Fox fudges poll numbers to claim 120 percent of the public believes scientists falsify global warming data.
Fox fudges poll numbers to claim 120 percent of the public believes scientists falsify global warming data.
Last week, Fox and Friends showed a Rasmussen poll graphic revealing that a whopping 120 percent of the American public believes scientists may be falsifying research to support their own theories on global warming:
Media Matters explains Fox’s fuzzy math:
Well, here’s the Rasmussen poll Fox & Friends cited. They asked respondents: “In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?” According to the poll, 35 percent thought it very likely, 24 percent somewhat likely, 21 percent not very likely, and 5 percent not likely at all (15 percent weren’t sure).
Fox News’ graphics department added together the “very likely” and “somewhat likely” numbers to reach 59 percent, and called that new group “somewhat likely.” Then, for some reason, they threw in the 35 percent “very likely” as their own group, even though they already added that number to the “somewhat likely” percentage. Then they mashed together the “not very likely” and “not likely at all” groups, and threw the 15 percent who were unsure into the waste bin. Voila — 120 percent.
Last month, ThinkProgress also caught Fox showing a pie chart documenting that 193 percent of the public supports Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, or Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination in 2012. So much for “zero tolerance for on-screen errors.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
FoxNews is Rupert Mudoch’s lie machine, and exists only to serve the financial interests of Murdoch and his co-corporatists.
What’s new?
If we lose net neutrality, the internet will become an extension of FoxNews and Rupert Murdoch’s empire.
Is this what you want?
The repiggies certainly want it.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:42 amActually, this poll provides even worse deception–where’s the numbers for “not likely at all”? These numbers are just representing the people who have doubt.
“Somewhat” should never be listed to include “very”. It’d be like saying that all of the people who were iffy about a policy were totally behind the policy.
Strap the person at fault for this into the Comfy Chair, Fox!
December 8th, 2009 at 11:44 amI may have failed math twice in my senior year of high school but COME ON! I can do that math in my damn head. FUX news blows.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:44 amNothing says credibility like a multimillion organization that can’t handle 6th grade arithmetic.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:49 amStupid fake news for stupid fake Americans.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:49 amIn a sane world, the number of these “mistakes” would render Fox news a laughingstock. But, we don’t live in a sane world.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:50 amWell. The people who refuse to believe in science apparently reject math as having a liberal bias, too.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:51 amI guess the War on Christmas isn’t the ratings draw it once was. So now Fox is launching the War on Math.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:51 amThis is what Fox news gets for lying a 120 percent of the time. 62 percent flat out lies, 49 percent horse pucky, and 9 percent telling the wrong lie.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:51 amhooda-
December 8th, 2009 at 11:51 amActually my 2nd grader’s math homework is at this level.
Irony, like hypocrisy, is a word that doesn’t exist for Fox and it’s viewers.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:53 amAnd of course.. due to their new rules for thorough fact checking – the whole lot of them are now fired – right?
idiots.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:53 amEven better, DNFP. Faux’s behavior on all levels seems about par with that.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:54 amWe’re missing the point I fear. This will make perfect sense to the tea baggers and wing nuts.
Their mantra is; “if it’s on Fox, it must be true”…duh
December 8th, 2009 at 11:54 amIt’s also a great example of how no one checks or proofreads anything they say or throw out there……as long as it’s conservative dogma and “unbalanced.”
December 8th, 2009 at 11:58 amWhen will all MSM call out Faux for what they are? They are nothing but Republican mouth piece. How many times have they twisted numbers, distorted stories and flat out lied to the American people? Once, Faux News used to be more subtle, now they are as subtle as a slegehammer.
December 8th, 2009 at 11:58 amNot to mention it’s a vague question on top of a news item. It is a known fact that some scientists have falsified their research. It’s in the news. So when asking “how likely is it that scientists falsify their research…” the respondent might think “well it’s damn likely, I read about it in the news just yesterday.” If you interpret the question that way, then even someone who believes that nearly all scientists nearly always act responsibly and who firmly believes in the evidence behind manmade global warming, might still give a positive answer to the question.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:01 pmDoesn’t matter – Faux Snooze viewers can’t add…
December 8th, 2009 at 12:02 pm…or read without moving their lips.
Faux has become the evil twin of Sesame St complete with demented antics to entertain the disturbed and fuzzy math to ‘educate’ them. Totally creepy.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:02 pmP.D. says:
When will all MSM call out Faux for what they are?
I think it’s kind of a “thin blue line” in media. They’re all afraid of setting a precedent for a purported news organization to be demoted from the lofty status of “journalist,” so they’ll support the supposed journalistic credentials of even the most hack organization (provided they’ve got broadcast rights and aren’t just some uppity blog). They’re probably thinking, “if we call out FOX, maybe somebody will call us out next!” Which in itself is evidence that they’ve already given up whatever journalistic credibility they had to begin with.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:04 pmYou know what’s strange… with all of these “mistakes” with misreported statistics and erroneous party identifications and the like…
none of them ever makes conservatives look worse.
It’s almost like they’re not random.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:05 pmIf we taught our kids Fox/Conservative math then 2 + 2 = 5.
Another example of how Fox distorts the news.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:07 pm@21, I’m probably reading this wrong Ralph, but are you implying there’s a connection here?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:08 pm100% of loyal Fox viewers don’t have a fukcing clue.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:09 pmPLC Poll:
How likely is it that FOX News follows the example of Karl Rove’s math and that 80% of their poll results are made up on the spot?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:09 pmOf course this is all the fault of the liberal educational establishment.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:11 pmYou are being too harsh on Fox “News”. This just shows how Rupert and Roger make sure to hire the mentally challenged to staff their network. The photogenic ones are placed in front of the camera while those for whom there is not enough peroxide to make a difference get jobs writing text or putting together graphics. How else do you explain the persistent habit of identifying every Republican caught with his willy in the wrong place with a (D) after his name?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:11 pmWow, 120%? Desperation and deception on Fox’s part?
Nah. They and by extension thier viewers are really that effing stupid.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:14 pmUSNClerk, I would never suggest that these errors are deliberate. Perish the thought!
I just find it curious, that’s all.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:15 pmThe other thing they have done is give the impression that responders think that scientists have fudged data to support the theory of global climate change when the exact opposite is more likely. If I was asked this question, I would probably say “very likely”. If they had wanted to conduct a legitimate poll to get real answers they would have polled twice. Once asking if scientists would fudge data to support the theory of global climate change and one asking if they would fudge data to refute the theory.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:16 pmI’m gonna gues it’s all of these interns straight out of the Heritage Foundation thinking they can “make a difference” by sabotaging the graphics and such. They’re a little too glassy-eyed over just having discovered The Fountainhead to realize they’re doing more harm than good to conservatism as a whole.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:19 pmMaybe they ought to move Shep Smith to an office upstairs. He wouldn’t stand for this crap.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:20 pmLast month, ThinkProgress also caught Fox showing a pie chart documenting that 193 percent of the public supports Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, or Mitt Romney for the GOP nomination in 2012.
Only 120%? Didn’t they poll the other 73% this time?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:20 pmBilbo, you are exactly right. I’d bet that most of us here at TP would have answered “very likely” to the question as worded. Plus, the question says “some” while the FOX screen does not use this word, making the impression that it is “all scientists”.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:22 pmPoll: How likely is it that Fox News makes up stuff?
