Fox News fiddles with climate change polling
December 08, 2009 6:47 am ET by Simon Maloy
Do you want to know how serious the "Climategate" hacked e-mail scandal is? It's so serious that, according to Rasmussen, 120 percent of Americans have an opinion on it. At least, that's what I learned from watching the December 4 edition of Fox & Friends, which featured this graphic:
What happened? 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.
As such, Fox News' presentation of the data made it seem as though 94 percent of Americans think it's at least "somewhat likely" that climate scientists falsify their research data.
As for the data itself, based on the phrasing of Rasmussen's question there's no way to know who the respondents were thinking of when they answered. It's possible that they could have been thinking of the climate scientists who compile the IPCC reports, it's also possible that they could have been thinking of the scientists on Exxon Mobil's payroll.
It's impossible to tell what motivated Fox to distort Rasmussen's data this way. The network as a whole has quite obviously sided with the "skeptics" and regularly plays host to a whole roster of petroleum industry-funded climate change deniers. Then again, it very well may be that the graphics department simply got confused once they started adding percentages together and didn't catch the mistake before it went on the air. Either way, it would appear that Fox News' new "zero tolerance" policy regarding mistakes isn't having its desired effect.
UPDATE: Here's a video of the Fox & Friends crew amplifiying their absurdly false graphic:
Media Matters: Will Glenn Beck's The Blaze follow Breitbart's trail?
Media Matters: On the brink of Glenn Beck's salvation
Let's see if they will now report on "Foxgate". What is the truth? How will the public know? Have we been lied to?
Just asking questions. Maybe Beck can answer them for me.
What is the End Game, What is the Strategic Plan & is there a Connection?
Let's go over the Known Facts, Hatred of Hispanics, Black, Gays & Lesbians.
To Facilitate this they don't use Journalists but instead use Former Beauty Queens that are better qualified as Thespians.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
He added up to over 90 with 26 more to go, maybe im crazy but i thought he looked Awake.
Am i being mean if i say that Fox & Friends is a Flake?
Kilmeade & Doocy, Do Flies go with that Shake?
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
Biggles! Fetch...THE CUSHIONS!
What!
AKA, mission accomplished.
~
----------------
> 50% of Americans have either not followed the news reports very closely, not at all, or aren't sure.
So about 1/2 aren't following this enough to know what is really going on.
----------------
> 52% think there's significant disagreement within the scientific community about global warming.
That may be what the general population believes, but the facts are different:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/Klaus-Martin-Schulte-and-scientific-consensus.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americas/01/19/eco.globalwarmingsurvey/
----------------
> 59% believe scientists have either falsified the data, or somewhat likely falsified the data.
That may be what the general population believes, but it just does not make sense that somehow just scientists involved with climate change are the only ones who falsify the data on such a massive scale as to invalidate all data proving global warming.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-do-the-hacked-CRU-emails-tell-us.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nnVQ2fROOg
----------------
> 54% are either don't believe global warming is serious, or aren't sure.
So an ill-informed, or uninformed population is no gauge of the facts or seriousness of global warming.
It does tell us that there's a PR issue that needs to be addressed. But PR aside, it still does not change the facts about humans causing global warming.
There's already a U.S. senator on his way to Copenhagen to tell the delegates this weekend that there's no chance in hell of the U.S. senate authorizing ANY funding until the science is made transparent, available, and brought out of secrecy.
Like it or not, he's right.
Inhofe's a complete idiot. He's sealed his fate. Now his constituents will see him for what he is - a 2-bit hack politician who get's his marching orders from big oil. He doesn't care one bit about his constituents. They'll soon see this.
Now that he and all the deniers have made such a big deal out of this so-called "climategate", it's full-scale on the radar with the American public.
Good for science. Bad for the deniers like Inhofe. Why?
By spring of 2010, the investigation will be over at CRU. As the preliminary results show, there's nothing there to even hint at a conspiracy.
That's how you conspiracy theorists will fade away - people will see what really happened, and wonder why they ever even listened to your rants - this includes Inhofe.
You can fool all of the people some of the time (e.g. "climategate!"), and some of people all the time (e.g. deniers), but you can't fool all the people all the time.
Better be prepared for a major let-down.
