This seems to be one of the conclusions using Google Trends as an indicator of interest. A sign the propaganda isn’t working?A paper recently published in Environmental Research Letters uses Google Trends as an indicator of public interest. It seems that public interest peaks and then falls off after major “climate” events but has declined with 2007 being the peak year. The trends are based on specific parameter Google searches. There was another peak, but not that noticeable on the trends with climategate and the IPCC glacier error in 2010. The authors seem a bit surprised that the public views climate change debated and contentious despite an overwhelming scientific consensus on the subject.
The opinions of the authors are evident in the terminology used in the paper. As mentioned in the previous paragraph, the scientific consensus on climate change is overwhelming, so how could the public doubt it? Perhaps a goodly number of the non-scientific, uneducated public recognize science isn’t done by consensus. Climategate gets a good amount of the paper. The Climategate emails were pretty much referred to as “hacked.” I suppose that makes any use of them invalid. “Hacking” or theft doesn’t seem to invalidate the Bradly and Snowden thefts, so why are the Climategate emails invalid? The Himalayan glacier “error” in the 2010 IPCC report also seems to get a bit of coverage in the report. The “error” as I recall was the use of anecdotal comments by a non-scientist which was then “validated” and defended by the IPCC until the laughter got too loud.
My favorite is the miss use of the term “climate change” which has replaced global warming and become to mean any difference in weather from some unspecified norm.
Perhaps public interest has waned because they recognize propaganda and are getting tired of repeated daily doses.