Completely Likely: 26%
December 8th, 2009 at 12:22 pmVery Likely: 52%
Extemely Likely: 81%
Not Very Likely: 22%
Getchen Carlson is Likely really Michele Bachmann: 32%
Sarah Palin Likely to understand math: 12%
ralph the wonder llama says:
USNClerk, I would never suggest that these errors are deliberate. Perish the thought!
I just find it curious, that’s all.
Exactly. Fox News is a legitimate news organization!
But I agree. All these mistakes. It’s interesting. If I didnt know better I would say they do it on purpose.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:23 pmFOX – Fools Only Xenaphobix
December 8th, 2009 at 12:24 pmIt is entirely possible that the people putting these stats together truly don’t understand the concept of what 100% means. To them if 100% is good, 120% is a lot better and 193% is really great. On Faux, nothing is impossible.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:25 pmso how many will be fired, now that rupe’s made on-air mistakes a firing offense over at the grand old network?
righties always use the idiot math though, so maybe this won’t count as a mistake.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:27 pm@29. Strange, but I sense a little snark there. Must be my imagination. :)
December 8th, 2009 at 12:27 pm.
I thought FOXPRAVDA fired the math wiz…
.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:30 pm…this from the same people that believe the Earth is flat.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:34 pmHere’s a poll for you.
How likely is it that a troll can post a comment on TP that doesn’t include squirrels, grade school acronyms or expressions of mock incredulity. On a scale of 1-5 with one being extremely likely.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:35 pmI’m still waiting for evidence, OSTL.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:36 pmWell, I can understand Fux Noise Cabal trying to skew the distribution as far to the right as they can, but this Rasmussen business puzzles me. Are they the same pollsters that predicted Dewey’s big win over Truman in ‘48?
(I’d try for a sampling error joke at this point, but it would go over the trolls’ heads and we’d be stuck with their sniveling and whining until a better thread comes along.)
December 8th, 2009 at 12:39 pmSo much for “zero tolerance for on-screen errors.”
Well, that’s assuming they made a mistake as opposed to willingly misleading the public.
I would not discount premeditation and shameless liars behind the making of this on-screen “error”.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pmFOX News would appear to be deliberately exploiting the fact that over the past few decades, the United States has been delivering a remarkably poor showing in comparison with other industrialized nations in terms of math scores — either that, or the people who packaged the results for broadcast have no comprehension themselves of basic mathematics. Even if neither of these possibilities is true, anyone who’s been trained how to conduct polls and other statistical research (as I myself have) knows that it’s by no means hard to skew the research in order to make it say whatever you want it to say…which ironically suggests that the people at Rasmussen and at FOX may have been guilty of doing exactly the same thing which they accuse the climatologists of doing.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:44 pmHey, OSTL, reposting the article doesn’t change the fact that the math is still wrong.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:46 pm53 – funny thing about that – the scientific community doesn’t tolerate frauds and liars the way the political community does.
but you wouldn’t know anything about that.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:48 pmFor all our trolls out there, let me make it clear:
December 8th, 2009 at 12:49 pm59+36+25=120. Ok? So this is a poll of 120% of people? On what planet did you sad-sack morons go to school?
FVNY is a typical Fox News viewer. After seeing a poll which addes up to 120%, he still believes the numbers.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:49 pmcan we just quickly erase, and not respond to, the osshole today?
it’s really starting to take away from any kind of actual discussion.
the tyranny of ernest t. bass must end.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:50 pmApparently the trolls believe that “I will give it my 110%!” is a perfectly valid, intelligent statement to make. Idiots.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:51 pmHe can’t understand what you are saying.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:51 pmNo, I read your post, what I can’t figure out is what you’re trying to prove. Are you posting this to say 120% of people out there have an issue with the science of global warming?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:51 pmWhen your audience is a bunch of idiots why bother getting details correct. See any comment by OSTL for reference.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:51 pmwell i see ostl has one of its other non-math troll helping out on the STUPID here
December 8th, 2009 at 12:52 pmGollies, I can understand folks thinking scientists falsify data regularly. After all, we just finished 8 years of the Shrub’s administration where scientists were constantly pressured to suppress data the administration found uncongenial, where promotions were made on the basis of righty political correctness, etc. Takes some time after that kind of Lysenkoism for the environment to be scrubbed.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:52 pm@59. Sorry, engaging the trolls can be a hard habit to break. I have a really bad time with stupid people. I’ll try to ignore him.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:53 pmOSTL says:
Exactly what the poll says!
Wrong, what the poll says is:
And here is what you said:
Not matter how loudly you sob and scream at us, 59 is not the same thing as 24. Ever.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:53 pmfailing?
coming from the guy with 19% of the population on his side?
you’re freekin funny.
is that what the F stands for?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:53 pm47%….lowest ever for a president at 10 months.
and he’s still created more jobs in that time than bush did in 8 years.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:54 pmFake news is not a trivial issue.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:55 pmChyron HR, are you saying ostl flat out lied?
Shocking!
but you are right.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:56 pmChyron HR says:
Not matter how loudly you sob and scream at us, 59 is not the same thing as 24.
I believe our dimwitted visitors are defending the idea that you can survey 120% of the population.
Yes, they are that stupid.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:56 pmOSTL:
December 8th, 2009 at 12:57 pmHow’s the crying out for attention going?
OSTL says:
47%….lowest ever for a president at 10 months.
Probably because he’s got the most done than any other President in the first 10 months. It’s called spending your political capital.
Come back and whinge at us in 2012 and we’ll see what the numbers look like then.
.
FVNY says:
What I find amazing is that 26% of the respondents still believe that it is not very likely that scientists falsify research to support their own theories on global warming.
Like I said, the question itself is vague. It is known – it is in the news currently – that some scientists have done so. Perhaps that 26% represents people unaware of that news. Or perhaps the respondents confused regarding whether the question refers to an absolute claim regarding all scientific behavior, or refers to the general trend of scientific behavior.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:57 pmWhat percentage of idiots still think Iraq had something to do with 911?
December 8th, 2009 at 12:58 pmYou know, it would sound really stupid if I said “26% said it’s at least not very likely.” Just report the counts per answer, thx.
December 8th, 2009 at 12:59 pmdbadass says:
What percentage of idiots still think Iraq had something to do with 911?
In this thread? Probably OSTL and FVNY are convinced…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:00 pm@ 73. shoeless says: Fake news is not a trivial issue. December 8th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
I concur.
And it’s even more of an issue when the ‘fake news’ is put in play for agitation and propaganda purposes, but that’s what Fux is in business for – that and taking money from idiots.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:01 pmOSTL says:
The sad part about this is you all could not tell whats false or whats true as you have no idea of science or math.
So you have no cred here, I mean you can not even answer simple questions. went you are able to carry a real convo.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:01 pmFVNY says:
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s AT LEAST somewhat likely.
But according to Fox News, 59% of Americans said it was Somewhat Likely, PERIOD. So is Fox News lying, or is Rasmussen lying?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:03 pmFVNY says:
Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s AT LEAST somewhat likely
Actually, OSTL is right. 59% would cover the 35% very likely and the 24% somewhat likely.
