SUMMARY:
The evidence
is growing that
climate alarmists
are losing their
popular support.
That's not obvious
with a quick glance
at survey results,
but keep reading.
Measuring
popular support
is not simple for
any controversial
subject
The coming climate
change crisis belief
is controversial.
Alarmists have been
getting more radical
in recent years,
making people afraid
to admit they don't
believe in a coming
climate crisis.
So there is support
for the belief in
a coming climate
crisis, at some time
off in the future.
But how deep
is that "support" ?
One way to find out
is to ask people
how much
of their own money
they'd be willing
to spend for CO2
emission reductions.
That's not simple either !
Because I would expect
answers to be biased
by virtue signaling.
Some people will SAY
they're willing to spend
lots of money.
They'll present
themselves as
"good people",
who care about
the planet.
But talk is cheap !
How many
would change
their minds
when the first
high priced
electricity bill
showed up ?
Even with that
potential bias
in mind, the
survey results
were surprising
to me.
Opinion surveys
in recent years
consistently show
the public is not
even willing to SAY
they would sacrifice
very much money
to reduce CO2
emissions !
And that's surprising !
DETAILS:
The United Nations says
to keep temperatures
within supposedly safe limits,
based on their wild guess
junk science, governments
must CUT global emissions
by a minimum of 7.6%
each year, between
2020 and 2030.
But the United Nation’s
2019 "Emissions Gap"
report says that
global greenhouse
gas emissions
have grown
+1.5% every year
over the past decade,
despite government
promises to reduce
emissions.
To persuade people
the 2019 UN CO2
"emissions gap"
needs to be closed,
the UN allowed
Greta Thunberg
to attack adults,
who she thinks
are letting the
'world end
in 12 years' ?
Some climate
alarmists are now
proclaiming that
the world only has
one year, 18 months,
or 10 years left
... to substantially reduce
fossil-fuel consumption,
or else it will be too late
to prevent a global disaster.
That's complete nonsense,
but I like hearing nonsense:
Ridiculous claims
will eventually make
the climate alarmists
appear to be fools !
Climate alarmists
are now working on
getting a consensus on
a new term to scare people,
perhaps “global meltdown”,
or “climate collapse.”
Writing for AdAge,
Aaron Hall argues
that to get people to
“take action”
against climate change,
“rebranding”
is crucial, since
“people … need to
be shocked into the notion
that the world as we know it
is ending.”
We should be enjoying
the current climate,
because we are living in
the best climate for humans
in 800 to 1,000 years
( since the Little Ice Age
cool centuries began ).
But climate alarmists
won't let us enjoy the
wonderful climate
( which has
been getting
slightly warmer
for 325 years,
but is still too cold,
in my opinion ...
It's 17 degrees F.
right now,
at 4pm on Wednesday,
December 18, 2019,
about five miles north
of Detroit, as I write
this article ).
The coming climate
change crisis
is a fairy tale belief,
not supported by
real science,
so we can't use
real science
to refute
that belief !
But we can encourage
the climate alarmists
to make more radical
claims ... and that's
easy to do.
Because climate alarmists
are unbelievably gullible.
Tell them the climate
is going to be worse than
previously thought, and
they LOVE hearing
that bad (fake) news.
Even better,
next year tell them
the climate is going
to be even worse than,
worse than we thought !
Some examples
of bias in polls
of controversial
subjects:
Voting for Trump
Some people will not
admit they plan to
vote for Donald Trump,
because Democrats
act like vicious animals
when they hear that,
especially if they see
a red Trump MAGA cap.
Owning a gun:
Many U.S.
gun owners
will not admit to
owning a gun.
Belief in God:
I've been an atheist since
roughly age six, when I could
first understand the word.
But when asked if
I believe in God,
I don't say "no",
because that could
lead to a debate.
So I'll toss out
a silly answer,
such as:
"I believe
in 246 gods",
which usually
avoids a debate.
Belief in extraterrestrial craft:
The U.S. Air Force
required written reports
on UFOs from their pilots,
from the late1940s
to late 1960s -- over
12,600 reports were filed.
Thousands of commercial
pilots have reported seeing
UFOs since the 1940s,
with some of the UFOs
tracked on radar.
This year a new TV show
-- "Unidentified" --
featured US Navy
videos of UFOs,
along with interviews
of Navy pilots and Navy
radar operators
who tracked them.
( see Episode 1 first )
The U.S. Navy
publicly
admitted
the videos
were real,
and unaltered.
So, are 100%
of all those
professional
pilots mistaken?
Of course not.
Yet most pilots
who see a UFO
won't talk about it
... because they know
people with weak minds
would ridicule them.
Belief in a coming
climate change crisis:
There's a lot of
peer pressure
to "believe"
in this.
And a lot of ridicule
for a skeptic, or for
a climate science
blog like mine.
Not that I care.
