# I weep for Americans (Global warming poll). **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 23, 2009, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881 "2009-10-23T17:24:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2009, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/101 "2009-10-25T23:33:14Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > However this: > > “I know the limitations of models, so I don’t follow the GCMs or their programmers at all closely.” > > Does show that you were still basing most of your criticisms on preconceptions, or rather that in your view there has been no change (are you trapped in the 70’s? 🙂 ) I would still say that maintaining that position only leads to having a huge blind spot when dealing with this subject. No, it shows what I said, not what your fantasies said. I follow the models and the modelers, but not that closely. Have you read the Kiehl report? Or can you explain to me what variable the GISS model uses to tune the albedo? Do you know how the models deal with the viscosity problem? Are you aware of what the MAGICC model is, and why the IPCC uses it? Do you even know what V&V and SQA are? Can you explain the Bern model for CO2 sequestration used by most GCMs? Have you ever written a radiation/convection/evaporation climate model? Are you able to speak knowledgeably about sub-grid processes and their potential effect on global averages? If not, then I’m following the models and the modelers much, much, much more closely than you are. I didn’t say my knowledge of models is all encompassing, but nothing is perfect. I also didn’t say I was stuck in the 70’s. I have an excellent knowledge of models, but I don’t know all the models and all the modelers. So sue me. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2009, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/102 "2009-10-25T23:35:39Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > BTW, to keep this thread on the subject, that survey did also ask a very similar question to Australians and 80% did agree that human activity is causing global warming. > > I would like to get the input of any Australian dopers on why you guys think that we are getting such a difference. I mean, you guys in Australia have no outfits like FOX that lie and do not correct their mistakes when informing the public? Do you have a cite for “that survey did also ask a very similar question to Australians”? I find nothing on the Pew Trust polling site. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2009, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/103 "2009-10-25T23:39:04Z")
I said: [QUOTE=intention] Latif is also unique among climate modelers because, as Fox News says, he claims that North American and European surface temperatures will cool slightly over the next decade, and that global surface temperatures may not warm at all over the same period. [/QUOTE] You replied: > [@GIGObuster](#): > > Fair enough, but it was the misrepresentation of Latif statements that was the issue. Misrepresentations like that are factors on why we are getting those poll results. I don’t get it. Where is the misrepresentation? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 25, 2009, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/104 "2009-10-25T23:58:40Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Do you have a cite for “that survey did also ask a very similar question to Australians”? I find nothing on the Pew Trust polling site. That was referring to 2 different surveys in the previous post. One made in the USA and the other in Australia: > **[Surveyed scientists agree global warming is real - CNN.com](https://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/)** > > Human-induced global warming is real, according to a recent U.S. survey based on the opinions of 3,146 scientists. However there remains divisions between climatologists and scientists from other areas of earth sciences as to the extent of human... > [@](#): > > Two questions were key: Have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures? > > About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second. > > **The strongest consensus on the causes of global warming came from climatologists who are active in climate research, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role.** The Australian poll is here: [http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/80\_of\_australians\_accept\_that.php](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/80_of_australians_accept_that.php) > [@](#): > > The latest Newspoll finds that 84% of Australians accept that climate change is occurring and 96% of those that believe that climate change is occurring think that it is wholly or partly caused by humans. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/105 "2009-10-26T00:02:27Z")
