A problem I have with this survey is when they ask us to rate how various actors have performed in their efforts over the past year to address climate change.

Can I rate a government's performance as "excellent" because they've done very little to address the problem?

Completed the survey and rated Canada and USA performance as very poor, would have rated lower if possible. Only advise I hope Copenhagen is ratified.

Completed the survey and rated Canada and USA performance as very poor, would have rated lower if possible. Only advise I proffered is that I hope Copenhagen is ratified.

Completed the survey. Rated Canada's performance as excellent, and hope that the ship of fools at Copenhagen come clean and admit the whole Big Scare is nothing but a money/power grabbing scam.

It would not let me complete the survey without giving my personal info...that's the last thing I'm going to give them

Could not complete the survey. When it asked what percent of money it would not except 0 so survey is rigged.

It would not let me complete the survey without giving my personal info...that's the last thing I'm going to give them..

Feel free to use any of these names... Luke Warmwater, Bolt Upright, Ben Dover, Frank Scurmellicapelli.

This survey is heavily sloped to find support for AGW in every way and hard put a strong position against.

Use 1 Euro.

I was really stumped by the "will you stop beating your wife for the climate?" question.

Re: Shaken, " I was really stumped by the "will you stop beating your wife for the climate?" question."

Amen to that, you had me ROFL. Another taxpayer shake down coming once these pinheads present their "findings" to weak-kneed politicos.

I submitted the survey from "Dr. Philip McCracken" of "Climate Rent-seekers International". The questions were irritatingly focused on the preferred solution- More Control Of The Little People, but I did what I could.

I gave them my last name and my real email address and I told them I'd participate in a future survey. We need to tell these people that we know this is a scam every time they give us the chance.

Question: "Last, what one piece of advice would you most like to give to negotiators as they meet in Copenhagen? "

Answer: Go to the private sector, and seek employment. Climate change is a natural phenomena that is poorly understood at present. Anthropogenic climate change is spurious at best, and also poorly understood. Rushing to restructure the world economy by legislative fiat will impoverish millions by redistributive schemes, and the attendant economic distortions that will be created.

The word scam came up in the comments. Also the words transfer of authority. When implementation and mandated was supposed to add up to 100%, 0&0 was rejected..the first time the second time it took.

The "what percentage of your children's future wealth should be spent on this nonsense" questions were frustrating -- you had to enter values that totalled to "100%".

The free-form text fields were fun, though.

As for "will you stop beating your wife for the climate?" -- No.

It's a survey looking for the "right" answer. Bogus, manipulative, bunk.

The questions are asked as if globull warming is FACT. "The science is settled, please confirm our findings".

I asked why they didn't hold the conference in Darfour.

In the comments I told them to leave capable and responsible people alone; don't tax or penalize them for being smart; and that they must read 'Atlas Shrugged' by Ayn Ran.

Remember - this is a survey of the Climate Converted.

It isn't offered to the public in general, thus the value of our mischief.

Question: "Last, what one piece of advice would you most like to give to negotiators as they meet in Copenhagen? "

I put this:

Do not sign anything binding or that will reduce our sovereignty! We should focus our efforts on real pollution that will actually help people in developing countries, not wasting time trying to reduce CO2 which is not a pollutant. We could also redirect wasted money now directed to C02 reduction to military operations that aim to liberate oppressed people world wide. You know, actually doing something useful with our philanthropy.

if global warming is so important, then should we limit northward immigration to counties in witch people are forced to consume more energy,people should only be allowed to immigrate southward where there "footprint will be less", if its so critical

I was more than happy to give these idiots my personal information, although I can fully understand those preferring not to do so. For myself, I've often called BS on this sort of thing in various forums and been gratifyingly surprised at the numbers of people who follow suit and declare their similar skepticism once someone's broken the ice. It's well past time we started speaking truth to power and letting these naked emperors know that the jig's up and equally importantly let them know that we know it.

I informed them that jetting to climate conferences was an indication of just how little they believed in their own alarmism.

I found it difficult to answer many the questions because they all assume that I actually believe that there is a climate change problem and that we puny humans can fix it by impoverishing ourselves.

I did my best to let them know how I feel about this big scam.

I suggested that they read "The Deniers" by Lawrence Solomon.

In the what advice would you give to the delegates, I put "Stay home."

Wow, what a set of leading questions,designed to get the answer they want.

When my students submit survey questions this "badly" written, I give them the zero grade they so richly deserve. Of course, those such as T who already have their "minds" made up will think they are great questions.

CRC

My advice for the "what should representatives do when they arrive?" was:

"Turn around and go home.

Communism has many faces... this is just a wealth re-distribution scheme"

I suggested they all take a train to Russia from Denmark, get pissed up on Russian vodka, go back home and order themselves Hudson Bay Blankets from Canada, because we are heading into a new mini ice age.
Yes and I did give my name and email address!

