DURHAM, N.H. – There’s a well-known saying in New England that if you don’t like the weather here, wait a minute. When it comes to independent voters, those weather changes can just as quickly shift beliefs about climate change.
New research from the University of New Hampshire finds that the climate change beliefs of independent voters are dramatically swayed by short-term weather conditions. The research was conducted by Lawrence Hamilton, professor of sociology and senior fellow at the Carsey Institute, and Mary Stampone, assistant professor of geography and the New Hampshire state climatologist. The research is presented in the article “Blowin’ in the Wind: Short-Term Weather and Belief in Anthropogenic Climate Change” in the American Meteorological Society journal Weather, Climate, and Society.
“We find that over 10 surveys, Republicans and Democrats remain far apart and firm in their beliefs about climate change. Independents fall in between these extremes, but their beliefs appear weakly held — literally blowing in the wind. Interviewed on unseasonably warm days, independents tend to agree with the scientific consensus on human-caused climate change. On unseasonably cool days, they tend not to,” Hamilton and Stampone say.
Hamilton and Stampone used statewide data from about 5,000 random-sample telephone interviews conducted on 99 days over two and a half years (2010 to 2012) by the Granite State Poll. They combined the survey data with temperature and precipitation indicators derived from New Hampshire’s U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) station records. Survey respondents were asked whether they thought climate change is happening now, caused mainly by human activities. Alternatively, respondents could state that climate change is not happening, or that it is happening but mainly for natural reasons.
Unseasonably warm or cool temperatures on the interview day and previous day seemed to shift the odds of respondents believing that humans are changing the climate. However, when researchers broke these responses down by political affiliation (Democrat, Republican or independent), they found that temperature had a substantial effect on climate change views mainly among independent voters.
“Independent voters were less likely to believe that climate change was caused by humans on unseasonably cool days and more likely to believe that climate change was caused by humans on unseasonably warm days. The shift was dramatic. On the coolest days, belief in human-caused climate change dropped below 40 percent among independents. On the hottest days, it increased above 70 percent,” Hamilton says.
New Hampshire’s self-identified independents generally resemble their counterparts on a nationwide survey that asked the same questions, according to the researchers. Independents comprise 18 percent of the New Hampshire estimation sample, compared with 17 percent nationally. They are similar with respect to education, but slightly older, and more balanced with respect to gender.
In conducting their analysis, the researchers took into account other factors such as education, age, and sex. They also made adjustments for the seasons, and for random variation between surveys that might be caused by nontemperature events.
The University of New Hampshire, founded in 1866, is a world-class public research university with the feel of a New England liberal arts college. A land, sea, and space-grant university, UNH is the state's flagship public institution, enrolling 12,200 undergraduate and 2,300 graduate students.
Proud Conservative
4:06 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
UNH surveys are about as reliable as their global warming research and political polls - absolutely worthless except for the fact that they keep a few professors busy.
Atlant Schmidt
4:14 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
Ahh: personal attacks. The typical rebuttal of a climate-change denier to the opinions of more than 97% of the scientists practicing in the field.
Really??
4:35 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
Why accumulate data and research it when you can just go with "yer gut!"
Right, P Con?
Really??
4:35 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
"Studies are stupid".....
Hilltopper
4:14 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
White House Press Secretary Carney: ‘No Specific Storm or Weather Event Can Be Tied to Climate Change’
Really??
4:35 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
Do you not understand what he was saying?
One Man Wolf Pack
4:55 pm on Thursday, January 24, 2013
Anything from a press secretary for a politician is suspect to begin with.
Jan Schmidt
8:00 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
That's exactly correct Hill... One cold snap doesn't mean the scientists are wrong....
The climate is not the weather, though they share a focus... Weather is right here and right now, and climate is years long and world wide.
Atlant Schmidt
8:00 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
Charlie:
> Anything from a press secretary for a politician is suspect to begin with.
"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do."
Recognize that one? Admittedly, it doesn't come (at first, anyway) from the press secretary for a politician.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Trees_cause_pollution
One Man Wolf Pack
10:38 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
@Atlant, while you and I are opposed on most issues I actually believe in Global warming; not quite convinced that it is 100% industry as some are but rather that industry may be excellerating an already present natural trend. Also you know I have issue with many rediculous statements from those on the right too; Akin being a recent glaring example. But Hilltoper points out this one from Carney and I think the statement is hogwash; certainly in the face of the mountain of climate data we have. A few extra degrees in the oceans do in fact produce differing weather patterns; often severly different. Isn't that proof? (Or are you just circling the wagons arround any leftist in sight again? The laughton's from Ward 4 come to mind here)
Reality Geezer
10:38 am on Friday, January 25, 2013
Independents need to pick an ideology and follow it. Flip flopping back and forth will never accomplish any goals.....................
steve forte
12:21 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Does their beleifs actualy change, or just the amount they actualy care about it? When everyone is making good money and doing fine , its easy to care about the small stuff. When one is unemployed and not sure where next weeks dinner is coming from, the weather 100 yrs from now dosnt seem so important.
Keith F Thompson
4:42 pm on Sunday, January 27, 2013
Climate change IS an economic issue.