> [@intention](#): > > I said: > > You replied: > > I don’t get it. Where is the misrepresentation? That was not dealing with your latest quote but the original “no warming over the last ten years” and with FOX twisting of the climate researcher’s words. It is not only you that is being pitted after all. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/106 "2009-10-26T00:52:53Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That was not dealing with your latest quote but the original “no warming over the last ten years” and with FOX twisting of the climate researcher’s words. > > It is not only you that is being pitted after all. Science Magazine said there’s been no warming in the last ten years. Fox claims that Latif said the US and Europe will cool and the globe may not warm for the next ten years. Once again, I ask … what was the misrepresentation? Which climate researcher got their words twisted? And whether or not it was Latif, what was the twist? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/107 "2009-10-26T00:58:38Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > That was referring to 2 different surveys in the previous post. One made in the USA and the other in Australia: > > [http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/](http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/) > > The Australian poll is here: > > [http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/80\_of\_australians\_accept\_that.php](http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2008/07/80_of_australians_accept_that.php) Thanks for the citation, Gigobuster. Looks like my guess was right, different questions were asked. The citation makes it obvious why the outcome of the polls were different. It does not depend on whether Australia watches Fox. The US poll asked **“Is there solid evidence that the earth is warming?”** The Australia poll, on the other hand, asked an entirely different question, viz: **“Do you believe that climate change is occurring?”** Since the climate has been changing for billions of years, ever since there has been a climate, I would say “yes” to the Australian question. So, just like with the American poll, I’m in the majority … go figure. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/108 "2009-10-26T01:49:24Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Thanks for the citation, Gigobuster. Looks like my guess was right, different questions were asked. The citation makes it obvious why the outcome of the polls were different. It does not depend on whether Australia watches Fox. > > The US poll asked **“Is there solid evidence that the earth is warming?”** > > The Australia poll, on the other hand, asked an entirely different question, viz: **“Do you believe that climate change is occurring?”** > > Since the climate has been changing for billions of years, ever since there has been a climate, I would say “yes” to the Australian question. So, just like with the American poll, I’m in the majority … go figure. And a misrepresented poll in less than a few hours, go figure. > [@](#): > > and 96% of those that believe that climate change is occurring think that it is wholly or partly caused by humans. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/109 "2009-10-26T02:04:43Z")
> [@intention](#): > > Science Magazine said there’s been no warming in the last ten years. \*\*Selectively \*\*quoted as shown by others. > [@intention](#): > > Fox claims that Latif said the US and Europe will cool and the globe may not warm for the next ten years. > > Once again, I ask … what was the misrepresentation? Which climate researcher got their words twisted? And whether or not it was Latif, what was the twist? > > Thanks. “listen, I’m not one of the skeptics, if my name was not Latif my name would me Mr. Global Warming” -Latif From the “Birth of a denial crock” video You only told part of the truth with the intention to mislead others. Even Cervantes in El Quixote, several centuries back, did figure out that when someone does tell only part of the truth it is just like lying, because the person does not want others to find the whole truth. The context shows that finding a ten years or more period of cooling was to be expected, **it does not eliminate AGW when researchers acknowledge that**. It shows that modelers already predicted those periods of apparent “cooling”. That was not what you did told us on your original posts. Researchers already took complexities into account and Latif’s point was that deniers were going to twist his words. Sounds to me that he was right on the money on that too. ---
**Author:** ![Weedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/weedy/32/301_2.png) [@Weedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weedy)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/110 "2009-10-26T02:10:17Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > BTW, to keep this thread on the subject, that survey did also ask a very similar question to Australians and 80% did agree that human activity is causing global warming. > > I would like to get the input of any Australian dopers on why you guys think that we are getting such a difference. I mean, you guys in Australia have no outfits like FOX that lie and do not correct their mistakes when informing the public? AGW is very widely accepted here, but I don’t think it’s because of any greater understanding of the science behind it. For example, global warming is often discussed in primary schools, e.g. ‘you can help save the planet by turning off lights when you leave the room’. But my nephew’s first grade