Inhofe's constituants are from Oklahoma. He will be reelected. Cap and trade will never see the light of day in the Senate. Like it or not, this is incredibly political, and I'm just being a realist.
I suspect that by spring of 2010 some scientists deleting messages to avoid FOIA requests will be in jail. I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I didn't write the email asking four scientists to delete data to avoid disclosing it. It's completely available, so look it up yourself and come to your own conclusions. Search for "IPCC & FOI".
I have not ranted here or anywhere else. I am not a "denier". I simply want to see the science. This is not a nuclear weapon, so why is it secret? Also, all science not covered by official secrets acts that was done using government grants is in the public domain. Why isn't this science in that domain?
I know you can't answer that, and I don't expect you to. But you should be asking the question.
As for your post below, observational science always needs questioning. There is no Pythagorean theorem parallel. Aristotlean lemmings held back knowledge for nearly two millennia, and his "science" was still being taught in the 17th century.
Less than 100 years ago, despite 300+ years of telescopic observations, Edwin Hubble finally stuck his neck out and said many of those "nebulae" in the catalogs were actually galaxies.
How did that happen? Why is his name on the greatest observatory man has ever known?
Because he questioned the "settled" science. We should never stop doing the same.
Agreed. But when we question "settled science," it should not be with a foreordained conclusion in mind, ala Big Tobacco and Big Oil.
There was a guy last night who called in on the Ron Reagan show demanding to see all the raw data from the scientists...
Ron tried explaining to him that the raw data is not something most people would understand... that there are maybe a few thousand people in the world who can properly interpret the data.
This caller then proceeds (and you can hear the desperation in his voice at this point) to tell Ron about a petition signed by over 31,000 scientist who say that Global Warming is fake.
Ron debunks that by asking a simple question that this caller obviously forgot to ask himself: How many of those scientists are actual 'climate' scientists? Ron did not deny that all the signatories of the petition were scientists, he did however point out that a geneticist or engineers are not climatologists and so that petition is basically bunk.
This is the kind of people we are dealing with here... a sad sack group of people who were never taught how to properly think critically and who cannot see reality accept through a pair of horse blinders.
The opinions of the general population may play well in the political arena, but it doesn't change the science.
I see a lot of "Well, science can be wrong! After all, they used to think the earth was flat!" A weak argument that doesn't prove anything, and is actually false. The general population thought the earth was flat, but the scholars (we call the scientists now) knew the earth was round, because they saw that ships moved below the horizon as they sailed away, and the positions of the constellations shifted as you traveled north/south.
The general population is never a gauge for determining what is or is not factual.
Increased knowledge builds societies. Ignorance and stupidity stops progress, or just tears it down.
Here's a good video on this subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU&feature=player_embedded#
Here you go. Maybe you can understand this.
Obviously, you don't know how to check your information, before spouting your understanding (or lack thereof) of the facts.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/kids/climateweather.html
Yet another elitist leftist (redundant) telling those who disagree with him how we “were never taught how to properly think critically” while he can’t even use the proper word of ‘except’ and instead uses ‘accept’! It seems SLRTX needs some tutoring on the proper use of the English language, eh? (BTW, I only point this out because I always get slammed if I happen to make a typo.)
Of course the SLRTX types don’t know the proper use of the word ‘trick’ either, just like their fraudulent ‘scientist’ friends with their thousands of emails proving just how much of a hoax their claim is that humans are the main cause of GW.
"thousands of emails proving just how much of a hoax their claim is that humans are the main cause of GW"
Just exactly what IS that number of emails that you deniers keep posting over and over and over....?
Thousands? Are you sure, or are you just regurgitating what you've been spoon-fed?
Fact - Just over a 1000 emails were published. Of that, just a handful of them are cherry-picked as examples of a "mass fraud."
You can't even get your facts straight.
Deniers never could explain how just scientists involved with climate studies are the only ones who chose to pull off a mass conspiracy of fraud and deception.
Why shouldn't ALL scientists be involved with faked data? You guys should dig deeper. This conspiracy may prove that ALL technology we use today is just one massive fraud!!!!!
OMG!!! Einstein was wrong! Newton was wrong! Fermi was wrong! It's all wrong!!!!!!
