Why don't the Chinese believe in global warming, is it because their science scores are so much?

Mostly because as smart as the physicists involved in GW studies think they are, they forget to get advice from people who may more more on that subject. The entire climate modeling process falls under 3 problems: 1.) When modeling a chaotic system, in order to make accurate predicitons about the future, your initial startijng point values must be very accurate. The global temp data is far from accurate and differ between reporting agencies by up to .5 degree in a month. 2.) You can not use your model of a chaotic system for a long period of time. While I have no doubt that they can at some point have models that are accurate enough to predict out to the next month, they will never be accurate to predict out to the next year and certainly not out to the next 100 years. 3.) If your computer model shoots off into infinity or negative infinity while the system you are modeling has never done that, it is sign that your model is wrong, not that the system will shoot off to infinity. I am not sure that AGW physicists know this. If they do, then they are arrogant SOBs who are afraid to admit that there are things that even they with their big brains can not find the answers to. Now why the scientific community has allowed this farce to go on so long without giving credence to people who actually understand the difficulties of modeling a chaotic system is beyond me. For that, I think you have to follow the money.

Our children are already ****** up, being fed lies by PETA and Greenpeace, saying hunting and eating meat is wrong. I don't think another bullshit theory is going to make the slightest difference, which is kind of ironic, considering the fact "going green" isn't gonna do **** either.

How do you know what the Chinese believe? I assume the Chinese like Americans have skeptics. True believer always accuse us skeptic of being evil.

The second question. My answer is yes that is the solution to many of our problems. The myth about Chinese being smarter is just that a myth. Americans produce more college grads per captia than China. But China has a well educated team to compete with our regular grads. Pro base ball team verses a company team.The most intelligent of Chinese are allowed to go to America to learn how to compete with us. Most Chinese are coolie class and uneducated.

I am not Chinese but have married one. She doesn't have much of an opinion on global warming because she hasn't studied it. I know dozens of her relatives and mostly I would say the same about them. Her father and mother are not well educated and don't speak good English but they are both conservative (they make me look liberal) and are skeptical of everything, including global warming. My wife has one cousin who was a good hippy, very nice guy, very left wing, and he believes in it. He is probably the most educated but sometimes a little education can be dangerous. His kids follow his lead. I am sure it is the same throughout China. In China, there is no freedom of speech so it is difficult to be sure what they believe. We just hired a new geologist from Chang Hai (spelling?) so I hope to find out his opinion pretty soon. If I find out, I will share. It is very rare to find a geologist that believes humans have caused significant warming.

Linlyons,

Continually, you tell half of the story, only your side and then whine when you are not given BA? The chinese are not smarter than US, they simply have more people and the students who do exceptionally well in school in China are sent to study in America. Your simple stating of Berkeley statistics is a bunch of hooey and says nothing. Also when looking at the amount of "clean energy" investments made by China, you are once again comparing apples to oranges. China is currently in the process of growing their economy and seeking new energy, whereas the US is stable and is really only seeking to keep the amount of energy steady. China spending more money on new energy does not imply anything. Why do you continually place out facts that are so irrelevant and only speak to half of the truth?

Linlyons,

The entire AGW industry that publish all of those reports that you so value are paid solely if AGW is a fear. So if you are trying to bash geologists for not beleiving AGW for monetary reasons, then by your same logic, the same can be said for all of the climate "scientists". The only difference is that thew climate "scientists" have been "correcting" the data in an unblinded manner. This is following your own logic. Why do you continually ignore your own logic when it may detract from the warmer's side? Seems more like ideology than science to me.

DrM,

Good answer. I have spoken with Chinese living here in the US. They do not even have anything bad to say about their politicians. They actually act as if their politicians are not corrupt. That is just absurd. Politicians not being corrupt? It like water not being wet or fire not being hot.

China is said to be the world's leader in production of solar cells now. They are also rapidly developing wind farms. Apparently, they believe in alternative energy, although they have built a lot of polluting coal fired power plants in the last 10 years.

Speaking of 'assuming' where did you get the idea that the "Chinese don't believe in global warming"?

do you think that global warming's a myth? and what does it have to do with the chinese? everyone knows that it not a mere truth. i am a chinese and frankly I'm pretty aware of the facts

1. The Chinese, or at least their government, believes in global warming. But they also believe that on a per capita basis, they are far less responsible for global warming and they have a right to develop and a pressing need to develop their economy.

2. Who said their science scores are higher than ours? We have the finest universities in the world.

3. I'm afraid that if you make the the US scientifically literate, you would find that everyone would believe that global warming exists. They may bicker about how much change will occur and how dangerous the change would be, but they would not deny the very basic science that increasing the CO2 level will cause an increase in temperature. This is Einstein, Planck, et al, and high school physics on black body radiation, quantum mechanics and absorption and emissions spectrums. You can't change the fundamental laws of nature to fit a political persuasion.

Apart from the facts that the global warmers don't have any science apart from computer models this and computer models that. Garbage in equals garbage out. How do they observe "climate" being as climate is supposed to be the average weather over a long period of time? How does anybody seriously study climate with no raw data, or haven’t they heard the historical climate data appears to be missing. In its place is a bunch of homogenized crap made up by a guy we should all trust because he like them only has our best interest at heart and honest he got it all right the first time and didn’t need it any more so he deleted it?

You should always be sceptical of AGW because additional mechanisms that influence climate sensitivity have been identified, including the response of the carbon cycle to climate change, for example the loss of organic carbon currently stored in soils. The net effect of changes in the carbon cycle in all current models is to increase warming, by an amount that varies considerably from model to model because of uncertainties in how to represent the relevant processes. The future strength of the uptake of CO2 by the land and oceans (which together are currently responsible for taking up about half of the emissions from human activity – is very poorly understood, particularly because of gaps in our understanding of the response of biological processes to changes in both CO2 concentrations and climate.

How would we know what the Chinese climatologists believe? They still live under a near totalitarian government, one which makes certain there is little or no dissent among their populace.