Canadian concern over climate change plummeting

National Post ^ | November 02, 2009 | Lawrence Solomon

[neverdem]

According to a new Climate Confidence Monitor survey released today, support for action on climate change is plummeting in Canada. Just 26% of Canadians consider global warming among their chief concerns, down from 34% in 2008.

Concern in the U.S. is even lower - just 18% , down from 26% in 2008. The UK's level of concern is the lowest of all, a mere 15%, down from 26% in 2008.

Worldwide, the drop in concern over climate change has also dropped by 8 percentage points, from 42% to 34%...

[sionnsar]

ping

[Parley Baer]

Eventually the truth does emerge. It looks like more and more people around the globe are seeing this for the scam it is.

[Army Air Corps]

Ping!

[Wisconsinlady]

I hope the rest of the world sees global warming as the sham it is before Obama signs the Copenhagen Treaty.

[TheThinker]

Yeah, because they’re freezing their butts off.

[Frantzie]

Bottom line: Domestic energy creates wealth in a BIG BIG way.

Canada is raking it in with oil shale, minerals, their water and other things. They are not stupid.

Our Dems, environmentalists are all on t he payroll of the Saudis. We are exporting our money and liberty to Muslims in the ME.

But hey it’s okay to sell our kids into slavery becauyse there is a good college ball game or NFL game on TV.

We have so much energy on Federal Land that it is at least 5 times the Saudis energy. This is why the govt keeps grabbing more land.

[ColdWater]

If I were a resident of Canada, I would be praying for GW.

[goodnesswins]

"Yeah, because they’re freezing their butts off."

That was MY thought also!

[ghost of nixon]

Yeah, because they’re freezing their butts off.

...bingo! They may be more liberal & more gullable than we are, but the last few years have been really cold up there...

[ALPAPilot]

I’ve spent some time flying over Northern Canada. They could use some global warming.

[hinckley buzzard]

You can only cry Wolf! so often. The environazis have used up their quota of bullsh&t for this decade.

[GOPJ]

Drudge has this story from the New York Times website - about how Gore is raking in the cash with the GW scam: Gore’s Dual Role in Spotlight: Advocate and Investor

[Rocky]

Meanwhile, Katie Couric interviewed Al Gore today. It was a real love-in. Al said the cause for cap and trade was analogous to the ban against smoking and, oh I forget what other liberal crusades he named which have succeeded through perseverance.

Maybe his car will break down on a lonely highway when it’s below zero outside, and he will freeze to death. I love irony.

[Fetid Facts]

“Concern in the U.S. is even lower - just 18% , down from 26% in 2008.”

Yes but our genius Lord Obama and the majority of Democrats in congress seem hell-bent on passing cap and trade to save the planet.

I’ve felt for some time that many politicians didn’t actually believe the anthropogenic global warming crap, but were pandering to the Green Cult for votes. They see the polling data, so this can no longer be the case and it’s very apparent that they don’t care about the science or the wishes of the people. Cap and trade is a naked power grab.

[sourcery]

The debate actually is over…and the idea that human emissions of carbon dioxide will cause any significant degree of global warming has been categorically refuted and falsified. The empirically-measured change in the amount of energy radiating away from the Earth as a function of changes in sea surface temperature totally falsifies the IPCC climate models--and more importantly, completely falsifies the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis—total, categorical falsification, not simply invalidation of the alleged "proof" based on computer climate models:

• On the determination of climate feedbacks from ERBE data (peer-reviewed scientific paper);
• RESPONSE TO US SECRETARY OF ENERGY ON CLIMATE STATEMENT (explanation for non-scientists)
• Basic Greenhouse Equations "Totally Wrong"
• IPCC'S FATAL ERRORS
• Climate Change: Statement of Dr. William Happer before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
• The Skeptics Handbook

[steelyourfaith]

Danke !

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[neverdem]

I noticed it. I didn’t read the whole story. It was on the front page of one of their editions. My guess is the local, not national edition.

[fanfan]

Thanks for the ping, Sionnsar.

[calex59]

Ok, let’s put this in perspective. No where was there ever 50 percent of more support for “climate change laws”. In fact, in 2008 there was less than 30 percent between Canada and the US. This is after a constant 30 year barrage from the news media telling us the sky is falling(er, the snow is melting). I think politicians have over estimated the effect their BS has had on the populations of both Canada and the US.

[Clive]

-

[x_plus_one]

Canada will be the first 'to go' if and when global glaciation resumes. Permanent snow cover, followed by permanent ice sheets will drive them south to their US borders.

If I were Canadian, I would burn as much fossil fuel as possible in order to warm things up - an insurance policy against permanent relocation to another country.

[Red Boots]

Canada will be the first 'to go' if and when global glaciation resumes. Permanent snow cover, followed by permanent ice sheets will drive them south to their US borders.

I know a guy who grew up in Winnipeg. His stories of growing up there and what it was like in the winter are downright scary !

[ARepublicanForAllReasons]

Given the choice between a slight warming trend or a slight cooling trend, I'll choose some warming every time.

Also, don't those 'greenhouse effect' nuts realize that if things get warmer, we won't need to burn as much carbon dioxide emiting fuels just to stay warm? (Not that I believe CO2 has anything to do with anything global.)

[ARepublicanForAllReasons]

Given the choice between a slight warming trend or a slight cooling trend, I'll choose some warming every time.

Also, don't those 'greenhouse effect' nuts realize that if things get warmer, we won't need to burn as much carbon dioxide emiting fuels just to stay warm? (Not that I believe CO2 has anything to do with anything global.)

[ARepublicanForAllReasons]

Given the choice between a slight warming trend or a slight cooling trend, I'll choose some warming every time.

Also, don't those 'greenhouse effect' nuts realize that if things get warmer, we won't need to burn as much carbon dioxide emiting fuels just to stay warm? (Not that I believe CO2 has anything to do with anything global.)

[ARepublicanForAllReasons]

Given the choice between a slight warming trend or a slight cooling trend, I'll choose some warming every time.

Also, don't those 'greenhouse effect' nuts realize that if things get warmer, we won't need to burn as much carbon dioxide emiting fuels just to stay warm? (Not that I believe CO2 has anything to do with anything global.)

[ARepublicanForAllReasons]

4 multiple posts, YEECH! Is that a record?>br>
I’m a dunce x 4 {%<()