This is a problem that concerns all of humanity. We have had the privilege of having a happier and wealthier lifestyle because of technology. It is our duty to make sure that whatever we put into the atmosphere, environment, water, land, and air causes the least amount of destruction as possible.
We have to live with our consequences of using natural resources. We have to take blame for pollution in the oceans, the destruction of rain forests, the overuse of energy, and the hammering that plant and animal populations are getting from it.
If you don't want to cooperate, fine. Go sit on the sidelines, but don't expect to be given any credit if problems get solved and don't ask for handouts if it succeeds.
Brilliant! You really have taught me and SLRTX (or is it SLTRX and I? - perhaps Mr. Retired in SF cn spread is awesome knowledge) a lesson.
This is an internet forum... spelling errors, minor grammatical mistakes, and typo's do not take away from what is being said, unless you are a tight a$$ conservative looking to score a few cheap points!
If this were an essay on the subject in my quest for a Masters degree, I would agree with you on my spelling error... and I stand by this stance regardless of your being called out for grammatical errors... since I do not do that!
But since you are willing to 'get even' about petty and minor stuff... I might point out that it was I and not SLRTX who made the original error. Perhaps you should learn to read before you comment?
This is exactly why I don't think you leftists are normal. YOU PEOPLE ARE THE VERY ONES WHO CALL ME OUT FOR A TINY SPELLING ERROR! Then have the audacity to criticize me for mentioning same - which I wouldn't have done in the first place (as I said in my prior post) if YOU CONDSENDING LEFTISTS HAD NOT SLAMMED ME! The fact you don't get this tells me you can't think clearly. You brains are mis-wired.
"Yet another elitist leftist (redundant) telling those who disagree with him how we were never taught how to properly think critically while he can't even use the proper word of "except" and instead uses "accept"
To which I said: "If this were an essay on the subject in my quest for a Masters degree, I would agree with you on my spelling error... and I stand by this stance regardless of your being called out for grammatical errors... since I do not do that!"
To which you now reply: "YOU PEOPLE ARE THE VERY ONES WHO CALL ME OUT FOR A TINY SPELLING ERROR! Then have the audacity to criticize me for mentioning same - which I wouldn't have done in the first place (as I said in my prior post) if YOU CONDSENDING LEFTISTS HAD NOT SLAMMED ME! The fact you don't get this tells me you can't think clearly. You brains are mis-wired."
So you have now proven that you cannot see any decency anywhere anymore and that you simply see all liberal under the same light! Oh well... so much for playing nice!
Sorry you feel so offended.
We're all ignorant about something.
But, if anyone refuses to accept that they don't know everything, and that they know more than the experts, then they're acting stupid.
How do you overcome ignorance???
Dig into the facts. Learn how to do research. Learn how to separate baloney from facts (see link below).
Or, just accept that there are some smart scientists out there who may know a bit more than you or me about certain subjects.
It's not wrong to ask questions to try to understand the situation.
But if anyone says, "this is a FACT, you are wrong!" (Not to mention, "You are being elitist!") Then be prepared to back up that claim, or just look silly and stupid.
Note - This is different than saying, "This is what I think, based on what I know." At least you leave open the possibility that you can be wrong.
But, don't just take my word for it. Check out this video. Warning - you may get offended by the way the "elitist" talks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUB4j0n2UDU&feature=player_embedded#
Absolutely. I've been wrong, and have admitted it. Or I don't know, but I go find out. Or, I don't know, but trust the large field of experts to be right on the issues.
If you haven't seen the video, please do.
There's a point in there that mentions scientists always say "I don't know." They then go on to understand as much as they can.
Same goes for us. If we don't know, then either go find out, or cede the opinion to the experts. There's a reason why they're called, "experts".
Completely sorry for that.
I beg humble forgiveness. {:-|
New rule for me - when the threads get all jumbled up like this. I think I'll call it quits.
Now just who was it that thought I offended them....? I can't find the post.... Oh well...
"or is it SLTRX and I"
Actually, it's "SLRTX and me". But, who's quibbling? ;-)
Who the #$%@ cares about typis? I serntnly dn't care!
Ah yes, it isn't about the science, it is about the PR surrounding the science.
