Grist has a piece today on a PR firm whose research on engaging the public on climate has leaked. Apparently, their work shows that "climate agnostics" respond best to the term "our deteriorating atmosphere."
Well, not to be outdone, HuffPost Green has its own highly scientific method of market research that we'd like to try out. Let us know what you think:
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The Bush Effect
Pollution solution.
"The Great Future Planet Heist"
- Details: We are stealing the planet, and the future from genereation X and beyond. I say tax Baby Boomers and their parents for propagating the destruction of our future, and potentially (more than liekly) the human race.
A joke.
A cycle in the life of this planet that has happened many times in it's history but for the first time will be witnessed by billions of people.
It's too bad this isn't a rose because then whatever label it was given it would still smell sweet.
Changing the name of this subject and using "talking points" will only make it more political which will divide the public even more. Why can't we just forget about the label, the models and Al Gore so we can get down to what is really important, clean air and water? The vast majority of people will all agree that we need to make sure that these fundamental resources are available for future generations and we can come together to make the necessary changes to ensure that reality. The steps needed to accomplish that would have many major benefits on our climate; two birds with one stone. As long as it remains a politically charged topic we are p!ss!ng up a downspout.
And the overwhelming evidence that the warming of the past 30 years was due to a natural cycle is what, exactly?
Sorry, no news reports or op-ed columns accepted.
Only cites of peer-reviewed scientific studies published in recognised scientific journals will be considered.
It's exactly irrelevant.
What is certain is the climate is changing and we need plans to adapt.
Arguing over who is "right" is juvenile and gets us nowhere. It's obvious that proving "your case" is more important to you than actually making progress in areas like pollution that basically everyone can agree on. Progress in those areas would have positive results in the areas that you're wanting to see change in.
We are wasting time with this tired argument. Do you want to improve our situation or not?
I hope it doesn't get too cold this summer and keeps our nations farms from producing enough. The sun is putting out the least amount of energy since 1923. Hopefully the output increases rather than keeps decreasing since scientists don't know why it is happening. If we have another period like the Maunder Minimum then we are all in trouble.
Touched a nerve, did I, conservativehippie?
Rapid polar warming and the consequent decline in the global thermal gardiant, northward shift of hadley cell circulation boundries and consequent drying of subtropical and temperate zones;
declining alpine glacier and polar ice sheet volume and consequent sea level rise;
melting permafrost and consequent emission of naturally sequestered CO2 and methane;
ocean acidificatfication (defined as a drop in pH) and the consequent impact on the marine food chain;
and other predicted and subsequently observed and measured impacts of global warming/climate change are exactly "irrelevant"?
What's juvenile is conflating "clean air and water" with reducing emissions of CO2 from fossil carbon fuels.
I'm not interested in being "right", I'm interested in stopping and then reversing the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere.
Those who seek to shift the subject to "clean air and water" are interested in preventing that from happening, period.
30 yrs?? 30 flippin yrs?? can we attribute any long term climatological phenomena to 30yrs worth of observation??
How about 420k yrs of observations that show we'll be heading into an ice age in the next 10k yrs like clock work.
30yrs! Pfffft!
Lbrty, if you actually looked up the record of the past 420k years and correlated it to the Milankovic Cycle northern hemisphere insolation matrix you'd learn that the next chance for a glaciation will not occur for another 50,000 years.
But hey, why bother to look up and understand scientific facts when you can just make stuff up?
Beginning with you, we just have to cut our losses with the contrarians--knowing full well they are feckless concerning anything haviing to do with the future--and just move forward unhindered.
Al Gore's Global Warming, Climate Change, Hoax.
There is no problem. It's just a political ploy.
"The Nothing" (They look like big, good, strong hands, don't they?)
We need to stop talking about saving the Earth, because that is not what it is about. Like George Carlin pointed out the Earth is not going anywhere WE ARE! Pack your bags the human race is going the way of the dinosaur. Perhaps the right term "fighting extinction" or something that points out our environment IS the reason why we can live here. If those so deeply concerned about economics before the environment are wrong it is not a debt we'll be passing our grandchildren but a spoiled environment unable to sustain human life.
Since the real problem with climate change is the widespread denial and misunderstanding of it, I propose the following new name: "Human Induced Climate Change Unawareness and Prejudice Syndrome."
Our planet has a bad case of the HICCUPS!
--jrd
lol...
Human
Induced
Climate
Challenge
Undulating
Prejudice
Syndrome
other:
nothing new under the sun!
Loading comments…
First Posted: 06-12-09 08:33 AM | Updated: 06-12-09 08:40 AM