This isn’t what Fox News said. They didn’t state “AT LEAST somewhat likely”. They wrote “somewhat likely”. That is incorrect reporting.
“Somewhat likely” is not the same as “very likely”. 59% does not equal 35%.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:03 pm250% think fox snooze is a load of BS. They lie just to stay in practice.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:03 pmOSTL, evidence that I namejacked you. NOW.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:04 pmIt’s apparent that our morning trolls don’t understand that Fux engaged in double counting in reporting Rasmussen’s numbers.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:04 pmFVNY says:
No you nitwit. 59% doesnt “cover” both somewhat likely and very likely. Its two different opinions.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:07 pm@ 89. Chyron HR says: FVNY says: Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s AT LEAST somewhat likely But according to Fox News, 59% of Americans said it was Somewhat Likely, PERIOD. So is Fox News lying, or is Rasmussen lying? December 8th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Q. So is Fox News lying, or is Rasmussen lying? A. Yes.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:07 pmI guess, technically, an out-and-out bald-faced lie could be fair and balanced. It’s a philosophical question.
Here is a nifty debunking of Climategate. Hard to believe the righties thought this was brilliant:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg
December 8th, 2009 at 1:07 pmOSTL, evidence that I namejacked you. NOW.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:08 pmNot likely poser just says weird crap for attention. Sad really…
Doesn’t change the fact that almost 60% of Americans believe that scientists are falsifying results related to climate change.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:09 pm—
and explain to me again why they are doing this. Thanks.
There is no discussion on this really, fox lies, everyone knows it.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:09 pmOSTL says:The new CNN/Opinion Research Poll shows Palin now at 46% favorable, just one point below her fellow basketball fan.
can you tell me if that number includes the tomato threwer? and the over 100 people she left in the rain before signing her book?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:09 pmand only 46% of her small fan base approves of her.is that what this poll is telling us?
i like to hear your answers
thanks
OSTL says:
Wow! It’s the same poll results that ThinkProgress reported on hours ago! Maybe by the end of the day, you’ll actually be commenting on current news!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:10 pmFVNY says:
Doesn’t change the fact that almost 60% of Americans believe that scientists are falsifying results related to climate change.
Its 94% according to Faux News.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:10 pmSince ex-gov Palin is unemployed, paid someone to write her book for her and is presently indulging in an ego, I mean book signing trip, just how does one do a ‘job approval’ rating?
Or are those responding to the survey considering her job as clown? She certainly does make us laugh.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:10 pmWell, ex-Sen. Obama, meet ex-Gov. Palin.
The new CNN/Opinion Research Poll shows Palin now at 46% favorable, just one point below her fellow basketball fan.
And now you know why she quit her job as governor. If she actually had to produce anything like jobs in today’s economy, people would actually have something to judge her for. Bury her eyeball-deep in the sh!t like the GOP have done for the current administration and then run a poll.
A useful follow-up might be “Why?” but that’s too much effort for pollsters.
Three years away from an election, who gives a rip what her rating might be? Or the president’s, for that matter?
Only whining little tools like our trolls think it’s of any import at all.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:10 pmOSTL says:
So “OSTL”, aka “FVNY” says “$$$$”?
You might be able to communicate better if you didn’t limit yourself to holding down the shift key and hitting four other keys at random.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:12 pmOSTL says:
and explain to me again why they are doing this
$$$$
And dont forget the babes. Those scientists are all in it for the sex and money
December 8th, 2009 at 1:14 pmFVNY says:
FVNY says:
Doesn’t change the fact that almost 60% of Americans believe that scientists are falsifying results related to climate change.
Its 94% according to Faux News.
____________________________________________________
Ok. So we’ll bash Fox rather than discuss why a majority of Americans think that scientific data related to global warming is bull sh!t.
I think its important to highlight where the misinformation is coming from.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:15 pmFVNY says:
FVNY says:
Doesn’t change the fact that almost 60% of Americans believe that scientists are falsifying results related to climate change.
Its 94% according to Faux News.
____________________________________________________
Ok. So we’ll bash Fox rather than discuss why a majority of Americans think that scientific data related to global warming is bull sh!t.
Uh, no, they don’t. A majority of Americans think that some of the results may have been fudged. They were not polled on whether the scientific data (which almost none of them understand) is b.s.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:15 pmNot everyone.
Like Joeseph Goebbels, Rupert Murdoch knows that some people will believe you even when they know you are lying.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:17 pmdbadass says:
Oh! I know! Who stands to benefit from hippie environmentalism? That’s right, the trees! And what do you find wherever there’s trees? ACORNS!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:18 pmThis whole stats massaging business as done by Faux displays just how easy it is to play the game. It is time for these polling groups to post the number of people who were polled and the manner in which they were selected and the demographics represented.
If someone did a poll on how popular grits were for breakfast and confined their questions to southern states the response would be radically different than if they used the entire country for a base.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:20 pmFVNY says:Actually, I don’t think progressives care what the majority of Americans think. They’ll just take the rest of us along at gunpoint!
Well you are right in one way we dont care what the minority thinks cause we are the Majority. Yes I know that dont set well with you and rest of your STUPIDs but reality is good delusions are bad.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:20 pmThe ignorant masses could never understand the results.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:22 pm—
Wanna remind me of your training in the sciences again? Have you brushed up on paleogeology of late? How about physical oceanography?
galmud says: Those scientists are all in it for the sex and money
My first read of this I saw monkeys and damn near choked on my coffee.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:22 pmThey’ll just take the rest of us along at gunpoint!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:24 pm—
Yeah you know those progressives and their boners over guns…
I’m not the one trying to empower the government to loot the wealth of the American people.
No, you are in the group of intellectually challenged and morally bankrupt who think that is a job better left to the rich.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:24 pmLet’s put Cap & Trade to a referendum and I’ll make sure to do all the research before I cast my NO vote.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:26 pmI suppose I rest my case as you have shown clearly the data is irrelevent to you…
No you’re not. Because we stopped you.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:26 pmLet me summarize FVNY for all of you. Get it all right here. That way you don’t have to waste your time reading any more of them. OK, here goes…
FVNY: “Blah, blah, blah, ignorant masses don’t know what’s good for them.”
FVNY: “Blah, blah, blah, the climate change challenge is a hoax.”
FVNY: “Blah, blah, blah, taxation is theft.”
FVNY: “Blah, blah, blah, redistribution of wealth!”
There it is, folks. That’s his complete bag of tricks. No need to waste your time anymore.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:27 pmFVNY says:
I think it was a mistake. Doesn’t change the fact that almost 60% of Americans believe that scientists are falsifying results related to climate change.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
_____________
True. This is a problem. This is a sad commentary on the state of science education in the United States.
So is the fact that a similar percentage of Americans don’t believe in evolution by natural selection. And that only 53% of Americans know how long it takes the Earth to revolve around the sun. And that only 15% of Americans know how much of the Earth’s surface is water.