Leftist character attacks
get louder, and harsher,
when you are doing
a good job refuting
their climate change
fairy tales.
Asking people
if they believe
in "climate change"
should get a 100%
yes response.
But the phrase
"climate change"
can be confusing.
"Climate change",
when used by
climate alarmists,
actually means
"a coming climate
change crisis" --
a different meaning.
Asking people
if they believe
climate change
is a coming crisis,
or that future
climate change
will be bad news,
may not get
much useful
information.
First of all,
no one knows
what the future
climate will be !
I've been reading
climate science
articles and studies,
as a hobby,
since 1997,
and I have no idea
what the future
climate will be.
There's peer pressure
to say you're a believer
in "climate change",
or a coming climate
crisis, or that future
climate change will be
bad news.
Strong peer pressure,
if you are a Democrat,
socialist or marxist
( groups that
I usually combine,
and call "leftists" ).
So how do you find out
what people really think
about climate change ?
One way is with
indirect questions,
about how much
money people
are personally
willing to spend
on CO2 emissions
reductions.
That gets
more information,
because talk is cheap,
but actual spending
means something.
An August 2019 survey,
by The Washington Post
and Kaiser Family
Foundation, found
more than 60%
of survey respondents
said they believed the world
had fewer than 10 years
to prevent the worst effects
of climate change ( with most
respondents claiming the world
has two years, or fewer, to act,
believe it or not ! ).
That's a disappointing result
... until you keep reading:
-- 51% of those
surveyed were
“somewhat” opposed, or
“strongly” opposed,
to paying only a
$2 monthly tax on U.S.
residential electric bills,
to pay for the fight
against climate change !
-- 61% would reject
only a 10 cents per gallon
gasoline tax increase,
to fight climate change !
A November 2019 survey,
of 1,000 likely voters,
conducted by The Heartland
Institute and Rasmussen
Reports, found slightly less
than half of those surveyed
believed “Human Activity”
is the primary cause
of climate change.
One in three Democrats
surveyed rejected the idea
that humans are causing
a climate crisis.
-- 63% said
they believed
it was very likely,
or somewhat likely,
that climate change
“will be catastrophic
for humans, plants,
and animals”.
-- But only 34%
of those
who believed
climate change
was primarily
caused by humans,
said federal or
state governments
should limit air travel
to help prevent
climate change.
-- But only 24%
said governments
should require
people to limit
their consumption
of meat to fight
climate change.
More important
than surveys
are actions:
Governments in
France and Chile
pushed fossil
fuel price hikes
to cut energy use,
in their effort to fight
climate change.
People rioted in the streets,
forcing their governments
to back off the proposed
fossil fuel price hikes.
Voters elsewhere have
replaced government
leaders, or parties,
who were pushing
policies to meet
their country’s
CO2 emission
reduction targets,
under the
Paris climate
agreement.
Instead, people
favored politicians
promising to rescind
energy taxes, and
focus on making
energy cheaper,
and more abundant !
A majority
of the public
believes
that humans
are affecting
the climate.
I do too --
although
how much
is a mystery.
Humans are
causing CO2
enrichment
of the atmosphere,
which accelerates
plant growth, and is
'greening' the planet.
Humans are likely to be
causing mild, beneficial
global warming too ...
but global warming could
have 100% natural causes
-- no one knows for sure.
There have been
over 60 years
of global warming
scaremongering,
especially loud
after the IPCC
formed in 1988.
Scary claims
ramped up
about five
years ago
-- the wilder
than ever
climate
predictions
offended me
so much,
that I launched
this blog, as a
public service.
In 2018, scary,
always wrong,
wild guesses
about the
future climate,
morphed into
delusional claims.
Climate change
is being sold using
a marketing campaign,
completely unrelated
to real science, and
human prosperity.
The truth is that the
coming climate change
crisis was ALWAYS
a marketing campaign,
with a political goal:
Much more powerful
socialist governments,
falsely claimed
to be needed to
"save the planet
for the children".
The new way
to sell socialism,
and marxism,
was the creation
of a new false
boogeyman:
Carbon dioxide,
which is actually
a harmless gas,
and the staff
of life for our
planet.
They can't claim
that socialism
will bring us
faster economic
growth, and a lower
unemployment rate,
because the opposite
is true.
So it's now "Save the
planet socialism" !
And guess what --
slower economic
growth can
be claimed
to be good news,
because slower
economic growth
means slower growth
of CO2 emissions !
And of course,
we always have
the usual leftist
character attacks
on all people
who do not
believe in
a coming
climate crisis.
Earth's climate
has gradually
been getting better,
for over 300 years,
as global warming
continues, and
our planet gets
greener !
Enjoy it please --
because Earth
only has
12 years left,
or is that
18 months left ?
I forget which --
hold on, I'll call
"thundering"
Greta Thunberg
for the right answer !