Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

[John Reece]

Rasmussen Reports

Only 20% Think Debate About Global Warming Is Over

Wednesday, July 09, 2014

Voters strongly believe the debate about global warming is not over yet and reject the decision by some news organizations to ban comments from those who deny that global warming is a problem.

Only 20% of Likely U.S. Voters believe the scientific debate about global warming is over, according to the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Sixty-three percent (63%) disagree and say the debate about global warming is not over. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

[robertb]

The political debate is definitely not over, nor will it be so in the foreseeable future, imo.

That said, the scientific debate has been over for quite a while now.

[John Reece]

That said, the scientific debate has been over for quite a while now.

Only in the minds of the closed-minded.

[robertb]

Only in the minds of the closed-minded.

You are referring to the vast majority of the field here, I suppose.

As in any scientific debate, a theory that makes better predictions will always trump one that makes worse predictions.

What do you have in mind?

[John Reece]

As in any scientific debate, a theory that makes better predictions will always trump one that makes worse predictions.

Predictions are not science.

Predictions may by promoters of the AGW theory usually turn out to be other than predicted.

[robertb]

Predictions are not science.

Predictions may by promoters of the AGW theory usually turn out to be other than predicted.

I believe that you avoided my question.

[Truthseeker]

robertb seems to think there is just one model of the overall atmosphere temperature that makes just one prediction. Not so. Dozens of models, a great range of predictions. Moreover, most of them are failing so far.

[John Reece]

Moreover, most of them are failing so far.

Right. See here.

[robertb]

robertb seems to think there is just one model of the overall atmosphere temperature that makes just one prediction. Not so. Dozens of models, a great range of predictions. Moreover, most of them are failing so far.

I think you misunderstand. What model do you propose and what predictions does your model make?

[John Reece]

I think you misunderstand. What model do you propose and what predictions does your model make?

He was not proposing a model. He is not in the prediction business.

[robertb]

He was not proposing a model. He is not in the prediction business.

Obviously you believe that the consensus is mistaken. What evidence do you have that you believe would falsify the consensus position?

I mean, we're not just talking politics here, right?

[John Reece]

Obviously you believe that the consensus is mistaken. What evidence do you have that you believe would falsify the consensus position?

What is the consensus position?

[robertb]

What is the consensus position?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scien...climate_change

This is fairly concise.

[John Reece]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scien...climate_change

This is fairly concise.

Why does the graph beside the article, and indeed the article itself, not indicate the fact that there has been no warming for the past ten to seventeen years ― depending on which of a number of scientific studies and reports that have been cited?

In fact, NOAA temperature data shows that the U.S.A. has been cooling for the past decade. See here.

No consensus model predicted any such phenomenon; in fact, as your quoted article and the accompanying graph indicates, the consensus modal prediction was quite the contrary to what actually has happened. Remember Michael Mann's hockey stick?

[Jedidiah]

As in any scientific debate, a theory that makes better predictions will always trump one that makes worse predictions.

As John pointed out the AGW has been very unsuccessful making predictions that meant anything.