We’re a stupid country. That’s the bottom line. The fact that 60% of Americans think scientists are falsifying climate change science is on par with American stupidity in everything else involving science. So why should the concerns of the uninformed have any role in formulating policy?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:27 pmduck FVNY, I’m throwing a tomato at ya. Be glad it’s not a shoe.
heh, tell us again how popular you guys are!!!!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:28 pmAh, spoken like a true Republican. If you can’t shoot something down figuratively, do it literally. What the mind can’t handle, the trigger finger can.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:29 pmrather than discuss why a majority of Americans think that scientific data related to global warming is bull sh!t
This demonstrates why this poll was taken and why it was reported as it was. If two scientists are found to have fudged data, then it’s easy to answer “very likely” to the question of whether or not to believe that “some” scientists have done so. However, this belief does not translate to a belief that scientific data, in toto, is flawed “bull sh!t”. But that’s the way FOX wants its viewers to interpret the poll.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:29 pmFVNY says:
The data was made irrelevant by an untrustworthy scientific community.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:27 pm
___________
Bullshit. Where is the evidence of the “scientific community” falsifying the raw data? Point to which email specifically discusses the “scientific community” altering the raw data used for climate models and studies, please.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:30 pmThe data was made irrelevant by an untrustworthy scientific community.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:31 pmSo the Keeling curve data is false? Don’t be ridiculous you are attempt to discount a large vloume of diverse data based on a small amount of that data set. It is absurd and you know it.
The data was made irrelevant by an untrustworthy scientific community
This conclusion is not supported by the data.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:32 pmFVNY says:
Thank you Josef Stalin!
December 8th, 2009 at 1:29 pm
_______
Well, it’s true, isn’t it?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:33 pmFVNY says:
“I hear the jury’s still out on science.”
December 8th, 2009 at 1:33 pmand explain to me again why they are doing this
$$$$
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:33 pmNot that this will get a real answer from the poser but wanna explain to me how research assistants and institute scientists are getting rich from this?
Come on, OSTL. Grow a spine and provide evidence I stole your name.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:35 pmActually, the pseudoscientific logic demonstrated by FVNY is equivalent to stereotyping of people:
A black man raped a white woman.
Therefore, the black community is made up of rapists.
is equivalent to:
Some scientists fudged data.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:35 pmTherefore, the scientific community fudged all the data.
FVNY is definitely Aaronk. His penchant for syllogistic logic always shines through.
Scientists collect data on climate change
December 8th, 2009 at 1:36 pmOne group of scientists fudged data.
All data gathered by scientists has been fudged.
dbadass says:
Not that this will get a real answer from the poser but wanna explain to me how research assistants and institute scientists are getting rich from this?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
____________
I saw someone on another blog trying to argue that the East Anglia scientists had a profit motive because they’d received $22 million in grant money from the UK government over a few years. $22 million.
That’s about what Exxon-Mobil makes in net income in five hours.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:36 pmWell, no wonder the can’t understand the science of climate change (or any OTHER science for that matter) — they can’t even do math at Faux news… or at least they are counting on their viewers not being able to do math.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pmFVNY is definitely Aaronk. His penchant for syllogistic logic always shines through.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pm—
Let alone the incessant whining about taxes and grovelling for nickels and dimes…
PatrioticLiberalChristian says:
Actually, the pseudoscientific logic demonstrated by FVNY is equivalent to stereotyping of people:
A black man raped a white woman.
Therefore, the black community is made up of rapists.
is equivalent to:
Some scientists fudged data.
Therefore, the scientific community fudged all the data.
Yep except there’s no evidence of any scientists fudging data. Just right wingers fudging the content of some stolen e-mails
December 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pmHas gore come out with an excuse as to why he cancelled his trip to cope?
–
December 8th, 2009 at 1:38 pmHave you explained why you hide your weird socially alienated personality disorder from your family and friends?
Since when has Conservative equaled willfully ignorant? I’m sure this head in the sand approach will help their cause in the long run….NOT.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:38 pmtoasterhead, one of them tried to claim that researchers were getting 3 million the other day and I pointed out that ceo’s of exxon make that much individually.
They really have nothing.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:38 pmdbadass says:
Have you brushed up on paleogeology of late? How about physical oceanography?
Our troll is still trying to figure out how geometry is different from geography. Too confusing.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:39 pmresearch assistants and institute scientists are getting rich from this?
They get checks, df! Bigh giant gov’t checks!
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:39 pmWouldn’t governments have more insentive to give them bigger checks if they came back with news that everything was A-Okay?
Note that the same people who think science is boloney will believe anything they see on Fox News, even though they know it isn’t true.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:40 pmOSTL says:
research assistants and institute scientists are getting rich from this?
They get checks, df! Bigh giant gov’t checks!
Yes to pay for their research.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:40 pmaww, the troll thinks 3 mill is giant……
You are pathetic, you know that don’t you?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:40 pmBy Aaronks standards if one right wing nutcase goes postal and shoots people because of his political belief, all right wing types are tainted.
And if one supposed news network broadcasts disinformation, all of their broadcasts are disinformation.
I guess I can see why he thinks the way he does.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:41 pmAnd then give it to scientists for a favorable opinion thus empowering the government to steal more money from the private sector, which then passes along the costs to the American public.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:44 pmSo are all the governments in on this deal? Man you are a weird conspiracist…
I can accept the term “tainted” but that doesn’t make the whole set of independently gathered data automatically “irrelevant” or, as implied, “wrong”.
And, really, should anyone who carried the water for the “wmd in Iraq” crowd be complaining about “tainted data”?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:44 pmFVNY says:
Was that what your grandfather said when the courts declared that interracial marriage was legal?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:44 pmWhere did you buy your degrees? You are unbelievably stupid.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:45 pmJust offer a plausible case for governments around the world convincing scientist around the world to scare their citizens into being better stewards of the environment or if you prefer just keep making an ass of your self all day long crying out to belong…
OSTL says:
He has?
Yep.
.
OSTL says:
Obama’s new Gallup Poll job approval number is 47%. Last month it was 53%.
Regular Ticket readers will recall how in this space in late November we pointed out that Obama’s closely watched job approval slide was coinciding with Palin’s little-noticed rise in favorability.
Not even going to argue with you. I’m really forward to y’all running her in 2012. She’s sure to win! It’s a lock. Go for it!
.
OSTL says:
They get checks, df! Bigh giant gov’t checks!
What, like this one?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:46 pmSo because a business makes money…And then gives it to scientists for a favorable opinion thus empowering…the private sector…to steal more money.
Fixed it for you, Aaronk.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:46 pmAnybody who doesn’t think the earth is 6000 years old and is not willing to lie, cheat and steal in the name of Corporate profits is painted by the Cons as unamerican, unpatriotic, on the take, criminals…..all the things the Cons actually are.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:46 pmOne day they are b itching about the big bad government taking money and bailing out corporations they next day they are complaining that the big bad government is taking away those corporations money… Fickle winds…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:48 pmYes, the majority of governments in my opinion are using global warming to enrich themselves at the expense of the people.
—-
That’s a gas…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:49 pmI saw a 85% sum pie chart on CNN International two days ago…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:49 pmdbadass says:
Where did you buy your degrees? You are unbelievably stupid.