The poor and working class will be the most affected by the changes.
NH's economy is dependent on climate. Skiing and snowmobiling, agriculture and tourism are all being affected by climate change already. That means fewer jobs, fewer taxes collected, higher prices for food.
Once again, conservatives manage to convince poor and working class people to vote against their own interests.
Proud Conservative
4:11 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
Keith F Thompson
4:42 pm on Sunday, January 27, 2013
Follow the money...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/26/1182365/-Dollars-for-Deniers-Big-Oil-Funds-Climate-Science-Denialism
Proud Conservative
4:11 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week.
The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.
This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years.
Atlant Schmidt
10:09 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
As usual your facts are garbage.
http://earthsky.org/earth/uk-met-office-responds-global-warming-did-not-stop-16-years-ago
But somehow, I'm sure you'll keep repeating your statement.
Proud Conservative
10:25 am on Friday, February 8, 2013
Atlant - why don't you enlighten us? Point us to some reliable, verifiable statistics that show indisputably that the Earth has warmed during the past 16 years and that human activity is the direct cause of the warming.
Proud Conservative
4:11 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Global warming skeptic and meteorologist Anthony Watts, whose wattsupwiththat.com website has been called the "world's most viewed climate website," released a scientific discussion paper yesterday that crushes the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's [NOAA's] "global warming" data claims. The study, co-authored with Dr. John R. Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville, Stephen McIntyre of Toronto, Canada, and Evan Jones of New York, concluded that "reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward."
Proud Conservative
4:11 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
New data shows that in fact the Earth has not warmed at all over the last 15 years. In fact, the Daily Mail reports that the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit, after taking data from nearly 30,000 stations around the world, have found that the earth stopped warming in 1997. The report suggests we are headed toward a new solar cycle, Cycle 25, which NASA scientists have predicted will be significantly cooler than Cycle 24 which we are in now. This data largely contradicts the accepted theory among the public that carbon dioxide pollution is causing global warming and even proposes that we are actually heading toward global cooling.
Proud Conservative
4:12 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Climate change itself is already in the process of definitively rebutting climate alarmists who think human use of fossil fuels is causing ultimately catastrophic global warming. That is because natural climate cycles have already turned from warming to cooling, global temperatures have already been declining for more than 10 years, and global temperatures will continue to decline for another two decades or more.
That is one of the most interesting conclusions to come out of the seventh International Climate Change Conference sponsored by the Heartland Institute, held last week in Chicago.
Proud Conservative
4:12 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
Check out the 20th century temperature record, and you will find that its up and down pattern does not follow the industrial revolution’s upward march of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2), which is the supposed central culprit for man caused global warming (and has been much, much higher in the past). It follows instead the up and down pattern of naturally caused climate cycles.
For example, temperatures dropped steadily from the late 1940s to the late 1970s. The popular press was even talking about a coming ice age. Ice ages have cyclically occurred roughly every 10,000 years, with a new one actually due around now.
Keith F Thompson
4:42 pm on Sunday, January 27, 2013
Proud Conservative-
Two seconds with the Google Machine exposes the quality of your sources-
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/09/local/la-me-gs-unabomber-billboard-continues-to-hurt-heartland-institute-20120509
Your response to this article is so typical. Massive information dump, all of the quality and reliability of the above.
Proud Conservative
2:03 pm on Friday, February 1, 2013
On March 28, fifty former NASA employees signed this letter to Charles Bolden, NASA’s Administrator:
Dear Charlie,
We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.
The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.
As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.
(Cont'd below)
Proud Conservative
4:12 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.
Thank you for considering this request.
Sincerely,
(Attached signatures)
Proud Conservative
4:12 pm on Friday, January 25, 2013
These scientists know that if they do research and results are in no way alarming, their research will gather dust on the shelf and their research careers will languish. But if they do research that sounds alarms, they will become well known and respected and receive scholarly awards and, very importantly, more research dollars will come flooding their way.
Proud Conservative
2:54 pm on Tuesday, January 29, 2013
What caused the last ice age cover to melt? Must have been global warming. But why......no people were here? For that matter, what caused the last ice age to begin with? When you find the answer to those two questions, you'll understand why the Earth undergoes long term temperature swings.
Really??
7:13 am on Friday, February 8, 2013
There is no "Ice Age" in the bible, heretic.
Michael Cole
10:25 am on Friday, February 8, 2013
"There is no "Ice Age" in the bible, heretic."
...There are no hybrids or wind farms in the Bible either, moonbat.
Proud Conservative
10:25 am on Friday, February 8, 2013
Really - Do you have any concept of history? The last ice age occurred when there were no humans on Earth. The bible doesn't cover events for that time period.
Swamp Fox
8:17 pm on Thursday, February 7, 2013
UNH says its just a couple of feet of snow we ae getting (2/8/13) and do not let that affect your judgement.
Really??
7:13 am on Friday, February 8, 2013
How stupid could you be?
Jan Schmidt
7:13 am on Friday, February 8, 2013
So you believe that because we're having a storm that there is no change in the climate? Hahahahahah, really?? Come on, seriously?