The survey questions are spectacularly asinine. Not one of them is suited to a yes/no answer.

http://www.theage.com.au/national/education/cold-on-warming-20120903-25a66.html

Pity the reporter didn’t do a bit of background research.

Obviously then the scientific evidence is unconvincing. The reason is that it’s been analyzed and compared against observed metrics and physical principles and found not to be of sufficient substance and validity (model scenarios are not data) to explain the current situation and therefore not fit for predictive purposes.

And those “segments of the public” include: climate scientists, geologists, chemical and mechanical engineers, astrophysicists etc i.e. experts that require rigourous science of a standard they are accustomed to in their own disciplines to be convinced on anything scientific.

The solution for climate science isn’t substandard psychological studies, it’s the presentation of convincing evidence starting with an explanation of why CO2 hasn’t actually forced temperature for some time now. Easterling and Wehner’s 2009 opinion that we should expect “one or two decades of natural variability” just adds to to the unconvincing nature of the ACO2 case.

The email was sent (the problem was with my desktop client) but I just received an interesting addendum to the “I’m travelling” auto-reply.

“I am currently traveling with uncertain email access until 7 September.

Note that although I endeavour to keep all email correspondence private and confidential, this does not apply to messages that are of an abusive nature.”

One must receive a great many abusive messages to add this to the auto-reply. Why would one receive lots of abuse?