teacher told her class that carbon dioxide was a toxic gas that was building up in the atmosphere, and that by the time they were grown-up, they would all be dead from it, unless they turn those lights off. So, widely accepted, yes. Widely understood, not so much. My guess is because we have so much wilderness here, and we trash it so regularly, it doesn’t seem too far-fetched that we could destroy the environment on a global scale. In an Australian context, it’s pretty obvious that that’s what humans do. It’s a common pattern that we find out we are causing some kind of environmental damage to some ecosystem, or species, or whatever; we scrabble around to work out what to do about it, and we change our ways to be less harmful. AGW is just the same thing on a bigger scale. Maybe it’s to do with political forces as well, that I don’t know much about. Australia, in general seems much more liberal (left-wing) than America. You can get Fox news on cable, but I don’t know how similar it is to American Fox news, and it’s not a major new source for many people. Hmm, maybe another reason, Australians pride themselves on their scientists, and we generally trust scientists and respect science, if the climatologists are convinced is good enough for us. As it becomes more of an economic, that will influence people a lot as well, one way or the other. But we are fire-prone and drought-ridden already, so global warming is probably not going to do us any favours. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/111 "2009-10-26T03:01:20Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > \*\*Selectively \*\*quoted as shown by others. > “listen, I’m not one of the skeptics, if my name was not Latif my name would me Mr. Global Warming” > -Latif From the “Birth of a denial crock” video > > You only told part of the truth with the intention to mislead others. > > Even Cervantes in El Quixote, several centuries back, did figure out that when someone does tell only part of the truth it is just like lying, because the person does not want others to find the whole truth. > > The context shows that finding a ten years or more period of cooling was to be expected, **it does not eliminate AGW when researchers acknowledge that**. It shows that modelers already predicted those periods of apparent “cooling”. That was not what you did told us on your original posts. Researchers already took complexities into account and Latif’s point was that deniers were going to twist his words. > > Sounds to me that he was right on the money on that too. “The context shows that finding a ten years or more period of cooling was to be expected” … who is twisting words now? It showed that it was to be expected 2.7% of the time, which is very unlikely. You are putting it out there like it was something we’d expect every day. You are saying that models “already predicted” the cooling, based on it showing up in 2.7% of the model results? Now that’s a novel twist. Nor did I claim that the ten year hiatus in warming meant that it would not warm further, or that global warming was dead, or anything remotely resembling that. Having dealt with your bullshit before, I made it very clear. I said: [QUOTE=intention] Nope. I didn’t say that “global warming is somehow in doubt.” I said “the scientific evidence says that global warming has not been seen for a decade.” Conclude whatever you wish from that … but don’t blame me for what you might want to conclude. [/QUOTE] and [QUOTE=intention] As we all agree (including Science Magazine), nobody knows what will happen from here. Some people say it will start warming again, some say it won’t. Some scientists expect the current period of no warming to last another decade … but they may be wrong, the warming may resume tomorrow as other scientists say. Or the world may start cooling again, as it did for unknown reasons from the 1400s to 1650. We don’t know. [/QUOTE] Now, how is that “only telling part of the truth”? I said that I was not claiming that global warming was in doubt. I said it might start to warm again tomorrow. I said it was warming in 1988, but not in 1970. I said: [QUOTE=intention] Given the quarter century of cooling from about 1950 to 1975, which I mentioned above, it is obvious that this decade of no warming does not give us any indication of how the future will play out. We may see further warming, or we may see future cooling, or it may stay level for another decade. [/QUOTE] So what bases haven’t I covered here, Gigobuster? How are you twisting that into saying I “only told part of the truth”? What part of the “truth” didn’t I mention in all of that? Are you upset that I don’t know much about Latif, so I didn’t quote the exact quote you quoted? Latif believes that after twenty years of no warming that the warming will start again … am I supposed to be impressed by that? He has no evidence of that, from his models or anything else, so why does that even matter? Yes, Latif believes in CO2 forced AGW … as do many people. So what? His belief means nothing about what we are discussing. Is that really what you are busting me for, that I didn’t say that Latif believes in AGW? That’s the huge twist that brings up Don Quijote? Really? Do you really believe