Belief in man made climate change declining

[brenthutch 383]

https://apnorc.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/EPIC-factsheets.pdf

“Americansarelessconvincedthatclimatechangeis caused mostly or entirely by humans compared to data from recent years, declining from 60% in 2018 to 49% this year.
● Thisincreaseddoubtwasjustassignificantfor someone who graduated from college as someone who has a high school diploma or less (11 percentage point drop), and was more pronounced for younger Americans (17 percentage point drop for those ages 18-29 vs. 9 percentage point drop for the 60+ age group).
● Democratsandindependentsarebecomingless convinced that climate change is caused mostly by humans, while Republican attitudes remain stable.”

This decline will continue as the costs of “energy transition” start to bite. I think we are close to a tipping point with less than 50% believing this man made climate change nonsense. I’m glad to see my work on this has not been in vain.

 

Edited April 22, 2023 by brenthutch

[wmw999 2,116]

That’s some awesome cherry picking there. The actual chart is below. The numbers of people who actually want to do something about that is declining, but that’s exactly the same as anything else — something should be done, as long as I don’t have to pay or change anything. NIMBY at its best

We have very little feeling of shared fate and responsibility in our country (and probably the world) now, especially among people of middle class economic and/or political level and above. Because they all know that they’ll be OK in a minor crisis because they can pay their individual way out of it. Why pay to hold back the whole river if you can put a levee around your own house for less?

Wendy P  

 

[olofscience 420]

30 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I’m glad to see my work on this has not been in vain.

Lol, you convinced millions of Americans that climate change wasn't man-made by making incoherent arguments in an obscure skydiving forum?

And losing a lot of them, too 

[JoeWeber 2,294]

43 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

This decline will continue as the costs of “energy transition” start to bite.

You're a bloody genius, you are. Who possibly could have arrived at that conclusion with as little as 250,000 years of human reactions to use as data? Whether or not AGW is real or not isn't decided by how may Bubba's want to roll coal instead of electrons. Seriously, more seriously than the last times I told you, you need to get a job. You need to get out and travel. 

[brenthutch 383]

22 minutes ago, olofscience said:

Lol, you convinced millions of Americans that climate change wasn't man-made by making incoherent arguments in an obscure skydiving forum?

And losing a lot of them, too 

#winning

[brenthutch 383]

2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

You're a bloody genius, you are. Who possibly could have arrived at that conclusion with as little as 250,000 years of human reactions to use as data? Whether or not AGW is real or not isn't decided by how may Bubba's want to roll coal instead of electrons. Seriously, more seriously than the last times I told you, you need to get a job. You need to get out and travel. 

If you would have read the link, the drop in the belief of AGW comes primarily from Democrats, Independents and GASP! young people!

Edited April 22, 2023 by brenthutch

[JoeWeber 2,294]

Just now, brenthutch said:

If you would have read the link, the drop in the belief of AGW comes primarily from Democrats and Independents.

If you would read between the lines you'd understand that the point was that stating that increasing immediate costs to individuals, be they Democrats, Independents, Aardvarks, or Mifflin County Gun Toters was likely to directly affect opinions and polls was a silly point. We know that. That's why long term planning that accounts for that inevitability is crucial. Think of it like this: you wouldn't go snipe hunting without your stick and bag, right? Same thing, sort of.

[Phil1111 908]

2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

... Seriously, more seriously than the last times I told you, you need to get a job. You need to get out and travel. 

 The pull of disinformation seems to grow year by year. I'm worried that ChatGPT and other such information summation and modification tools will drive people susceptible  to b.s. even deeper than what FOX does.

Imagine tens of Brents, dozens of Slims! All operating to overpower common sense.

Edited April 22, 2023 by wmw999
Remove overly direct

[JoeWeber 2,294]

13 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Or get his head out of is A$$. The pull of disinformation seems to grow year by year. I'm worried that ChatGPT and other such information summation and modification tools will drive people susceptible  to b.s. even deeper than what FOX does.

Imagine tens of Brents, dozens of Slims! All operating to overpower common sense.

Like a Tarantino movie. Now I won’t sleep.

[brenthutch 383]

54 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

Or get his head out of is A$$. 

I got a time out for suggesting someone resolve their cranial rectal inversion let’s see if anything happens to you.

Edited April 22, 2023 by brenthutch

[Phil1111 908]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

I got a time out for suggesting someone resolve their cranial rectal inversion let’s see if anything happens to you.

I have friends in high places.

