Majority of Americans still understand global warming, despite best efforts of Fox

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is good explanation of the GOP strategy:

One of the wild cards in the budget debate is its relationship with simultaneous republican efforts to deny the Environmental Protection Agency the funds necessary to implement its Green House Gas regulations (GHG). Both the House and Senate are considering short-term proposals that would strip EPA of funding through September, and also permanent legislation that would prohibit EPA from limiting GHGs, so that Congress could settle this important part of our industrial policy. The GHG bills have not attracted enough votes from democratic senators to overcome a filibuster, let alone an anticipated presidential veto, so the only viable republican strategy is to include a defunding provision in a bill the president might be forced to sign.

The maneuvering to defund EPA is simply one manifestation of a larger phenomenon. The risk in global budget negotiations is that individual members of Congress will promise their constituents that they will not vote for a funding bill unless it contains a specific policy solution, whether defunding EPA, high speed passenger rail or Planned Parenthood. If enough members make inconsistent commitments, then Congress can lose the ability to forge any spending bill that will attract a majority, thereby inadvertently backing the country into a crisis no one wanted.

http://www.insidecounsel.com/Exclusives/2011/3/Pages/Regulatory-The-Budget-Battle-and-EPA-Rules--No-Score-After-One-Inning.aspx

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Zero, it's futile trying to explain science to people who have a 6th Grade understanding of science. Most of these yahoo deniers don't even have a college degree, which explains a lot.

I have an MS. Man made global warming is a hoax. The impending absence of funding for it will expose it for a hoax.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I have an MS. Man made global warming is a hoax. The impending absence of funding for it will expose it for a hoax.

I wonder if Steven ever finished his AA. I wasn't going to say anything, but since you brought it up, I felt I should. I only have a lowly BA in Applied Mathematics and Computer Science.

[Ban Hammer 13,352]

I wonder if Steven ever finished his AA. I wasn't going to say anything, but since you brought it up, I felt I should. I only have a lowly BA in Applied Mathematics and Computer Science.

not good enough, it's probably not from a left coast university.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I have an MS. Man made global warming is a hoax. The impending absence of funding for it will expose it for a hoax.

Yet you know nothing about how the Greenhouse Effect works.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I wonder if Steven ever finished his AA. I wasn't going to say anything, but since you brought it up, I felt I should. I only have a lowly BA in Applied Mathematics and Computer Science.

And that somehow makes you an authority on Climate Science?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

And that somehow makes you an authority on Climate Science?

And your degree in cartoons makes you a climate scientist?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

not good enough, it's probably not from a left coast university.

Frisbee U? Cotati, California? The town center looks like a peace sign from space, and "Use an accordion, go to jail" is strictly enforced.

And that somehow makes you an authority on Climate Science?

Not even close. Did you ever graduate from that community college?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

And your degree in cartoons makes you a climate scientist?

Disregarding the overwhelming consensus of climate scientists from around the world requires a lot of ignorance and arrogance.

[james&olya 1,121]

I have an MS. Man made global warming is a hoax. The impending absence of funding for it will expose it for a hoax.

I have significant post-doctoral education in science. So I guess that means man-made global warming is real because I say it is?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Disregarding the overwhelming consensus of climate scientists from around the world requires a lot of ignorance and arrogance.

Blind faith in what someone tells you requires no intelligence at all. And it isn't "overwhelming". There are plenty of respected scientists that also doubt MMGW and the list is growing every day. You just choose to ignore them. That is your ignorance and arrogance.

[james&olya 1,121]

Blind faith in what someone tells you requires no intelligence at all. And it isn't "overwhelming". There are plenty of respected scientists that also doubt MMGW and the list is growing every day. You just choose to ignore them. That is your ignorance and arrogance.

Choosing to believe something because it is more convenient rather than because the majority of evidence supports it is what is truly ignorant!

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Choosing to believe something because it is more convenient rather than because the majority of evidence supports it is what is truly ignorant!

So you say. What I have read says otherwise. Man cannot and is not causing GW. You are a fool to believe it. GW isn't even happening. Since 1998 the temperature of the earth hasn't gone up. It has either gone down or stayed the same. That is a fact that you cannot ignore. They have even stopped calling it global warming. They changed it to climate change and now to climate disruption. Why? Because the fact is there has been no warming. If you are the educated person you claim to be then you cannot deny that fact.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

But as I have said before, believe what you want. All that matters is that cap and trade is dead and the EPA cannot regulate CO2. That is what matters to me, everything else is just noise. The hysterical alarmists have lost.

[Zero Sum 305]

This is good explanation of the GOP strategy:

http://www.insidecounsel.com/Exclusives/2011/3/Pages/Regulatory-The-Budget-Battle-and-EPA-Rules--No-Score-After-One-Inning.aspx

The GOP turned most of the health science researchers against them in the Bush Jr administration by allowing religion to dictate health science. Now they are doing it with environmental science research. Besides die-hard closed-minded people that read mostly un-reviewed science and take it as gospel, or worse- take the word of politicians instead of the actual scientists, those people that take the time to read the actual peer-reviewed literature (yes, there are reviews out there that paraphrase the research in still-complicated words, but less tricky to read than research publications) learned some of the intricacies of what the research actually said. I count myself among those that learned by doing this, and therefore I can conclude that the overwhelming body of evidence in favor of what most of the scientists are saying is much more accurate than what the political hacks are trying to overshadow with ignorant legislation.

What will happen if we follow the money? We'll find old school right-wing hacks controlling the puppet strings of ignorance to benefit the same industrial interests that are giving us more pollution that just CO2.