Posted on 08/28/2013 7:42:51 AM PDT by Kip Russell
Take our 13-question quiz to test your knowledge of scientific concepts. Then see how you did in comparison with the 1,006 randomly sampled adults asked the same questions in a national poll conducted by the Pew Research Center and Smithsonian magazine.
The analysis of the findings from the poll can be found in the full report. (No peeking! If you are going to take the quiz, do it first before reading the analysis.)
In other words, CO2 causes absolutely no net change in energy, which is a necessary component of "global warming." In order for the atmospheric heat (energy) content to increase, CO2 would have to store energy, not absorb and release it almost instantaneously (via fluorescence).
13/13 on the easy one, 42/50 on the tougher one. I take some comfort knowing the in most cases of error, my second choice was the correct one. It’s good I’m not your diagnostician :)
Got 11 of 13. The nitrogen one got me as well as the electrons. Should have known that one with the colliders and such.
I have to check the link later. It was so slow it would just hang.
What disturbed me on the first one was the percentage of people who couldn’t get half the questions correct.
That is what I found disturbing as well.
B,Increase.
You scored better than 85% of the public, below 7% and the same as 8%.
This test is racially biased because I missed one.
Hahaha :)
Made me spew ice water everywhere >.<
How nice! I’m pleased.
It will get warmer (in most instances). The compressor puts off more BTUs than any cooling it might be able to produce. It is designed to cool a small space and not run continuously.
The back of your refrigerator is warm.
I got 43 out of 50. I started out bad with the Mendel question and pea pods. I did better after Newton and inertia. Apparently I've forgotten much.
5.56mm
You’re both right Good for you!
YES 100% :)
Yes, exactly
Actually, I am not surprised that most people could not answer all of those questions correctly, even taking into account the “global warming” question (I have not seen any data on the proportion of scientists who believe that CO2 drives current temperatures).
Right here on FR, I have run into people whose level of scientific illiteracy is breathtaking, to say the least. There is more than one FReeper who cannot grasp logical thought, understand cause and effect, or distinguish between science and mysticism. Extrapolate that illiteracy out to the entire American population—the surprise is not that “merely” 7% got all the questions right, but that most people answered at least half of them correctly.
Opaque to long-wave? No transmission whatever?
Transparent to short-wave? No absorption whatever?
What about water vapor? What are its properties?
Is there more water vapor in the atmosphere than CO2?
How would that affect one's opinion about what is causing global warming?
What do "most scientists" believe explains the lack of warming during the last decade and a half?
How can the various models of the earth's climate be valid if they all fail to predict the present situation?
If the climate models predicting global warming also predict heating of the upper atmosphere over the equator, what does it tells us about the models if the heating over the equator does not exist?
Science is not supposed to be about choosing the results that support one's theory and ignoring the results that do not.
I’m not so sure about that; one of the questions was about greenhouse gas, and what “most scientists” think. I know what most journalists think - but is that the same thing?Frankly, a 6th grader should do as well. On average, adults get 8 or 9 out of 13 correct, which is just...sad.
Which is a commentary on the audacity of assuming that all adults should vote.How many adults do you suppose actually believe that a car running on electricity has zero emissions, not considering what it takes to charge the batteries!
How many engineers would know whether a vacuum cleaner draws more current when the flow of air into it is unrestricted or if the airflow is choked completely off?
(in college, an engineer told me the correct answer, and I didn’t believe him - until I participated in a lab experiment that proved it. In an oral exam, I was the only one to get it right - and none of the others changed their mind after I asserted the correct answer). (Hint: you can easily verify with your own tank-type vacuum cleaner or shopVac. Just understand that a motor will run faster when it’s not loaded and not drawing much power - and will run slower if it is loaded and drawing power).
Same for me, but the global warming question, well you had to be up on politics.
You initial premise is faulty, i.e. a net change in energy being necessary. CO2 stores energy - as heat - that’s why it warms. There is no net change, only an energy transfer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.