—
Just offer a plausible case for governments around the world convincing scientist around the world to scare their citizens into being better stewards of the environment or if you prefer just keep making an ass of your self all day long crying out to belong…
I told ya. Its the sex and monkeys.. ehrm money,.. well maybe except for those heathen evolutionary scientists. I bet they would marry their beloved monkeys if they could
/snark
December 8th, 2009 at 1:49 pmYes, the majority of governments in my opinion are using global warming to enrich themselves at the expense of the people.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:49 pm—
So how is it that the money gets to this weird “themselves” entity?
OSTL says:
طابة البلوج طوسترهاد
From “toasterheads” blog. Nuff said.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:47 pm
____________
What’s wrong with that?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:50 pmOSTL says:
طابة البلوج طوسترهاد
From “toasterheads” blog. Nuff said.
What’s it say? Got a translation, or are you just being racist?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:50 pmWow! This is the biggest conspiracy in the history of the world! It’s amazing that all of these governments got together in this scam, and no one spilled the beans! The only countries not in on the deal are India and China. I guess you are saying they are the only honest governments.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:51 pmVaccines don’t work it is a money grabbing scam. Stop letting the government take your money… Geez this is fun…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:51 pmYes, it is a global conspiracy. Scientists everywhere are living in luxury as a result of gathering tainted data. Just look at the number of them flaunting their wealth. Designer lab coats. Junkets to Greenland and Antarctica. We should all be more aware of their abuses because so many scientists have multiple mansions, fleets of cars, gorgeous young women hanging on their lab coats.
Be afraid of this conspiracy. It is insidious.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:52 pmNorth Korea is actually a lovely place. The government has roped the military into telling you otherwise to grab your money. I mean for real have you been there to check it out. Lovely lovely place…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:53 pmFVNY says:
Nice hissy-fit. It’s hilarious that you originally came here intending to troll us.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:54 pmThemselves refers to governments. They tax business and people for revenues. But the business get to pass those taxes along in the form of increased costs for goods and services. The people are the ones who suffer.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:55 pmAnd then does this “government sit in some little room and divy it up amongst themsselves? How much does Inhofe get?
FVNY says:
Are you serious? Are you suggesting that a majority of Americans who disagree with certain policies or opinions should be forced to comply? And you call yourself an American?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
______________
Yes. When the majority is ill-informed, policymakers need to lead rather than follow. That’s why we have a representative government and not direct democracy.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:57 pmMan never went to the moon. That whole thing was just a ruse so that the government run space agency could… Yup you guessed it grab your money…
December 8th, 2009 at 1:57 pmOSTL says:
What’s wrong with that?
It’s un-American.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
__________
True. Would you prefer I wrote in Cherokee instead?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:58 pmFVNY says:
The people are the ones who suffer.
Suffer from what? The government providing public services?
December 8th, 2009 at 1:58 pmThe people are the ones who suffer.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 1:59 pmEspecially the future generations what with the clean air and water and abundance of resources and all….
Choosing to be ignorant and willfully twisting the facts seems un-American.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:59 pmSee? India and China weren’t in on that scam either. It must be nice to live in those countries where the governments are honest, unlike here in the US.
December 8th, 2009 at 1:59 pmThe government gets the money and then progressives figure out how to divy it up and redistribute it to make a more “just” society.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 2:00 pmOh so in the end the government doesn’t get rich. I am sorry I thought that was your premise.
Scientists don’t have to get rich, just keep working.
Ah but you and your halfwit friends are claiming some sort of conspiracy based on money.
And speaking of money and tainted data, can you address the scientists who actually are paid to prostitute themselves by accepting money from the oil companies for public release of their fraudulent and tainted data?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:00 pmSo it goes to the people who are the ones that suffer. I see…
December 8th, 2009 at 2:01 pmFVNY says:
They do both. They bailout their friends in big business for taking undue risk and then tax businesses for revenue knowing full well that those costs get passed on to the consumer.
So we should elect politicians who support consumer rights… oh wait, that’d be Obama.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:01 pmThere is no such thing as germs…go ahead eat with the hand you wipe with…if you get sick god is punishing you for believing the logic of science. Amen and more tax cuts for the wealthy.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:02 pmThose scientists sure are dumb, running a scam just to keep working. Most swindlers do it to get rich.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:02 pmFVNY says:
Higher costs. And how much of the money government seizes from Cap & Trade going to go into public services? And what public services will benefit. Oh right, the government will decide. Glad to see you have such trust.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
___________
If you don’t like it, you’re welcome to find another country to live in. Love it or leave it, hippie!
December 8th, 2009 at 2:03 pmThe government gets the money and then progressives figure out how to divy it up and redistribute it to make a more “just” society.
As opposed to a very small number of people getting rich and having no social conscience whatsoever.
Never did read the Preamble, did you, pumpkin.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:05 pmThose scientists sure are dumb, running a scam just to keep working. Most swindlers do it to get rich.
—
December 8th, 2009 at 2:05 pmAnd a scam of global magnitude. It is mind boggling isn’t it….
Oh no, they get plenty rich.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:06 pm— Wanna explain how? What is Ms Bachmann’s cut?
He only trusts the governments of India and China. I guess that kind of narrows down his choices.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:07 pmOSTL says:
These far left loons don’t understand that the more “evidence” of “global warming” the “scientists” find the longer the “scientists” get to keep their jobs.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
______________
Then why are the far right loons always complaining that the science of global warming is inconclusive and that more research is needed? Seems like you want it both ways – you oppose scientists finding evidence of climate change because it keeps them employed, and you oppose them not finding evidence, because it keeps them employed.
Just proves that you far right loons are anti-science, period.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:08 pmDBadass says: I suppose I rest my case as you have shown clearly the data is irrelevant to you
The data was made irrelevant by an untrustworthy scientific community. — FVNY
**********************************************************
So you believe that the entire scientific community as a whole is untrustworthy because a few scientists may have misinterpreted or even falsified their data? Good grief — talk about throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
I imagine that you must find life extremely difficult. It would seem that the reason why you don’t put any trust in science and apparently find little virtue in it is because it depends upon the effort of flawed and imperfect human beings — even though most of the time, science is grounded upon statistics and empirical observation. With all due respect, if that’s the case, then I’m very much inclined to wonder what if anything you do trust or even could trust in this world, given that so much of what we experience in life depends on the efforts of flawed and imperfect human beings. Am I to understand that you’ve never once made a mistake, misrepresented the truth, or betrayed someone’s trust in your life…even if only by accident?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:09 pmGravity is just a theory. The earth sucks. Use it, throw it away. Praise Jesus.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:09 pmFVNY, just who is it that makes up our government? Are they aliens? Does taking a government job involve some sort of weird indoctrination that makes them inhuman robots?
Just why do you hate the idea of a government of the people, by the people and for the people?
Oh wait, never mind. You are a Republican.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:09 pmOh, I see. Your premise is that politicians are getting rich by pissing off the oil and coal companies.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:09 pmlonger the “scientists” get to keep their jobs.
Man, we seriously got some Blue’s Clues level of investigating going on here…
Tell us, exactly how, you think these scientists made a living prior to your paranoid theory, please?!
December 8th, 2009 at 2:10 pmAre you denying that politicians get rich while they’re in office?