that people are so stupid that instead of writing > [@](#): > > Richard Kerr of Science Magazine said there’s been no warming in the last ten years. Fox claims that Latif said the US and Europe will cool and the globe may not warm for the next ten years. you think I have to write > [@](#): > > Richard Kerr (who believes in AGW) of Science Magazine said there’s been no warming in the last ten years. Fox claims that Latif (who believes in AGW) said the US and Europe will cool and the globe may not warm for the next ten years. so that people won’t be entirely fooled and totally bamboozled by my evil ways? Because I don’t think people are that dumb, although you appear to be. So to avoid future problems, I will write “GIGObuster (who believes in AGW) …” so that nobody is deceived. The weird part to me is that you are arguing against yourself. The fact that Latif supports AGW makes it much more surprising that he is saying we might see no warming for another decade. I’d expect that from somebody who doesn’t support AGW. So you are shooting yourself in the foot, the part I didn’t mention makes my argument stronger, not weaker. If Latif is right, we have a decade of no warming behind us, and another decade of no warming ahead of us. How about, instead of abusing me, you give us your thoughts on what twenty years of no warming might mean for your pet theories? You should be praying that Latif is wrong, because if we see no warming for another decade, how do you think people will answer in ten years when asked “is the earth warming”? Your poll results then will be very ugly … ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/112 "2009-10-26T03:04:20Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > And a misrepresented poll in less than a few hours, go figure. **GIGObuster (who believes in AGW)**, you’ve done your usual again, vague spiteful accusations of “misrepresentation” without a fucking thing to back them up. Who is misrepresenting what, where, and how? ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/113 "2009-10-26T03:09:46Z")
> [@Weedy](#): > > My guess is because we have so much wilderness here, and we trash it so regularly, it doesn’t seem too far-fetched that we could destroy the environment on a global scale. In an Australian context, it’s pretty obvious that that’s what humans do. It’s a common pattern that we find out we are causing some kind of environmental damage to some ecosystem, or species, or whatever; we scrabble around to work out what to do about it, and we change our ways to be less harmful. AGW is just the same thing on a bigger scale. Indeed, I do remember a very good historical example of that: Rabbits are still a problem in Australia. While his efforts were praised at the time, the pioneer settler Thomas Austin has borne the historical brunt of the blame for introducing that pest to Australia. [http://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/00128/en/rabbits/history.htm](http://library.thinkquest.org/03oct/00128/en/rabbits/history.htm) ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/114 "2009-10-26T03:23:02Z")
> [@intention](#): > > The weird part to me is that you are arguing against yourself. The fact that Latif supports AGW makes it much more surprising that he is saying we might see no warming for another decade. I’d expect that from somebody who doesn’t support AGW. So you are shooting yourself in the foot, the part I didn’t mention makes my argument stronger, not weaker. > > If Latif is right, we have a decade of no warming behind us, and another decade of no warming ahead of us. How about, instead of abusing me, you give us your thoughts on what twenty years of no warming might mean for your pet theories? Funny thing that you make it just my own, most scientists do not agree with you any how, and in reality, neither is Latif, in the same video he reports **that the warming is man made** , yes, at the same time he insisted that the cooling periods would be misrepresented by the deniers. > [@intention](#): > > You should be praying that Latif is wrong, because if we see no warming for another decade, how do you think people will answer in ten years when asked “is the earth warming”? Your poll results then will be very ugly … As the other cite I posted twice already shows, it not clear that there was cooling, (yet another reason why you are misrepresenting the ten year bit) it is more like ten years of a steady state, and the issue is that if human produced greenhouses gases were not there then the temperature would be cooler that what we have right now. It is more likely that soon we will see temperatures rise again. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/115 "2009-10-26T03:28:44Z")
> [@intention](#): > > **GIGObuster (who believes in AGW)**, you’ve done your usual again, vague spiteful accusations of “misrepresentation” without a fucking thing to back them up. Who is misrepresenting what, where, and how? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: > [@intention](#): > > “Since the climate has been changing for billions of years, ever since there has been a climate, I would say “yes” to the Australian question.” That implies that the Australians only got a question regarding natural warming, that was not the case. It seems that you forgot to scroll down a little more. :rolleyes: (What else this intrepid researcher is missing thanks to his biases when he searches information for his papers? I’m afraid to even wonder) ---
