ABC Poll: GW rates a big fat zero

A non panicked public says “where’s the fire”? Amazingly, “Global Warming” scores a ZERO in the latest ABC News poll.

ABC and the Washington Post polled Americans about the most important issue to them in the upcoming elections. The economy ranked #1 with 41%, Iraq #2 with 18%, Health Care #3 with 7%, Terrorism/National Security #4 with 5%, Immigration and Ethics followed with 4%, Education and Morals with 2%, Environment and Global Warming continue to receive a 0%.

image

See full size table here

(Direct link to ABC Poll, page 6 has global warming zero result) http://www.abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1063a4EconomyandIraq.pdf

h/t to ICECAP and reader Mike Bryant.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
60 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Roger Carr
April 20, 2008 12:24 am

The 41% worried about the economy may better represent the number worried about man-made global warming insofar as postulated carbon taxes are going to add quite some pain… but perhaps they have not bridged that gap?
Or have; and simply ignored the climate question, figuring they had already answered that in the “Economy” box.

Anonymous
April 20, 2008 4:46 am

Amazing.
The politicans need to pour more money into TV ads.

(Gary G) Otter
April 20, 2008 4:52 am

With a little luck, algore’s $300 million ad campaign will end up just one big Flush.

Steve Keohane
April 20, 2008 6:46 am

This means there is hope the farce will end. My greatest concern is the duping of the masses.

Rico
April 20, 2008 6:53 am

The specific question was: “Thinking ahead to the November presidential election, what is the single most important issue in your choice for president?”
Given that all three of the remaining candidates are basically on the same page with respect to global warming, even if a few people thought it was the single most important issue (though I doubt even that number is very big), it’s not one that distinguishes between the candidates.

Evan Jones
Editor
April 20, 2008 7:21 am

The Gore adds I’ve seen so far only sideswipe the issue. They “agree” on “caring about the planet”, then having done all that, the closing line says something about “solving” the “climate” issue.
If they wanted to make a real impact, they should have tried the shock and awe approach, maybe?

April 20, 2008 8:46 am

If global cooling hits the number one issue will be how to survive! Global warming was a long term threat with political solutions, a cooler world caused by changes in the sun’s behaviour has no political solutions and it will become a scramble for food resources with instability in the poorer countries as they lose out big time to the richer players.
I hope you are all wrong which seems like wishful thinking, the climate has never been stable from one century to the next, why should our run of luck go on forever?

David Smith
April 20, 2008 9:12 am

Looks like AGW fell from “asterisk” (between 0.5% and 0.0%) in February to “absolute zero” in May.
Ouch. How humbling to not even rate a lowly asterisk.

Evan Jones
Editor
April 20, 2008 9:53 am

Pierre: Note the overwhelming trend in ther comments to that article. c. 10-to-1 on the skeptic side.
Perhaps the “climate” in the “WAllies” is creating a pressure buildup that will cause an explosive intellectual counter-reaction. Maybe THAT’s the GCM model that will prove out.

Jeff B.
April 20, 2008 10:23 am

In my view, Algore’s ad campaign is indicative of panic.
The data from the Sun and Ocean, the steady stream of new papers, projects like SurfaceStations.org, and Polls like this one are all picking up. More and more people are clueing in to the fact that we don’t know exactly how climate mechanisms work, but certainly many indicators point to the Sun and the Pacific Ocean as far greater drivers of climate than mankind.
As the temperature has trended downwards, and we’ve had a record cool winter, most people are relying on their own empirical judgment. And so if you are Algore, and you’ve staked your reputation, and a whole lot of Green Business on your weak hypothesis, you certainly have no choice but to double-down, or even $300 Million down to to try and save your ship. And while you are at it, shut out the press, etc.
All signs point to Algore eclipsing humpty-dumpty in the very new future. We won’t just have egg on his face, he will be swimming in a sea of egg.

Jeff B.
April 20, 2008 10:38 am

BTW, let me also state that there appears to also have been a shift in overall anti-AGW tactic to focus more on the computer models. And this is the exactly correct tack in bringing their hypothesis down. They cannot deny that all of their claims are based on these models. The models are everything to them. So by continually focusing on the models, and asking them to defend the models, pointing out the models weakness, etc. it will have a maximum impact. It’s very instructive to to simply play what-if with their models. Keep the models in the spotlight. Let’s run live on-air simulations with their models, and show what happens when positive feedback is dialed back. Do it with a fancy multi-gesture interface and colored isobars. Let their methods defend or not defend themselves.
And lets ask those who have not yet published their models, to do so. It’s easy to then say, but what-if we simply dial back this positive feedback variable here? Then what happens? And in every case, the crisis disappears. And this is intuitive simply by looking at climate history. There are plenty of historical natural CO2 emissions from volcanic and other activity that did not produce a runaway effect. So why model that now?
Because the goal is not a conservative approach to energy usage, nor protection of mankind or the earth. The goal is political control.

April 20, 2008 10:43 am

It’s almost as if the rubes learned the difference between science and political pandering back in 7th grade.
Maybe the public school system isn’t so bad afterall.

Mike Bryant
April 20, 2008 12:07 pm

Could the American people be much much smarter than the warmers think?

tetris
April 20, 2008 1:10 pm

Re: Anonymous
Why more money into TV adds? To convince people we’re heading for disaster when we’re not? Gore continues to do that although for practical purposes the hypothesis that increases in CO2 drive increases in global temperatures has been falsified. It’s the “unintended consequences” of “mitigating” carbon emissions by foolishly making ethanol out of food crops that are the real disaster in this story.