Fox and Fiends does it and you figure ... simple mistake
Sean Hannity does it ... and you begin to wonder
now this and you realize they have been doing it this way since 1996... just with varying degrees of success and levels of bravado to see how far they can go before being caught.
40,000 tons of carbon emissions will be spewed getting the Copenhagen crowd together and keeping them in comfort. That is the daily amount of carbon dioxide produced by 30 of the world's smaller countries COMBINED, according to UN statistics.
While this group of leftists decide how the 'little people' must live.
And the hypocrisy marches on.............
Y'know this fixation you deniers have on Al Gore is really appearing stranger all the time.
You deniers should try therapy to see why you are so enamored with him.
Do you have dreams about him?
Try regurgitating something else for once.
Move on with your lives.
I am not "fixated" on CO2 and methane. You environmental wackos are the group who is so 'fixated' on these! Jeez, you leftists are really thick.
Oh, and ha, ha, ha about your little joke. Very original.
Gore's a big, fat idiot. He plays fast and loose with the facts.
So, you aren't hurting my feelings when you bash him.
Be my guest. Call him whatever you want. But, that doesn't change the reality that humans are causing climate change. Bashing Gore won't get you any closer to erasing that reality.
Check out this video series. It covers the facts about climate change, and a knocks on Gore's twisting of the facts.
http://sites.google.com/site/dallastrees/potholer54-climate-change
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/06/al-gores-mansion/
1. Who did you get this information regarding "a mountain of caviar"? How much are they trucking in?
2. Got a list of the proven scams that Gore is in charge of?
3. Are you going to complain that Al Gore isn't going to Copenhagen? He is, after all, saving gas emissions.
4. How much in carbon emissions is normally produced at a conference this size (around 15,000 delegates)?
5. Perhaps the fact that we exhale carbon dioxide AND emit it from smoke stacks should make it more essential to look into ways to control carbon emissions more? How about planting trees and using cleaner fuels/alternative energy resources?
I'll wait.
Al Gore Cancels $1,200 Per Handshake Event In Copenhagen
Do the "unforeseen changes" have anything to do with the unforeseen changes in climate change evidence?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342404574576280330992114.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Al Gore apparently has canceled a high-priced speaking engagement during the upcoming climate change conference in Copenhagen.
As NewsBusters reported Tuesday, the Nobel Laureate was slated to lecture about his new book "Our Choice" where attendees could pay over $1,200 a ticket for the right to meet the Global Warmingist-in-Chief and have their picture taken with him.
Media Ignore Al Gore’s Financial Ties to Global Warming
http://newsbusters.org/node/11149
As NewsBusters reported here, here, and here, there are huge dollars to be made from global warming alarmism. However, conceivably no one is better positioned to financially benefit from this scam than Dr. Global Warming himself, former Vice President Al Gore, a fact that the media will surely not share with Americans any time soon.
If you want more google "al gore profits from global warming". There are many more.
And, if I may once again please clarify, I also agree that the climate is changing. Always has and always will. The amount that man contributes to this change is less then 4%. As a favor to the left on this site who have such a problem with math (and obviously science), I will kindly translate this for you - 96% is not man made! Get it? And from a common sense point of view (stay with me on this libbies), do you actually think man contributes more to climate change than natural events such as volcano eruptions and sun spots? If you do, what about before we "evolved"? Climates changed as much and more before us. Assuming the industrial revolution was the start of your supposed man made GW, or at most 150 years, our influence is roughly 150 out of 4,500,000,000 years which of course is like a grain of sand in a desert.
Dang you people are so dang gullible and naive.
You'd be going nuts if Gore did go and do this, because he'd be joining in on the carbon emissions fest. There's no pleasing you.
And I'm suggesting we do this all not just for climate but for the environment. You want polluted oceans and disrupted biocycles? Be my guest and throw that plastic cup away.
And why do so many of you defend Gore? Don't you see how he's profited millions and millions from his agenda of pushing man made GW? He "buys" carbon credits from his own company to off set his tremendous use of fossil fuels! Then he doesn't have the courage to debate anyone who differs from his opinion. Why aren't you offended by this?
You folks need to do some independent thinking. Stop allowing yourselves to be duped by what you see in the MSM and what you read on your left wing sites.