I was talking to a long time friend last night and the subject went around to aid to Ukraine. He went on to state that President Zelenskyy was lining his pockets with cash from foreign aid. bla, bla bla.i.e. tune it out and change subject. He is a pretty smart guy but his sole source of news is FOX. It sounded like a line of pure b.s. from Tucker or Sean.

If you're not more careful you'll be the next Slim here. With everything else it entails.

[BartsDaddy 4]

3 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

If you would read between the lines you'd understand that the point was that stating that increasing immediate costs to individuals, be they Democrats, Independents, Aardvarks, or Mifflin County Gun Toters was likely to directly affect opinions and polls was a silly point. We know that. That's why long term planning that accounts for that inevitability is crucial. Think of it like this: you wouldn't go snipe hunting without your stick and bag, right? Same thing, sort of.

The Snipes I know if you go hunting them you better have more then a bag and stick.

[billvon 2,384]

Not too worried about BH's propaganda any more.  The trend is clear - and it's towards more people taking it seriously.

In the most recent YouGov poll there were some interesting notes.  One is that even republicans are now close to 50% on addressing climate change, and that number keeps rising.  The second is that there is a stark difference between the 18-44 crowd and the 65+ crowd, with almost 3/4 of the younger people wanting to address it, and just over 50% of the older folks wanting to address it.  That means even if nothing else changes, over time there will be more and more pressure to address it.

But of course things will change, and people will experience more and more extreme weather events, see more and more heat, see more climate refugees etc.  And you can get people to believe your lies when they don't see it in person - but even the Trumpiest of Trumpy liars are going to find it hard to get people to not believe their own eyes (as the poll above indicates.)

When should people address climate change?
Right now: 53%
In next few years: 14%

How much responsibility do you have to take care of the environment for future generations?
A lot 38%
Some 35%

Efforts to reduce climate change will:
Help the economy 41%
Hurt the economy 31%
Not much impact 28%

Climate change should be addressed right now or in the next few years:
Democrats 91%
Independents 64%
Republicans 44%

Climate change should be addressed right now or in the next few years:

18-29 74%
30-44 74%
45-64 64%
65+ 56%

https://www.scribd.com/

[billvon 2,384]

3 hours ago, Slim King said:

 Don't mess with Mother Nature.

I agree.  Glad to see you agree that we have to stop trying to increase CO2 concentrations ourselves.

[brenthutch 383]

https://www.cato.org/blog/68-americans-wouldnt-pay-10-month-higher-electric-bills-combat-climate-change
 

[JoeWeber 2,294]

48 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

https://www.cato.org/blog/68-americans-wouldnt-pay-10-month-higher-electric-bills-combat-climate-change
 

1. It's lame to post a link and then run. Try to be better. 2. Most narcotized second amendment AR-15 strokers aren't immediately affected by mass shootings and thus see no reason for change. Of course if your beach home is flooded or suddenly uninsurable or your kids are at school on a day when an AR-15 toting maniac shows up for his moment in the sun even a wrong rightie might be open to conversion. The saying is that all politics are local. The reason, of course, is that so are most narrow, short sighted, opinions. 

[wmw999 2,116]

Don’t forget that people without kids won’t be nearly as interested in paying 20% more in school tax to pay for armed guards and training; many of them resent paying school tax as it is

Wendy P. 

[JoeWeber 2,294]

2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Don’t forget that people without kids won’t be nearly as interested in paying 20% more in school tax to pay for armed guards and training; many of them resent paying school tax as it is

Wendy P. 

But if you aren't trained to ignore that sort of thing your self validating narrative starts unraveling.

[billvon 2,384]

4 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Don’t forget that people without kids won’t be nearly as interested in paying 20% more in school tax to pay for armed guards and training; many of them resent paying school tax as it is

One of the recurring fantasies of the right is that volunteers from Meal Team Six will be willing to patrol schools with their AR-15's for free.  There are no potential downsides, and the upsides of a LOT more sales of guns and ammunition.

[brenthutch 383]

On 4/22/2023 at 7:24 PM, wmw999 said:

Don’t forget that people without kids won’t be nearly as interested in paying 20% more in school tax to pay for armed guards and training; many of them resent paying school tax as it is

Wendy P. 

 

On 4/22/2023 at 6:06 PM, brenthutch said:

https://www.cato.org/blog/68-americans-wouldnt-pay-10-month-higher-electric-bills-combat-climate-change
 

It’s funny how giving me a one month time out still doesn’t change the fact that folks only support climate action in the abstract. When they have to pay for it, support craters.  That is why the Ds had to name their Green New Deal Lite, the Inflation Reduction Act.