Advice:

"Belief" and "consensus" have no place in science, nor do bureaucrats or activists.

[qoute]Wow, what a set of leading questions,designed to get the answer they want[/quote] crotchrocketcowboy

I could not get by the price per ton, .001 or $1.00 did not meet the minimum allowed.

It is some comfort that these types of surveys also fool the proponents.....

I couldn't pass the dollar/euro amount question either, not at the 0.00 or 0.01 that I wanted; or the 1.00 or 1 that I tried; or going the opposite way and entering as many zeroes as possible so that 1000000.00 a tonne would be a ludicrous amount.

Advise:

Vote to resolve that AGW is a hoax, the greatest swindle ever perpetrated in the history of mankind, and all efforts to control populations and governments using AGW as excuse to do so shall result in that nation, or group of nations, to be sanctioned by all others.

I gave my name as Al Gore and my business as Carbon Credits Unlimited. What a rigged survey.

Advise was Climate Change is a HOAX.

@Joe "Yes and I did give my name and email address!"

Of course.
These people need to get the message that we wont go quietly into the cold, dark night.
Bring. It. On.

In the money amount per ton, enter in one box OR the other, not both.

BTW ... my survey has now frozen up and won't proceed

When asked for the geographical area of my expertise, I was honest and put "Kuiper Belt"...

That was fun!

Advice- Admit AGW is a colossal hoax; Al Gore and David Suzuki are frauds; go home and quit wasting everybody's money.

Best describes type of org u work for- Other- non-moonbat.

I had no trouble with cost/tonne question. I entered .012 and it seemed to work.

Tried to get cute with percentages re adaptation and mitigation: 187% and -87% but wouldn't accept. As well, gave anti-AGW resposes as much as I could.

Far as I know, it went in OK.

Submitted by Harry Pitts.

I found the survey nothing more than a push poll for the converted. I like many of you, tried to answers as many questions in a way to reflect my distrust and opposition with the next attempt in Copenhagen to hold the western world up for ransom through guilt.

At least my comments will tell MY postion:

Stop the road show of chicken little hysteria.

The pseudoscience of climate change has done more to damage "true science" due to the monastic approach and manipulation caused by Gore and his followers. One only has to start with the false premise of Michael Mann's hockey stick then follow the vilification of people now called "denier's" been done with the same fervor as the Catholic church when it went after the likes of Galileo and Copernicus. The believers of Global Warming have now turned science into the" Inquisition".

In short The difference between science and pseudoscience is that science is based on factual information gathered without a person biased opinion. Pseudoscience is twisting facts to suit a over blown misrepresented "theory" to show others that this misinformation is in-fact true.

If the "theory of Global Warming" is so true and requiring action. Why are the purveyor's of the theory so unwilling the debate with the supposed "deniers".

The like's of Load Monckton, Václav Klaus, Roy Spencer Ph. D., Anthony Watts, Lawrence Solomon, Steve McIntyre,Tom Moriarty and so many that are just as qualified. HAVE proven the science IS NOT IN.

Any government, company or group that persists with the misleading premiss of AGW and cripples any economy, give's up national sovereignty or transfer wealth due to a "theory" will pay a massive price in the polls, market place and world of idea's.

Albert Einstein say's it best.
"The only thing more dangerous than ignorance is arrogance."

Putting aside how annoying the presumption of belief in AGW was in this survey, I recommended that they:
Believe in (and practice) freedom, prosperity, innovation and the free market to be of ultimate benefit to humanity , NOT the authoritarianism that the current UN IPCC and others are saying is required to 'prevent' so-called catastrophic human induced climate change. Climate has always changed; freedom, prosperity and innovation can and will deliver net benefits that bureaucracy can't.

Liberal-left/socialism brings you: Gaia. Contributions are tax-deductible.

Gaia eats CO2 wafers, shoots, and stays for supper, says expert St. Gore.
…-

“It’s official – climate change beliefs now have religious equality status
4 11 2009

While I’ve been avoiding posting on this topic for quite some time, when a UK court makes a ruling like this, and the UK Telegraph makes a headline like the one below, it becomes hard to ignore. We live in interesting times.

“Climate change belief given same legal status as religion”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/

I could not get by the price per ton, .001 or $1.00 did not meet the minimum allowed.

It is some comfort that these types of surveys also fool the proponents.....
Posted by: Phillip G. Shaw at November 4, 2009 11:15 AM

I was able to successfully enter 0.01 and advance to the next question. Note, you only have to enter in the dollars field ~~OR~~ the Euros field. Entering an amount in both is an invalid entry, and the survey will not allow you to advance.

My adice: Drill Baby Drill

Completed the survey and rated Canada and USA performance as very poor, would have rated lower if possible. Only advise I proffered is that I hope Copenhagen is ratified.
Posted by: T at November 4, 2009 9:34 AM

Spoken like a true Kool Aid drinker. The term "useful idiot" springs to mind.