It really doesn't matter to me if any of you ever get enlightened by the truth since you are such a small minority. In fact liberals are down to 20% while conservatives are at 40% and climbing - not to mention independents are almost 30% of which most will vote Republican.
Last, the only reason I read and comment on MMFA is I find it astonishing there are even the small amount of people out there who can possibly think with so much contortion and twisted logic. I tell my wife about some of MMFA posts you folks make and she thinks I'm making things up!
Kudos to you for cleaning up after yourself; I would have bet you didn't, but I'll take your word. I tell my wife about a grumpy old retired guy who chose to live in SF and complain about how liberal it is. She thinks I'm making it up. She says, "No way. If this guy is even smart enough to type, there is no way he'd live in the city that all his heroes (Beck, O'Reilly) talk about as the most anti-American place in the Western Hemisphere. And the fact that he trolls a liberal site to make asinine comments tells me he probably has no life whatsoever. Either he's a complete moron, or a liar." She seems to know her stuff without reading a single one of your posts.
But someone's going to profit from it, regardless. As long as Gore puts it back into research and honest conservation efforts.
"You folks need to do some independent thinking. Stop allowing yourselves to be duped by what you see in the MSM and what you read on your left wing sites."
I've posted numerous proofs of my position, yet you yabber on about how we are being duped, without even one shred of proof. You never have mentioned that you even looked at those links. Probably not, because you already know all the facts, so why should you bother with all that data? It's just all made up anyway.
I'd rather be duped by thousands of scientists and the consensus on climate change, than a handful of wacko "McExperts", who think they know all, and everyone else is wrong. That's the definition of delusional, with a touch of narcissism. You dupe yourself. Independent thinking? Haven't seen it from the deniers.
----------
"It really doesn't matter to me if any of you ever get enlightened by the truth since you are such a small minority. In fact liberals are down to 20% while conservatives are at 40% and climbing - not to mention independents are almost 30% of which most will vote Republican."
OOOOO. The flat-earthers were in the majority way back in the day, because they were made up of the ignorant "average" person who didn't know better. Still, the earth was known to be round by the experts. Mariners consulted the experts about proper navigation on a round earth, and completely ignored the ignorant average person. And so goes you deniers. You'll soon start sounding to more people like nutjobs.
You can pat yourself on the back about a temporary poll result, but it still doesn't change the facts about climate change.
------------------
"It really doesn't matter to me if any of you ever get enlightened by the truth"
On that point, we agree. So wallow in your ignorance. You deniers are a complete waste of time.
Deniers like you will soon be recognized by all as the same type of wackos who believe UFOs are piloted by space aliens, and the pyramids were built by Atlantians.
Be prepared for a major let-down. And that may come around spring of 2010 when the CRU finishes the review of this email issue. Early returns don't look good for the deniers.
Yup - and people can get lung cancer without smoking. So, clearly smoking can only be 4% of the cause of any one case of lung cancer! Problem solved!
Do you think they get paid by the word?? Maybe with an extra bonus point for every exclamation mark and self-induced lol?
You do realize that speakers at speaking engangements do not get all of the money raised for the event, don't you?.
I think something like 3,000 tickets were already sold to Gore's book speech, which are being refunded, which goes against the money-grubbing angle they're always trying to put on Gore.
This is yet another dittohead "story" that completely backfires on them.
I'll cite my source after you cite your source that man contributes more to climate change than natural events such as sunspots and volcanoes.
According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide. Despite the arguments to the contrary, the facts speak for themselves: Greenhouse gas emissions from volcanoes comprise less than one percent of those generated by today’s human endeavors.
Just wanted to see how nasty you compassionate leftists pukes would get - and of course you didn't disappoint with your smears and name calling. Especially Private Harlen. Atta boy Private.
Regarding Wildcat, thanks for the volcanoes post. Now, what about all the other natural elements that contribute to climate change / GW? Or did you have trouble reading my original post where I stated (re-posted just for you Wild) "do you actually think man contributes more to climate change than natural events such as volcano eruptions and sun spots?
Then again, this tactic is common for the Left since they can't debate facts and data - just like the email "scientists" who used tricks to support and exaggerate their political thesis of man-made GW.