**Author:** ![Weedy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/weedy/32/301_2.png) [@Weedy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weedy)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/116 "2009-10-26T04:42:58Z")
Regardless of what the poll question was, Australians, in general, believe in AGW. Not saying that every single Australian does, or that there is no debate whatsoever, but it is widely accepted. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/117 "2009-10-26T05:03:46Z")
> [@GIGObuster who believes in AGW](#): > > [QUOTE=intention] > How about, instead of abusing me, you give us your thoughts on what twenty years of no warming might mean for your pet theories? Funny thing that you make it just my own, most scientists do not agree with you any how, and in reality, neither is Latif, in the same video he reports **that the warming is man made** , yes, at the same time he insisted that the cooling periods would be misrepresented by the deniers. [/quote] I said “you” because I am talking with you, not with others. I was asking what your opinion is, assuming that you have one … why is that so threatening to you that you want to pawn it off on others and attack me instead of answering? [QUOTE=GIGObuster who believes in AGW] As the other cite I posted twice already shows, it not clear that there was cooling, (yet another reason why you are misrepresenting the ten year bit) it is more like ten years of a steady state, and the issue is that if human produced greenhouses gases were not there then the temperature would be cooler that what we have right now. It is more likely that soon we will see temperatures rise again. [/QUOTE] It is not clear that there was cooling when? And what does this have to do with me? Are you talking about this? [QUOTE=GIGObuster who believes in AGW] The context shows that finding a ten years or more period of cooling was to be expected, it does not eliminate AGW when researchers acknowledge that. [/QUOTE] Are you referring to the Science citation? That is unclear as well, since the Science citation says nothing about a ten-year cooling period. And if so, what does that have to do with me? I’ve already shown that I have said repeatedly that the Science citation doesn’t rule AGW either out or in. Neither does the Latif claim that we’ll see another decade of no warming. Are you really that obtuse, or do you just play an obtuse person on TV? What am I missing here? What are you busting me for now? Are you talking about the Science citation that said a ten year flat period was to be expected 2.7% of the time? ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/118 "2009-10-26T05:19:31Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: > That implies that the Australians only got a question regarding natural warming, that was not the case. It seems that you forgot to scroll down a little more. :rolleyes: > > (What else this intrepid researcher is missing thanks to his biases when he searches information for his papers? I’m afraid to even wonder) Ah, I see, my bad. I assumed that when you said the “survey did also ask a very similar question to Australians” that you were talking about the question “Is climate change occurring?”, as that was the only question which is very similar to the question in the OP, “Is there solid evidence that the earth is warming?” Upon re-reading your question, I see that you weren’t actually talking about the similar question. You were talking about a totally different and separate question, which was whether warming is caused by humans. Were I of your mindset, I’d accuse you of trying to deliberately mislead me by saying it was “a very similar question.” However, I don’t think that was the case. I think it was just unclear, and I know that I misunderstood it. Your continuing assumption that I am on some evil course to mislead people is both unwarranted and wrong, and it reflects very poorly on your character. I answered the question I thought you were talking about, “Is climate change occurring?” My error. ---
**Author:** ![intention](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e95f7d/32.png) [@intention](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/intention)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 7:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/119 "2009-10-26T19:21:06Z")
When I was younger, I worked in a number of countries in Africa. It is because of my experiences there that I support the “no-regrets” option. As I mentioned above, this is the path of taking actions which will benefit the poor regardless of whether Gigobuster (who believes in AGW) or I are right about CO2. While wandering around the web today, I found an article which expresses the issues much better than I could, because it quotes extensively from Africans. Here is a part of the [article](http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story.aspx?b4f4b1ac-1302-499b-b7bb-7ffe13b447e2): > [@](#): > > Life in Africa is