Public opinion about global warming, it turns out, has been remarkably stable for the better part of two decades, despite the recent decline in expressed
public confidence in climate science.
Eroding confidence in climate science punctuated by a pair of blizzards has global warming skeptics across the United States calling for a sharp rollback to years of political and industrial efforts to curb greenhouse emissions thought to contribute to global warming.
These organizations, which include the Heartland Institute — a group that once compared those who believe in climate change with the Unabomber — have undermined public
confidence in climate science so much that scientists have to defend even their most fundamental findings.
Given that there is still much we do not know about climate change — including why mean global temperature has been flat for the past ten years —
undermining confidence in climate science can (further) undermine its ability to inform policy.
They are just shooting themselves in the foot, All this does is reduce or eliminate the public's
confidence in the climate science community, because it gives the appearance that the scientists are trying to hide something.
Rep. Ed Markey (D - MA) called the hearing in an effort to further restore
public confidence in climate science, and to set the record straight that «Climategate» was not the scandal climate deniers and the right - wing media tried to portray in the wake of the theft of private emails from scientists at the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia.
We are concerned that the incorporation of unsubstantiated theories into what the public understands to be the «scientific consensus» on global warming is eroding public
confidence in climate science.
While many of his colleagues are (appropriately) quick to point out hype from those aiming to undermine public
confidence in climate science, Schmidt has been unafraid also to note that reality on important issues — from tipping points to extreme weather — is not always convenient for greenhouse campaigners.
I believe that the public's
confidence in climate science and climate scientists may increase if it is felt that the scientists can take a mostly disinterested view on climate policy.
King once remarked that «climate change poses a bigger threat than terrorism», that it is the «biggest challenge our civilisation has ever had», and that foreign spies and US energy interests were behind attempts to undermine public
confidence in climate science and the attempt to build an international agreement at Copenhagen.
This is the sort of jumbled reasoning that creates loss of public
confidence in climate science; you don't need to have a PhD in a climate - related science to see that it is totally illogical and contrary to all common sense.