—
December 8th, 2009 at 2:10 pmMost are rich before they get there. Actually what I am doing is asking you how this complex international scam works. Ultimately how do they decide how much of the climate scam they are running goes to each member of the big bad governments around the world operating the scam? Come on my friend this is your idea not mine.
all this off-topic nonsense and thread derailment is going to get at least one special needs righty banned from this site,
and that will be a very good thing.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:10 pmFVNY says:
These far left loons don’t understand that the more “evidence” of “global warming” the “scientists” find the longer the “scientists” get to keep their jobs.
__________________________________________
BINGO!
Whats so great about keeping their jobs if they spend all days fudging data without getting a rotten nickel for their efforts?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:11 pmis that bridge made out of wmd’s, or does it go to nowhere?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:12 pmI’m not sure if globalists planned this together or the individual governments just jumped on the bandwagon when they realized its a money maker.
OK now I’m intrigued. Who are the “globalists”?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:14 pmIt is simply amasing how much the junior senator from Alabama made on that whole lead is bad for you scam…
December 8th, 2009 at 2:14 pmFVNY:
December 8th, 2009 at 2:16 pmWhen is the part when you wrap flags all over everything and claim greatest nation on Earth is that before or after you condemn the government as worse than organized crime and capable of manipulating the entire globe in a massive scheme to get rich?
and the globalists do all this so that the progressives can redistribute the stoled funds? Damn this is a complex web…
December 8th, 2009 at 2:18 pmBecause the Dems are in office and there’s 10% unemployment.
Economic collapse of Wall Street: September 2008
Trillion plus deficit due to two wars: 2003-2008
The fact that unemployment is only at 10% and slowly improving: Jan 20, 2009 to present.
Sort of like a Master Card commercial.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:20 pmFVNY says:
I suppose I rest my case as you have shown clearly the data is irrelevent to you
__________________________________________________
The data was made irrelevant by an untrustworthy scientific community.
See if you base that out of hacked emails taken OUT OF CONTEXT, without taking into account how scientists use words like trick, then just imagine how the GOP looks even WITHOUT taking them out of context? Let’s see…WMDs in Iraq should be enough to kick them out of power for GOOD if we had an informed populace…
December 8th, 2009 at 2:20 pmdb, you missed the part about hanging the flag draped package being hung on a cross.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:21 pmOSTL says:
Tell us, exactly how, you think these scientists made a living prior to your paranoid theory, please?!
Studying the flow of ketchup?
nah, that’s Reagan’s FDA for ya…haha
December 8th, 2009 at 2:22 pmOSTL:
December 8th, 2009 at 2:25 pmYou are flailing about again. Wanna tell us of your goals and objectives and why you hide your twiseted OCD and social alienation issues from your family. I am sure they would be impressed with how you spend your days crying out to be noticed…
Scientists are scammers…all you need to know is tax cuts to the wealthy create jobs, Corporations don’t need any regulation, the poor are that way because is punishing them for being logical.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:27 pmshould be god is punishing.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:28 pmDrill, baby, drill = Burn, baby, burn.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:31 pmFVNY says:
Oh right, the government will decide. Glad to see you have such trust.
Well as an American patriot who believes in democracy and the Constitution, I understand that our government is “We The People.” I’m comfortable with that, and participate in the democratic process to make sure my opinion is taken into account, even as I respect the opinions of my fellow voters. The government of the U.S.A. is not a “they,” it is a “we.” To a treasonous fascist like yourself, such a concept must seem strange and alien.
.
FVNY says:
Baaaaa! Baaaaa!
What’s this, a redneck pickup line? Are you coming on to me?
December 8th, 2009 at 2:32 pmLet me point out something to no one in particular. The poll does not say the “majority of Americans think scientists likely fudged their global warming data”.
It says, the “majority of poll respondents” felt some way. The sampling is probably 1,000 people or less and includes people too stupid not to answer the phone at dinner time. We’ve never had a poll covering all Americans’ opinions, the closest we ever get may be a presidential election.
Can I get some back-up from Bluestockings? You wrote that you had some experience in polls and statistical research.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:48 pmOSTL, waiting for you to provide evidence is LIKE watching ketchup flow.
December 8th, 2009 at 2:57 pm257 – if ketchup was made of dumb, and not tomatoes.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:00 pmFun with Real audio – George W. Bush…
love that one
December 8th, 2009 at 3:07 pm@ 152. LibertyLover says: Well, no wonder the can’t understand the science of climate change (or any OTHER science for that matter) — they can’t even do math at Faux news… or at least they are counting on their viewers not being able to do math. December 8th, 2009 at 1:37 pm
And not being able to do the math and not understanding the science? Well, that obviously makes scientists untrustworthy. You can take FVNY’s word on that.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:08 pmNow I’m really confused. You said the politians around the world were joined in a conspiracy to get rich by fooling people into believing in global warming. I’m pretty sure the CEO of Exxon/Mobile is pretty pissed off about that.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:09 pmAaronk has posted contradictary and paradoxical things because he has no basis for anything. Global conspiracy involving money, scientists who are rich, government stealing money, he just pulls things from his butt and flings.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:16 pmdbadass says:
OSTL:
You are flailing about again. Wanna tell us of your goals and objectives and why you hide your twiseted OCD and social alienation issues from your family. I am sure they would be impressed with how you spend your days crying out to be noticed…
well see his parents do know about his OCD and that why they borough him his PC so he can be occupied at something, maybe while they try to fine some where they can leave him at.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:20 pmFVNY says:
Uh, no, they don’t. A majority of Americans think that some of the results may have been fudged. They were not polled on whether the scientific data (which almost none of them understand) is b.s.
______________________________________________________
The ignorant masses could never understand the results. So we trust that you, the government, and the scientists tell us what’s good for us.
Spoken like a true progressive. Truly disgusting!
Sorry to be late responding but since I have a job rather than whatever welfare program is supporting Aaronk, I was away from the PC for several hours.
To suggest that most Americans do not understand the data being used and analyzed by climatologists in no way denigrates Americans’ intelligence — although it is pleasantly surprising to see a wingnut speaking highly of public education in this country.
I’m fairly well educated, but I don’t understand quantum mechanics, or high-level astrophysics, or a good many other scientific fields either. I don’t have to and I haven’t spent years or decades studying in a highly specialized field. What continues to amaze me about climate change is that every Tom, Dick and Harry considers themselves qualified to decry “junk science” purely on the basis of intuition.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:29 pmI’d suggest ignoring F(u)NY and lOSTL for the remainder of the day; they seem to be stuck in an unterminated DO-loop or an infinite recursion.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:33 pmOSTL / FVNY –
The oil companies / coal companies and other large corporate entities are running a vicious campaign against climate change.
They apparently are not happy about this.. they feel it’s going to hurt business.
Governments are recognizing that we are going to need to gang together to give support for developing nations to support climate change efforts – no one is really eager to flip the bill for them.
These entities aren’t going to benefit from this ‘mass conspiracy’ – they are reluctantly fighting for it for the planet’s sake.. their pockets won’t get lined from it – it’s a costly endeavor. The only thing they stand to gain is continued existence on this planet. Your view of the government’s motives is ridiculous.. it implies they will expend tons of political capital – and also money.. to support a cause that, were it a hoax, is not advantageous to them in any way.
