listening to our naive and gullible children. It takes enough just for the rest of the world to survive every day.
I also have my doubts about that WaPo poll from 2014 as well.
“Since Dana Nuccitelli’s article in 2016 the global av. temperature has fallen ~0.4C.”
Good point! CO2 is rising and temperatures are falling.
I’m ready for Spring! 🙂
Given the natural tendency of our progressive comrades to lie,project and get reality 180 degrees out of phase…Dana is right.
The Cult of Climate Crying is fading away,the 1st quality wailers have all cashed in and exited the stage.
Leaving the real second stringer,like Dana,s and true believers hanging.
Guess who are going to be the scapegoats of choice as the worm turns.
Poor Dana his moment of relevance..was never.
The Old Whiteman Angle is little acknowledged!!! He is blamed for everything for crysakes! A sinister report from Germany almost a decade ago was noting that the old folk in Germany had the highest carbon footprint, sending a chill down my spine!!
The unspoken crime really is creating the Age of Enlightenment/The Rennaisance and a few technological revolutions which gave us the modern world, the very things they want to scrap to return us to Dark Age serfdom.
The odd thing is, that all this diversity, ugly identity politics, a dozen genders, the invention of catastrophic athropo global warming, the scientists that support it, the heads of nearly all new left institutions, NGOs, the Champagne socialist billionaires, foundations, university heads and the faculty heads of the social sciences and global warming science are are all lefty white folk, mostly men, most of the protesters are white women…WUWT??
This ignominious group with their patronizing social revolution and so-called standing up for diversity are witlessly imbued with the most insidious form of racism which is expressed in the form of an imperative for whitefolk of their particular stripe to protect and advocate for those of the other races.
I was heartened by the recent report here that the government in Papua New Guinea has said to hell with the CO2 game, they are going to burn coal to provide the cheap abundant energy they have to lift their poor people out of poverty and into prosperity. I was also heartened by Bangladesh’s Prime Minister Khaleda Zia who argued at the latest climate klatch that their new coal fired electricity was essential to keep expanding their economy. India isn’t buying the scam either.
It’s amusing to note the contuous labeling of denier to anyone that is not a full blown end-of-world / die hard alarmist. The label also refers to conservative older white males, making the climate alarmist camp a pseudo environmental / racist, ageist and sexist movement.
A lot of it has to do with class hatred of white males, which is a foundation of the modern Democrat party. Another part has to do with hatred of older people.
making the climate alarmist camp a pseudo environmental / racist, ageist and sexist movement.
The climate alarmist camp is filled with intersectional leftists. Intersectionalism is inherently racist, ageist and sexist.
I hate to disappoint the liar Dana Nuccitelli, but I for one am still a ways from 60 yrs old.
And I’m healthy. And my family has moocho longevity in our DNA.
I’ll be around to cause him and his climate hustlers problems for decades.
No, you won’t cause them problems for decades. You will be around, but they will eventually wise up.
Especially if we start asking them what the best temperature for human longevity and biosphere abundance and diversity would be. (Used to be called “climate optimum,” but that is a warm period, so newer geologists are lied to about that word).
Live to be old enough to see climate predictions fail, and for more than one climate cycle of wet to dry to occur, and for more than one hurricane or tornado outbreak to occur, and the scares don’t register.
The group that is convinced that global warming is a good thing is in good company: Svante Arrhenius himself wrote that global warming would keep mankind away from the next dreadful ice age.
Yes he was a white old man.
This sort of post provides a great deal of light relief and humour to all the rational readers.
As an old, male WASP, gringo, honky, paleface, round eye, deplorable, denier, racist, homophobic, pro-life, gun-nut, xenophobic, infidel, rapist, misogynist, conservative living in fly-over country….. and those are just some of the ‘clean’ ones…..
Might I say that too many of today’s youngsters have had little or no experience of the ‘real world’. Walk to and from school – or ride public transportation – give up your seat to an adult. Wear a school uniform and be proud of it . Chores. Take responsibility for your words and actions. Outdoor sports activities. Corporal punishment. Meeting and interacting with more than just a group of peers. We’re in the fourth generation of children raised according to Dr Spock. It’s tragic….. (Disclaimer: born 1941.)
Might I say that too many of today’s youngsters have had little or no experience of the ‘real world’.
Bingo. nail hit squarely on the head. The reason there is an “age gap” is because children don’t have experience of the real world, all they have are what their parent and teachers have been teaching (indoctrinating into) them. You fill their heads with climate alarmism and they’ll believe it because they don’t have the experience to know better. They haven’t lived long enough to see the contradictory predictions (Coming ice age vs global warming) and failed predictions (snow thing of the past, Hurricanes more frequent/intense, permeant drought, etc) come to pass. As they get older and wiser, many of them will grow up to be old, conservative, “climate deniers” as they realize they’ve been lied to.
Twenty dollars was far too low a figure, that’s a cup of coffee and a cake figure, this is serious stuff, a potential life and death scenario.
So how much is your life really worth, lets start at 500 dollars a month, it will not be all that much per month, especially with such a serious mat ter at stake.
But my bet is that this figure would change the poll results quite a lot, because its a big enough amount to cause you to think about what you are agreeing to do.
And lets say ” Old white conservative men”., less the word American. Those persons over the period from say 1950 have created the world that you presently enjoy, and yes older aged persons have one big advantage over theyoung, because we have been there, done that, and we remember.
I myself at 92 can remember far back to reading about the hoax of Piltdown man, the mix of a modern lower part of the skull with a older upper part.
The ice age prediction is still fresh in our memories, and as for the Climate gate affair, despite the frantic efforts to whitewash it, clearly shows that our oh so responsible and caring scientists , clearly think that that their so called “Cause” is far more important than the facts about Planet Earth.
As for the United Nations and its very biased organization the IPCC. It is intent on destroying our ” Western” way of life, and it should be de–funded right now.
MJE VK5ELL
Michael
92 years old.
With a mind as sharp as a rapier.
Much respect sir.
I’m only ten years your junior, and my thinking parallels yours.
I find it interesting the way white has been added to the list of characteristics. No data is presented that measures the race of the respondents. So this is clearly just a dog whistle for racists.
The idea that climate alarmism rejection will decline as the old people die off assumes that people hold the same views for their entire life. In reality we are all born ignorant and so easily mislead, as we grow we become more knowledgeable and so better at filtering out lies.
because you can insult/blame/accuse anyone white of anything and thats fine.
rayciss is only when anyone on the pale side says anything any snowflake gets upset by
as an older white female non yank..i find nuttercelli an annoying jumped up brainless twit
Thank you for pointing out the anti-white bigotry. That is a major reality of our time, and we must stop tolerating it. For one thing, it is ungrateful. Ingratitude is a sin (shortcoming) that causes anxiety, heart problems, indigestion and lowers competence. Whites (mostly males–another bigotry that needs to stop) invented washing machines, permanent press clothes, cars, airplanes, computers and many other things. They raised the life expectancy of every race by 20 years or more.
Ingratitude for such things is insane. Today, other races are contributing to making the world a better place. You don’t have to buy into supremacy theories to be grateful for blessings.
Esther Cook
Lady Life Grows
Abe Lincoln said it best, “You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time…..”