How Weather Influences Global Warming Opinions 517
An anonymous reader writes in with this story about how people's belief in climate change shifts with the temperature. "Last week's polar vortex weather event wasn't only hard on fingers, toes and heating bills. It also overpowered the ability of most people to make sound judgments about climate change, in the same way that heat waves do, according to a new study published in the Jan. 11 issue of the journal Nature Climate Change. Researchers have known for some time that the acceptance of climate change depends on the day most people are asked. During unusually hot weather, people tend to accept global warming, and they swing against it during cold events."
Global vs. local effects (Score:5, Interesting)
Global warming is exactly that- a global trend, not a local one. Locally, the effects have been most pronounced near the north pole [wikimedia.org], which is not exactly a place where many people live.
Global climate change seems to have resulted recently in a "warming" trend, but as we know from Al Gore's movie, if the North Atlantic current gets shut off we are in for a polar vortex on a much longer time scale.
I am not sure who coined the phrase "global warming"; is it a PR failure by the scientists involved or a reporting failure by the news media? To quote a well known meme: "why not both?"
Re:Egocentrism (Score:5, Interesting)
"I don't live in a totalitarian police state because I've never been detained without charge or sentenced without trial or deprived of property without warrant."
Re:Egocentrism (Score:3, Interesting)
Well, you need to haul back your slobbering, drooling politicians and CNN. I have a file of fraudulent rhetoric that is shameful and manipulative.
The capstone was a CNN article that screamed in the headline, " Global warming will be like the tsunami!", this being right after the Indian ocean one, with all the horriffic videon. About 2/3 the way down, they pointed out they meant up to a 30-foot sea rise ovet 100-300 years, not a sudden catastrophe.
By the way, we can **less** imagine the science in 100 years than people in 1914 could today's, much less the people of 1714. We are foolish and quality of life will be best served by continuing economic development apace. How stupid our ancestors would habe been in 1900 to put brakes on development and present us a clean air world in 2014 with, maybe, 1970-level tech.
Thanks for nothing. cNet effect: many more megadeath, not less, and lower quality of life, not better.