"what about all the other natural elements that contribute to climate change / GW?"
Yeah but, what about...?
Yeah but, what about...?
Yeah but, what about...?
Yeah but, what about...?
Yeah but, what about...?
See! You can't explain it, so I MUST BE RIGHT!
Absolutely no proof of the deniers' claims, so they resort to the, "Yeah but, what about...?" endless loop.
It ain't up to anyone to prove deniers wrong. They need to prove themselves right about .... just what IS that theory they have? Hmmm.... It's never been defined.
earth's orbit and tilt
PDO(El nino)
wildfires
solar cycles
changes in the magnetosphere
...etc.
I'm sure there are a lot more known and many more unknown natural causes. We don't know everything, do we? Like does anyone understand what is happening in Earth's core?
"We don't know everything, do we?"
Well, you certainly don't. But these guys do!
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
http://climate.nasa.gov/
http://coaps.fsu.edu/climate_center/climatechange.shtml
http://www.ucsusa.org/ssi/climate-change/scientific-consensus-on.html
http://www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=12457&tid=282&cid=13366
"does anyone understand what is happening in Earth's core?"
Ummm.... yes.... and.....???
You may as well add, "Does anyone know what's going on in the Andromeda galaxy?" My bet is that they're having a good laugh at people who are ignorant, but refuse to research the facts.
Now, are you ever going to post a link that gives back up to your 4%? You said you would. No, now you'll add another natural occurance and want to see state on that as well.
I'm not clear on what "common tactic of the left" you are referring to. Supporting claims with scientific facts and statistics? Yeah, we lefties are crazy that way. Seriously, I have a very short piece of advice for you: Get. Help.
Ah, the old "CO2 is a natural gas so it can't be harmful!" routine. Are you that easily used? Are you aware that the Oxygen is a poison? "Nope, that's what we breathe!" WRONG! It only makes up about 21% of the air, 80% in Nitrogen. Reverse it and we all die. We can't live off of mostly Oxygen. My point my ignorant friend? ANYTHING can be harmful in excessive amounts.
Like, say, Carbon Dioxide or watching Fx "News"
BTW, the Gore house thing? Out of date. Use the Google you sad, angry little person.
This is the type of simple-minded thinker the righty media plays to; We exhale CO2, how can it hurt us?
They should be forced to think about this while sitting at the bottom of a well-used port-o-john.
Now run off and listen to Rush to make all the hurtful thinking go away.
And the hypocrisy marches on.....
What is your opinion about the 1623 Superfund Clean-up sites currently on the Environmental Protection Angencies list (and growing daily)? What do you think will be the carbon emissions output that will be required to clean all that mess up (it's so large they can't even begin to estimate those numbers)? Not to mention the fact that most of that will also require tax payer dollars. Industry has a history of leaving behind messes for the public to clean up. Industry does not perform self oversight, that is a fact.
But it is not the human and animal source of CO2 that is tipping the balance, but all that CO2 bottled up in all that coal and oil that has been released into the atmosphere in greater and greater amounts.
Solar Flares, Sun Spots, Solar Cycles - THAT's the major reason for change. It's been going on for Thousands and Thousands of years long before any of these "pundits" were even twinkles in anyones' eyes.
Stop the Spin .. It's the SUN!
by the way if the sun suddenly went out, we'd be in total darkness in EIGHT minutes! Get a flashlight & some batteries quick!
This is why America is falling behind in science, we have grown adults (I assume) who can be convinced that the planet's climate can't be affected by humans because the Sun is big.
WAKE THE **** UP Faux-viewers!
Within the past week here, one of the wingnut posters broke down the number of those in our country who don't have health insurance into a few groups that were either eligible for government programs and simply didn't take advantage, or those who were not eligible (i.e. illegal aliens).
Although no sources were provided for the percentages he put into each group, I added them up, and it came to 108 %. This is how easily led the average American wingnut is. They can be convinced that if they're in a room with 100 uninsured Americans, 108 of that 100 should not be counted among the uninsured.
Dude, it's a falsehood.
I'll bet a poll of Fox viewers would show nearly 100% of them are still confused about the use of the word "trick" by scientists.