Under the comments I told them to read Lord Moncton's report on climate change, I bet they won't invite me to do a second survey

crotchrocket - I agree; that's one of the worst, most biased 'surveys I've seen. I would have failed any student who wrote such garbage.

As for T, he obviously don't know what a valid scientific survey looks like; this one was a piece of junk. All the questions were biased, leading and therefore, scientifically unreliable and invalid.

I put 'Somalia' as the example of the best country in managing the 'climage change' in the world. Notice how they've all dropped the AGW term?
As for suggestions - I suggested that they switch to another religion and acknowledge that AGW is relgious dogma..and they should acknowledge that genuine science rejects AGW.

The financial amount? Just leave it blank. And give a noname for email.

I put 0.00001 Euros in the field.

"I put 'Somalia' as the example of the best country in managing the 'climage change' in the world."

Posted by: ET at November 4, 2009 1:05 PM

And I put Zimbabwe as the best country in managing the 'climate change'.

And I thought Botswana was the hands down leader.

wrt T, I pity the fool!

If this was my survey I would gather the questions that were difficult to answer from the "denier" perspective and spin those answers in the "enlightened" folks favour. That's what I expect if they send me the results as they've offered.

Finally, to pat myself on the back, I thought it was pretty funny recommending they redirect AGW funds to military operations to liberate people; although, "drill baby drill" takes the cake for most irritating response.

And I put Zimbabwe as the best country in managing the 'climate change'.
Posted by: Joe Molnar at November 4, 2009 2:11 PM

Heh, I picked Nigeria.

Yes, I also put Zimbabwe but the survey failed in that it insisted that I put a value on a tax and woulf not accept zero as an answer.

Well I tried to fill in the survey but I couldn't find an answer that even came close to the abhorrence I feel toward AGW. The range of answers available made it look like I supported AGW.

Did I mention that I abhor AGW? Well if not abhor then revile or hate or....

for What advice to the morons at the Cop, I said any party signing it should be HUNG!

Advice:

Get your hands off my personal freedom, my nation's sovereignty, and my wallet.

Thanks Kate,
I am so pleased I did that, and I did give them my details, on the price per ton just left it blank, it let me continue,on job responsibility put I was a net provide of wealth and opportunity and that God has been managing the climate quite well enought up till now, on advise I just quoted the old tale, "Oh look the Emperor has no clothes on".

Oh, and I put down Iran as the best country to handle made-up problems with strategies that are a cover for world domination. They're executing well with their "peaceful nuclear energy program".

Posted by: Talnik
[..]It would not let me complete the survey without giving my personal info...that's the last thing I'm going to give them[..]
Yeah you and me both...but have no fear my PHD IT expert warns/assures me that your entered responses were recorded/forwarded anyway....that's the way the software works....
Like that junk-e-mail you get when you back out before giving your name and credit card #.
He also opines that, regardless the responses, the results were decided prior to convassing....especially if the matter has ANY political aspect.

The survey was scewed in an attempt to get the answers they wanted. When I tried to indicate $0.00 per tonne it wouldn't let me.

Heh, I loved filling in the "other" choices...for the area where you had a chance to freeform something...

"You're using our tax dollars for this claptrap? Why don't you all punch yourselves in the gonads a few times and resign, so that money can go to addressing real problems, like the lack of indoor plumbing for penguins in Antarctica, or maybe solar-powered text-to-voice Koran readers?"

First, I did put "0" for price/ton, and it let me.

Second, the other questions where they wanted 100% is what percentage of an already existing climate change budget should go to which. I put 100 adaptation, 0 mitigation, which fits with all of human history where we don't waste effort on things we can't control when we could be going outside and clubbing a bear for its warm coat.

Third, for advice, I recommended they read "Eichmann in Jerusalem" while they go about trying to regulate the lives of everyone on earth, and that they try not to prove Jefferson's assertion that "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

"Completed the survey and rated Canada and USA performance as very poor, would have rated lower if possible. Only advise I proffered is that I hope Copenhagen is ratified."
Posted by: T at November 4, 2009 9:34 AM

Perhaps you'd like to explain how closing down the relatively clean industry here and moving production to dirty factories in China will reduce real pollution and C02 emissions?
And explain how shipping raw materials there and the finished products back here won't increase pollution?
Take your pick, the Copenhagen treaty is a choice between world wealth redistribution or a cleaner environment.

You've been had.

It's a survey heavily weighted towards those who have quaffed of the AGW koolaid but there's a couple places to object.

I recommended that the Copenhagen negotiators have a nice trip, sightsee, drink beer, and then go home. Because nothing that they do will help make people richer, more free, and less subject to the vagaries and corruption of politicians and bureaucrats.