[Bullpine]

It appears Scientific American readers truly see the Inconvenient Truth.

[yldstrk]

Ya don’t say

[Daisyjane69]

That is pretty damning stuff, I must say.

[RC2]

“prone to groupthink” This is the problem. The group is more important than the idividual....to these people. If they can grow the group to the point they over whelm the individuals, they will win.

[Paladin2]

Scientific American is now run by “new scientists” who write the conclusions and then go make up some data to support same, while demanding increased funding.

[TomGuy]

Well heck!

Now, we will continue to have varying summers and winters, separated by milder springs and autumns.

[Mother Nature is laughing, and so am I.]

[Gondring]

I have had nearly nothing to do with Scientific American since they turned an obituary of Edward Teller into a political screed attacking the deceased. My anger was so great that I don't even recall details of the column, except that even liberal scientist friends of mine were appalled.

[Wonder Warthog]

"It appears Scientific American readers truly see the Inconvenient Truth."

Too bad their editorial staff isn't as smart as their readers.

[hinckley buzzard]

I've been a Scientific American reader, and participated in this poll. Now that my kids are out of school I'm letting my subscription lapse. To their credit, they have had occasional good articles debunking peak oil and a few other sacred cows, but their hack columnists are about at Newsweak level.

Editorially, SA just doesn't cut the mustard.

[Yardstick]

I’m a little surprised they published the results of the poll.

[HerrBlucher]

For this one, multiple answers are allowed. 26% said greenhouse gases from human activity, 32% solar variation, and 78% “natural processes.” (In reality all three are causes of climate change.)

BS, AGW has not been even remotely proven. The total contribution of human generated CO2 is miniscule and countered by human activity that generates extra particulate matter in the atmoshpere which blocks sunlight from coming in. AGW is a carefully constructed fantasy which apparently is extremely difficult to give up, like a lonely little girl and her imaginary friend.

[RhoTheta]

Ping

[Nick Danger]

There will be night and early-morning low clouds and fog along the coast; otherwise, hazy sunshine.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[IncPen]

ping

[Publius6961]

"he [Hansen] has failed to note that in 1988 he predicted that the West Side Highway in Manhattan would go permanently under water in twenty years.

This fruitcake is a hack and is still searching for a clue about science.

Why does he still have a job, at NASA, of all places, is a bigger mystery than the main cause of global warming.

[TaxPayer2000]

The link:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/the-shocking-truth-the-scientific-american-poll-on-climate-change/

does not work for me.

[oh8eleven]

26% said greenhouse gases from human activity, 32% solar variation, and 78% “natural processes.” (In reality all three are causes of climate change.)
In reality, the 26% from human activity is BS.

[Pontiac]

Here is the Poll on Scientific American website.

Taking the temperature: Climate change poll

[Interesting Times]

Looks like the AGW SC(ientific) AM(erican) is over.

[Stepan12]

The readers' realism as regards 'Scientific American' is in contrast to 'Scientific American' itself. This magazine was owned by someone with the last name of Piel who was a Communist or at least his wife is one. She was the leader of the Communist "Emergency Civil Liberties Union."

As part of the scientific veracity of 'Scientific America,' they declared the Wright brothers invention of the flying plane was fictitious three years after the Wright bothers invention actually flew.