often nasty, impoverished and short reports Fiona Kobusingye. “AIDS kills 2.2 million Africans every year according to WHO (World Health Organization) reports. Lung infections cause 1.4 million deaths, malaria 1 million more, intestinal diseases 700,000. Diseases that could be prevented with simple vaccines kill an additional 600,000 annually, while war, malnutrition and life in filthy slums send countless more parents and children to early graves.” (1) > She adds, “Yet Africans are told the biggest threat they face is global warming. Conferences, news stories, television programs, class lectures and one-sided ‘dialogues’ repeat the claim endlessly. They are told using oil and petrol, even burning wood and charcoal, will dangerously overheat our planet, melt ice caps, flood coastal cities, and cause storms, drought, disease and extinctions.” Africans are told climate change threatens humanity more than all the diseases listed above. > > Will Alexander of the University of Pretoria, South Africa, points out that since the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 1988 not a single person in South Africa has died as a result of provable climate change. But thousands have died from poverty-related starvation, malnutrition and disease. He says, “How dare those who call themselves scientists deliberately suppress this information? How dare they ignore the suffering of all these people? How dare they steadfastly refuse to participate in multidisciplinary studies where their alarmist theories can be demonstrated to be without foundation?” (2) > > Africans are being told that carbon dioxide discharged into the atmosphere from coal burning power stations and transport are a far greater threat to national welfare than unemployment, poverty, malnutrition and disease. Alexander reports, “Nowhere in the climate change literature will you find a balance between humanitarian concerns and environmental concerns. Instead, while our people are starving, powerful and influential bodies such as the G20 discuss the situation over delicious meals and refreshments.” (2) This is what turns my stomach about people like L. G. Butts PhD (who believes in AGW) and GIGObuster (who believes in AGW) who get all self-righteous about how they are so noble, how people who oppose them are “fucking morons”, and how they weep for the stupidity of Americans who have had the temerity to notice that the world is not warming now. (Obligatory GIGObuster disclaimer: although it is not warming now, in the future it will start either warming or cooling again, in case you didn’t know that. I wouldn’t want to mislead anyone into thinking that the world will never warm or cool again …). Their multi-billion dollar recommended policies, designed to avert a possible threat in fifty years, are causing human misery today by working to prevent development in Africa … and they think they have the moral high ground because they are trying to prevent Africans from building coal fired power plants? I wish I could sentence every one of them to go to Africa, make them talk to the people there, and find out what the real crisis is in Africa. Because I guarantee you one thing — it’s not the fact that atmospheric CO2 has gone from 0.03% to 0.04%, and the Africans know it. ---
**Author:** ![Duke\_of\_Rat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Duke\_of\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke_of_Rat)\ **Post date:** [October 26, 2009, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881/120 "2009-10-26T20:50:30Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > It won’t be a tundra by then, but areas which are now good for cultivation will have turned into dry deserts. It’s this presumption of absolute certainty about what will happen if global warming isn’t stopped/slowed that irritates me. I have no trouble believing that sea levels will rise, ice will melt, etc. Do we really have absolute proof that a higher average global temperature will cause deserts? I seem to recall that the immense amount of vegetation coupled with higher average temperatures than today were part of the reasons dinosaurs were thought to be so succcessful. If I’m mistaken about this, forgive me. Then there’s [this piece from National Geographic](http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090731-green-sahara.html) that suggests a surge in vegetation in the Sahara within the last few years. Were global deserts prevalent back before the current subsiding ice age? The entire recorded human history has been written on the heels of a retreating ice age. There’s never been a human experience written about what the Earth was like without substantial polar ice, are we certain that the entire Earth would be an inhospitable desert should the polar ice vanish until the next ice age? I’m absolutely not saying that there’s not global warming going on right now. I’m not saying that humans shouldn’t make an effort to reduce their contribution to global warming. All I’m asking is, are we so absolutely certain that the world will be less hospitable should the average temperature rise to pre-ice age levels? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-weep-for-americans-global-warming-poll/514881.md?page=7)