----------------------------------------------------------------
These pollsters are a waste of donor organs.
<Vacant nods of agreement from Faux News viewers.>
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming
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.
Fox got its numbers directly from Rasmussen
Does anyone know if a news channel is required to have / maintain any type of special FCC licensing? I was just wondering if there was a way to get Pox' status revoked so that they would lose the “press” status that allows their people into functions, etc. They are just a 24-hour trashy magazine channel.
Thanks MMfA for helping me cope with the insanity!
Fox at least takes responsibility for it's errors, unlike the b.s. that comes out of the other networks, especially the Matthews-Maddow-Olby Bermuda Triangle of Facts..
A "graphical error". How gullible can people be?
Notice that ravenrog, like most of them, doesn't give any examples of that "bs" from the station that Fox has told him is evil.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming
-
'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.'
***
TV Newser: 59% + 35% + 26% = 120%
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/fnc/59_35_26_120_145327.asp
Let's recap who's telling us to keep using oil and Global Warming is a hoax:
- Exxon-Mobil http://www.hiddenpcmaster.com/wp-content/capt.ny89910271354.earns_exxon_mobil_ny899_01.jpg
- Saudi Shieks http://rawstory.com/2009/12/climategate-shakes-trust-scientists-saudi-arabia/
- Rush Limbaugh
- FOX "news"
- The Republicans
http://rawstory.com/2009/12/bush-insiders-distorted-climate/
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/20091207%20-%20SmokeScreen%20Final.pdf
So add 22 ex-Bush officials to Rush Limbaugh, FOX "news", the Republicans, Exxon-Mobile, and Saudi OIL SHIEKS who want us to stay on Big Oil and say Global Warming is a hoax.
We're seeing the power of the corporate media, right and center, just corporate owned media, on how they can make people believe something, anything they want. The surveys show how propaganda works.
They could say there's no such thing as gravity, and then a poll of Americans who don't believe in gravity would go from 5% to 45%. The media is more powerful than an army.
The one that really cracks me up is the Saudi OIL SHIEK:
We have an OIL SHIEK from Oil-rich Saudi Arabia, in full shiek attire, saying he's "shaken" about the recent hacked emails, which there is no focus on the hackers or the break-ins by the law and the media, mysteriously.
The OIL SHIEK is "shaken" at these recent revelations. The OIL SHIEK says, then we'll have to stay on MY OIL!!! He was really going gung-ho with Global Warming when, SHUCKS! These emails were hacked into! Damn it! He was all FOR it and this ruined it! Now we'll have to keep using is oil! Drat!!! He's sick about the hacked emails.
You couldn't write something funnier for Saturday Night Live, The Colbert Report, or the Daily Show. The OIL SHIEK was all for it! And his dreams were shattered! He had already put a downpayment on an electic car! Shucks!!!
I haven't read the article, not watched the video - and I understand that the second group is a subset of the first. How desperate are you people?
Rasmussen presented the data with the 59% figure. What MMFA doesn't want to deal with is the fact that 59% of Americans have figured out the climate scammers.
And it's so smart, it knew what the problem was just by looking at the graphic, and was ready to cover for Fox. Good puppy.
and rasmussen is who exactly? is he like, oh i don't know, the official final word or something?
so the only two options are you're either really smart or someone here is really slow?
i think there's another option you're overlooking.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/econ_survey_toplines/december_2009/toplines_climate_change_december_1_2_2009
It says (cut/paste right from Rasmussen):
3* In order to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming, how likely is it that some scientists have falsified research data?
35% Very likely
24% Somewhat likely
21% Not very likely
5% Not at all likely
15% Not sure
So, edrossinoelwein9669, you are neither really smart nor are MMFA a little slow, YOU are just like FOX "news" trying to mislead people.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming
Check the link, fourth paragraph in.
Sorry to ruin your circle jerk about Fox News "fudging the facts", but I'm sure you guys are more interested in the truth than slamming a news organization that reports on stories that you don't want the world to know about.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming
-
'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.'
***
POLITICO -- FOX producer: no error in graphic; Media Matters responds
http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalderone/1209/Fox_producer_No_error_in_graphic.html
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/environment_energy/americans_skeptical_of_science_behind_global_warming