Your viewpoint is just nuts. – Occam’s Razor says they are doing these things with the sincere hope of preventing a catastrophe. Hopefully they make progress.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:34 pm@ 266. An excellent point, gummitch. Well said.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:35 pmI guess that means you have no response!
Pay attention, pumpkin. My response was that you are so scattered in your claims that there can be no real response. You are just looking for attention and will say anything just to keep from living in the whacky world of your head with all your little voices.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:44 pmOSTL says:
——————————————————————————–
Really?
59, 35 and 26…Exactly what the screen says! Exactly what the poll says! Flunk reading much?
Uh…did you not read the screen, or the article for that matter? FOX counted the “very likely” TWICE.
It’s clear FOX manipulated the stats to make it look like 104% (59+34) of the respondents believe it’s somewhat likely or more that the scientists manipulated *their* stats.
Irony, thy name is FOX.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:44 pmIrrespective of my advice to ignore the trolls for the remainder of the day, they do vex me. I’d like to pronounce a pox on them, but poxes went out with spells, yanno?
However, as a semi-retired lab rat, someone who worked supporting various scientific endeavours and worked with and for scientists, I think this thread’s trolls do deserve a swift kick. The only mitigating factor I see is their ignorance and stupidity – ah, but that’s what makes them trolls, that mixed with an unpleasant intransigience and nastiness. I take it back – there are no mitigating factors.
Allow me to point out that if the conclusions drawn from the climate data are wrong, or if someone is massaging the data to make a falsified set from which to draw a conclusion to support a pre-determined position, that someone(s) will be found out and their careers will be ruined. It’s happened to more than one scientist in the last decade or two.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:47 pmEh. Dammit. 59+34=93%, not 104. RE: post 271
December 8th, 2009 at 3:48 pmVirtual Pebble says:
they seem to be stuck in an unterminated DO-loop
December 8th, 2009 at 3:33 pm
____________
More like an unterminated DUH-loop. XD
December 8th, 2009 at 3:53 pm@ 272. Dear Idiot Trolls,
Keep in mind that if, based on an erroneous or massaged data set, a decision is taken to clean up greenhouse and other pollutants at the source, rather less harm is done than if the pollutants are not cleaned up and it turns out that all the climate change claims are correct.
Apart from there being less harm done in cleaning up pollutants, it also happens to be a useful direction to take in developing technology and industrial processes.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:54 pmVirtual Pebble says:
I’d like to pronounce a pox on them, but poxes went out with spells, yanno?
December 8th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
______________
Not entirely. Thanks to the work of the antivaccine hysterics, smallpox just might make a resurgence.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:55 pmbluesunflower says:
——————————————————————————–
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1866862,00.html
Hey, global warming deniers: Wake me when our temperatures go down to pre-Industrial Revolution levels, otherwise STFU.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:57 pmShouldn’t conservatives support the global warming initiatives?
It is an opportunity to make money by creating technologies that could be sold worldwide.
Besides, if the world is goes to shit, then there will be no more chances for making money.
Oh wait, there is still the rapture!!!
December 8th, 2009 at 4:17 pmOSTL@246 said,
I guess our troll is much to ignorant to realize that the study of fluid mechanics is one of the many schools of science, which yielded such innovations as the boat, and plumbing.
I wonder how much a scientist could learn from the study of flowing catsup that could change the world? What would it be worth to have an invention as valuable to humanity as buoyancy?
Idiot trolls don’t have the faintest idea that scientists study everything, including the flow of viscous fluids. The fantasy reality in which the fascist wingnuts live does not value science, and our ignorant trolls are ignorant as a direct result of it.
December 8th, 2009 at 4:20 pmSure but he always has the option to pass along the extra costs to the consumer
December 8th, 2009 at 4:51 pm—
So is he in on the scam as well or not?
I see. dbadass poses a good question. Are the oil comapnies behind the whole conspiracy to convince people that oil consumption causes global warming? Are they paying the politicians all over the world to get them to participate in this scam?
December 8th, 2009 at 5:20 pmFVNY says:
I guess that means you have no response!
Don’t need one. You have no evidence.
A global conspiracy of all of the governments and science in the world to perpetuate an incredibly complicated lie regarding the fate of our biosphere, is something I would refer to as an “extraordinary claim.” We’re talking about thousands of independent climate scientists forging massive amounts of data for decades at the bidding of hundreds of independent government and inter-governmental agencies, all coordinated behind the scenes by… who, Al Gore? The guy who couldn’t even beat that dumb hick from Crawford TX by a clear electoral margin?
December 8th, 2009 at 5:39 pmI see. Dbadass poses a good question. Are the oil comapnies behind the whole conspiracy to convince people that oil consumption causes global warming? Are they paying the politicians all over the world to get them to participate in this scam? — Shoeless
********************************************************
You’re being facetious, I trust. If anything, oil companies are probably playing a hand in the efforts to derail the debate over climate change since evidence which demonstrates that climate change is indeed taking place and that human beings are playing a significant role in it would represent a significant threat to their profits. If a majority of human beings were to acknowledge that human beings are having a negative impact on the climate, this would probably result in a significant conservation effort around the globe and more stringent industry standards. The oil companies and other corporations have scientists of their own working for them, after all…and if some climatologists have been deliberately misinterpreting and/or falsifying data in support of climate change so that they can keep their jobs, it’s reasonable to assume that some scientists working on behalf of the oil industry and/or other corporate interests face an equivalent temptation to deliberately misrepresent their findings so that they can keep their jobs and help maintain the status quo.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:02 pmFox and anyone who watches it are nothing but supermarket tabloid reading idiots. Its not news.
Unfortunately, in America, its perfectly legal to print or broadcast complete lies.
December 8th, 2009 at 7:32 pmLet me point out something to no one in particular. The poll does not say the “majority of Americans think scientists likely fudged their global warming data”.
It says, the “majority of poll respondents” felt some way. The sampling is probably 1,000 people or less and includes people too stupid not to answer the phone at dinner time. We’ve never had a poll covering all Americans’ opinions, the closest we ever get may be a presidential election.
Can I get some back-up from Bluestockings? You wrote that you had some experience in polls and statistical research. — Ice9
*******************************************************
Happy to oblige. My experience with polls and statistical research comes primarily as a result of finishing two degrees in the social sciences — one undergraduate and one graduate, both from schools which are considered by most authorities to be very selective. The required coursework for both degrees included classes in research design and experimental ethics as well as statistics.
One of the particular difficulties with conducting polls and similar variations of social scientific research is the fact that the data being obtained in these instances deals with opinion, and opinion does not necessarily have any actual relationship to facts or truth in any other context apart from the individual’s belief or experience. In this instance, the fact that a significant percentage of those polled believe that some scientists have skewed the data does not by itself necessarily indicate that they have skewed the data. After all, the majority of human beings believed for centuries that the sun revolved around the earth rather than vice versa…but that by itself did nothing to alter the facts. As one of my favorite authors once wrote, “the facts do not go away simply because they are ignored.” Scientists do not create the truth — they merely reveal it.