Funny fact: Even after spending nearly a trillion dollars to lower our CO2, 2023 emissions are expected to outpace 2022.  Not only are renewables unable to replace fossil fuels en masse they are not even able to keep pace with the increase in demand on the margins.

[kallend 1,621]

Hummingbirds arrived in my yard 3 weeks earlier than nomal this year.

 

And apparently the 13 year cicadas are emerging earlier.

[normiss 620]

I get a newsletter from a family coffee farm in Guatemala, Godoys Coffee (NOOOOMMMMMMS)

 If it's TLDR, the weather is changing, coffee farms are struggling, coffee will get more expensive, farms will relocate as required.

Climate change is real. Man can and should do all we can to maintain our environment.

Ignorance and hatred will most likely do us in before the planet forces us to find another one.

I'd LOVE to be here when Earth crashes into the moon and sun though. 

 

Rainy season, climate change and coffee

Central America has two seasons: wet and dry. Coffee depends greatly on rainy season as it is not generally a crop that is irrigated. Coffee blooms ten days after a rain and the growth of the cherries is done during the rainy season. We are awaiting our third blossoming this coming week.

This is the coffee flower which blooms for a mere 24 hours. Because of the changes in the climate of Central America, coffee has been flowering more often than before. For example, at our farm, it rained in February and again in April, both creating premature  blooms. When the coffee flowers and no rain follows some of the fruit is aborted, creating overall losses. In the past, it was common to get only one large flowering and a harvest that lasted three weeks.

 

This recent upset in rainfall has caused the harvest to be extended as the fruit no longer ripens at the same time. It makes the coffee harvest more expensive for the farmer as he needs to have workers picking fewer beans over a longer period of time. Last year we had to go though the farm four times to pick the ripe coffee and likely it will be the same this year. Coffee is becoming more expensive to grow and places that used to produce coffee are becoming too warm for the crop.

Regardless, at Godoy’s we continue to work hard to make sure you get your wonderful morning brew, no matter the weather or despite changes to the climate.

 

 

 

[brenthutch 383]

17 minutes ago, normiss said:

I get a newsletter from a family coffee farm in Guatemala, Godoys Coffee (NOOOOMMMMMMS)

 If it's TLDR, the weather is changing, coffee farms are struggling, coffee will get more expensive, farms will relocate as required.

Climate change is real. Man can and should do all we can to maintain our environment.

Ignorance and hatred will most likely do us in before the planet forces us to find another one.

I'd LOVE to be here when Earth crashes into the moon and sun though. 

 

Rainy season, climate change and coffee

Central America has two seasons: wet and dry. Coffee depends greatly on rainy season as it is not generally a crop that is irrigated. Coffee blooms ten days after a rain and the growth of the cherries is done during the rainy season. We are awaiting our third blossoming this coming week.

This is the coffee flower which blooms for a mere 24 hours. Because of the changes in the climate of Central America, coffee has been flowering more often than before. For example, at our farm, it rained in February and again in April, both creating premature  blooms. When the coffee flowers and no rain follows some of the fruit is aborted, creating overall losses. In the past, it was common to get only one large flowering and a harvest that lasted three weeks.

 

This recent upset in rainfall has caused the harvest to be extended as the fruit no longer ripens at the same time. It makes the coffee harvest more expensive for the farmer as he needs to have workers picking fewer beans over a longer period of time. Last year we had to go though the farm four times to pick the ripe coffee and likely it will be the same this year. Coffee is becoming more expensive to grow and places that used to produce coffee are becoming too warm for the crop.

Regardless, at Godoy’s we continue to work hard to make sure you get your wonderful morning brew, no matter the weather or despite changes to the climate.

 

 

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/263311/worldwide-production-of-coffee/#:~:text=Global coffee production reached 175.35,by South America%2C specifically Brazil.&text=In 2018%2C Brazil produced 61.7,60-kilogram bags of coffee.

 

Meanwhile in the real world, coffee production reaches record levels.
 

[normiss 620]

Climate change impact on coffee production - so it's not from one of the many farms facing new challenges.

Like everything else ignorance forcibly refuses to acknowledge, it's just a matter of time until it affects the non-believers directly.

[billvon 2,384]

30 minutes ago, normiss said:

Like everything else ignorance forcibly refuses to acknowledge, it's just a matter of time until it affects the non-believers directly.

. . . at which point they just blame Biden and call it a day.