Another problem which social scientists face is the prospect of demand characteristics — the potential that the pollster or researcher might, perhaps without even consciously being aware of it, be influencing the subject to deliver the desired or expected response. One of the ways in which a researcher can — whether deliberately or unintentionally — skew a study is by polling a sample which is not sufficiently random, which means that the results apply only to the sample studied and cannot be reliably extrapolated to the larger population. As an example, a poll taken from regular FOX News viewers will probably produce very different results from an identical poll taken from regular readers of Mother Jones simply because the polling sample in both cases is already somewhat skewed in favor of certain viewpoints. It’s also possible to phrase the questions within a poll in such a way that encourages one particular answer over the others. In my opinion, the wording of the Rasmussen poll was not particularly leading and asked a legitimate question — however, FOX opted to paraphrase rather than quote the original question (which in itself is a distortion) and in a way which most experienced researchers would consider leading. The original question asked people for their opinions on how likely they thought it was that some scientists have falsified data — the way in which FOX chose to paraphrase and interpret the question, above and beyond the preposterous figures, made it seem as if they had been asked whether they thought all the scientists had falsified their data and that’s not the same question! That’s why I said what I did above — that FOX News is actually guilty of misrepresenting and distorting the data which Rasmussen collected, making them guilty of the same offense which they’re accusing the climate scientists of having committed. Do I hear glass shattering? Methinks I do…
December 8th, 2009 at 7:52 pmA sample size of 1000 is plenty big enough, provided that the sampling was done using research industry best practices.
However, as I’ve pointed out a couple of times here, there are at least two ways to interpret the question. It can either be an admission of the news item that some climate scientists seem to have manipulated their data, or a statement of belief regarding the general trend of behavior among climate scientists. That may lead to two different answers in many cases.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:10 pmFox: Insane tv for the insane.
Unfortunately that’s a not an insignificant portion of the tv viewing population.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:38 pmSilly liberal “thinkers”. Did you bother to do the research on this picture? Or did you simply fall in line with what the internet told you? (because everyone knows the internet never lies). Here, let me do the research for you:
Those numbers were taken out of context. Here it is in context:
“Fifty-nine percent (59%) of Americans say it’s at least somewhat likely that some scientists have falsified research data to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming. Thirty-five percent (35%) say it’s Very Likely. Just 26% say it’s not very or not at all likely that some scientists falsified data. ”
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming
59% is all of the people who though that it as “at least” somewhat likely (meaning that this figure also includes the “very likely” stat)
Said a different way, 59% believe that the data is falsified, but the 39% are more sure than the remaining 24%.
I wonder if we listened to the audio that went along with this screen shot, that might be explained.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:41 pm288…while we may have caught that nuance, the point is Fox News probably framed those numbers that way to suggest that MORE people are in denial over climate change…
December 8th, 2009 at 8:43 pmthe point is the FRAMING of issues that Fox does…so perhaps you missed that point from all of our posts…
December 8th, 2009 at 8:51 pmThe bigger point is due to a misinformation campaign by Big Tobacco, people believed that smoking was not addicting. Due to Big Oil and Big Business’ disinformation campaign, people have been brainwashed into believing that it is actually the scientists who are brainwashing them when the big money powers are the ones projecting what they are doing to the scientists. The bigger issue here is propaganda from Big money interests enabled by their media lapdogs and Fox, which is a willing propaganda network that dupes its listeners into thinking that they are fair and balanced.
December 8th, 2009 at 8:53 pmJESmith says:
——————————————————————————–
Silly liberal “thinkers”. Did you bother to do the research on this picture? Or did you simply fall in line with what the internet told you?
Perhaps you should read the article yourself and figure out what the REAL problem is. Or read post #271, which just says it again.
December 9th, 2009 at 1:23 am@ 288. JESmith says: Silly liberal “thinkers”. Did you bother to do the research on this picture? Or did you simply fall in line with what the internet told you? (because everyone knows the internet never lies). Here, let me do the research for you: Those numbers were taken out of context. Here it is in context: “Fifty-nine percent (59%) … December 8th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
Unlike USCKitty @ 289, I won’t give you the benefit of nuance, JESmith. I haven’t looked at Rasmussen’s page, but I’m reasonably sure that they didn’t conflate two sets, producing an equivalent to a double counting error, but FUX Noise Channel did in that screen shot, and I have no problem thinking that they did so deliberately and did not alert their viewers that their 59% number just happened to include the following 35% value. I also suspect that it would have gone over the head of more than 50% of Fux’s viewers as they neither give the proverbial shit nor do they care to understand anything requiring numeracy beyond knowing the point spread for whatever round or ovoid ball game is on at the moment.
Yelping that “scientists fudge data” doesn’t do much more than pander to the bigotry of that set of viewers. It merely confirms them in their prejudices. You want a nation of know-nothings? Then by all means, continue to support Fux Noise.
December 9th, 2009 at 1:24 amJESmith says:
Silly liberal “thinkers”. Did you bother to do the research on this picture? Or did you simply fall in line with what the internet told you? (because everyone knows the internet never lies). Here, let me do the research for you:
Did the people watching FAUX Noise have time to “do the research on this picture” when it was flashed in front of their faces for a couple of seconds? We aren’t the ones misrepresenting the numbers, FAUX is.
December 9th, 2009 at 2:14 amJESmith says:
Silly liberal “thinkers”. Did you bother to do the research on this picture? Or did you simply fall in line with what the internet told you? (because everyone knows the internet never lies).
Then why did you use the internet to prove your point? How else would we have researched this?
And I won’t bother going into why opinion polls (where the opinions of uninformed people are measured) are the most unreliable of all.
December 9th, 2009 at 9:26 amIf you go back and read the posts by dbadass, my self and the idiotic wingnut, FVNY, you will see that the fool twisted himself into a pretzel trying to argue that all the governments and scientists in the world were in on a conspiracy to fool the public into believing in global warming. The knucklehead couldn’t tell us where the money was coming from to fuel this conspiracy, except for a vague concept of global corporations, which include oil companies. We were just making fun of his idiocy, as he probably made the stupidist agrument in the history of dumbass right-wing nonsense.
December 9th, 2009 at 11:00 amSorry I missed this episode of the two-minutes-hate. You’re all so anxious to jump on the bandwagon that not one of you apparently checked the source of the poll to see that all Fox did was present the data the same way it was presented in their source, simplifying the graphic for simpletons like, well, all y’all, for instance. Did anybody take note of the audio portion, or were you all too entranced by the pretty pictures?
December 10th, 2009 at 4:47 amThank you..
Sesli Chat Sesli Sohbet Sesli Chat Sesli Sohbet
December 10th, 2009 at 3:11 pmOnce again, this was a local fox affiliate not Fox News Channel. What the local broadcasters at the Buffalo NBC affiliate do does not reflect one way or another on Brian Williams, or anyone else at NBC news. The same is true when it’s some local broadcaster at a FOX affiliate somewhere. When you imply that you caught FNC doing something that they didn’t do, it’s no less idiotic than retards at FNC faking a chart. You’re simply spinning something to fit your own agenda, just like them.
December 10th, 2009 at 5:30 pmiT’S THE NEW MATH!
December 11th, 2009 at 12:23 pmA sample size of 1000 is plenty big enough, laptop battery provided that the sampling was done using research industry best practices.
December 11th, 2009 at 10:49 pmThank you for your sharing.!
December 14th, 2009 at 4:32 pm