Mike Smith
April 20, 2008 1:32 pm

Seems like the American People are smarter than some give them credit for being.

April 20, 2008 2:47 pm

I have noticed that Al” Incontinent Truth” and Obama’s political ads both use flashing images with subliminal messaging. Not particularly adept advertising,
but they are spending money like water on them.
It seems, therefore, that the next big growth industry is subliminal marketing for the message-content-challenged. Forget all this math and science stuff, I’m opening a PR firm where we make cheap but flashy ads filled with 0.5 second imagery. Going to call it Hippy, Zippy, and Trippy Mrktg. Does anyone have Al’s ph number?

Alex Cull
April 20, 2008 2:55 pm

Clearly the rhetoric needs to be ramped up a lot! Forget “global warming”, “climate change”, etc., much too tame and wishy-washy. “Climate crisis”, “climate emergency”, hmm, better but still not urgent enough. “Climate apocalypse”? “Climate immediate eco-mega-death”? “Climate unstoppable immanent global damnation and eternal hellfire”? I don’t know, they’ll need to think of something – fast!

villagesgroup
April 20, 2008 3:20 pm

… in recent underwater excavations, a journalist’s diary was found among the ruins of the sunken Titanic.
Turns out he was gauging the public mood on the boat. People had a lot of things on their minds, but the thing that eventually finished most of them (including the journalist) off – the ship hitting an iceberg and sinking – was not among them.
(snark)
Seriously: the fact that the American public is not worried about this, is not exactly a sound logical argument for the case that we *should not* worry – as you try to imply.
Given the American public’s recent track record in identifying what’s going to hit it (dot-com bubble, 2000 elections, 9/11, Iraq, housing bubble) – this is actually in itself a reason to worry more.

April 20, 2008 3:21 pm

Gotta agree with Gary G here. Maybe that $300M will put some people to work without changing anybody’s mind.

crosspatch
April 20, 2008 3:35 pm

Well, it’s no wonder. Today’s temperature is 14 degrees below “normal” for this date and tonite they are calling for the possibility of record low temperatures … which means below freezing … in San Jose California in late April.
In the 12 years I have lived here I have never seen such a cold, late spring. In fact, this might be the latest freezing temperature I have ever experienced in my life anywhere I have lived.

braddles
April 20, 2008 3:53 pm

Much as I admire Americans’ apparent resilience to GW propaganda, surveys like this are a crock, because they allow respondents to pick only one issue from a fixed list. But very few people are single issue fanatics.
Imagine a survey that asked people to name the single most important thing to them. You would get things like “my family”, “my job”, “my faith”, “my boyfriend”, perhaps a few “the planet”. “The upcoming election” would probably get a zero: does that mean no one in America cares about it?

Evan Jones
Editor
April 20, 2008 5:34 pm

Maybe the public school system isn’t so bad afterall.
Oh, yes it is.
All this shows is that the PSS has been about as successful in teaching AGW as it has been in teaching math.

Evan Jones
Editor
April 20, 2008 5:46 pm

Al’s ph number?
8.3? (He’s pretty base.)

Texas Aggie
April 20, 2008 5:48 pm

It rsanked where it ranked for a reason: people are not worried about such nonsense despite the constant media sky-is-falling bombardment. This is great news, unless you’re a carbie.

Evan Jones
Editor
April 20, 2008 6:08 pm

Gotta agree with Gary G here. Maybe that $300M will put some people to work without changing anybody’s mind.
I’d much rather be a shill for Big Oil. (I need to eat but I’m happier if I can sleep at night.)

April 20, 2008 7:39 pm

[…] tip Anthony Watts. Sphere: Related Content […]

Jeff Alberts
April 21, 2008 12:37 am

Given the American public’s recent track record in identifying what’s going to hit it (dot-com bubble, 2000 elections, 9/11, Iraq, housing bubble) – this is actually in itself a reason to worry more.

Of course you forgot AGW hysteria in your list.

April 21, 2008 4:40 am

Interesting polls and equally as interesting comments.
I spoke before a group of college students over the weekend and not a single one believed in AGW. They did agree with me that we should all be stewards of our environment, but not to the extent the envirowhackos suggest.
I also visited a Starbucks in upscale Lake Forest Illinois where one would expect to run into some of the more intellectually inclined individuals (Captains of Industry and all that). As I walked towards the entrance, there were approximately 40 people sitting around the outside tables, shivering their butts off (the inside was packed). As I walked past them, I casually mentioned “Thank God for global warming, can you imagine how cold we would be without it? It was all that it took to get a good group conversation started as one person after another made jokes about Goofy Gore and the gw nonsense.
Now that gave me a great warm feeling!
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com

April 21, 2008 5:14 am

Sure, keep on heating the planet and call the science nonsense, just as long as your can keep on drillin’ and drivin’ for Jesus and the American way.
Denial accelerates the inevitable. AGW is a real problem. The sun and the pacific ocean have an effect, but the contributions of pollutants is now undeniable.

April 21, 2008 6:14 am

tuibguy said: “Sure, keep on heating the planet and call the science nonsense, just as long as your can keep on drillin’ and drivin’ for Jesus and the American way.
Denial accelerates the inevitable. AGW is a real problem. The sun and the pacific ocean have an effect, but the contributions of pollutants is now undeniable.”
I understand Depends are on sale throughout the world this week. You might want to stock up.
Jack Koenig, Editor
The Mysterious Climate Project
http://www.climateclinic.com

Jeff
April 21, 2008 6:58 am

Tuibguy? What evidance do you have to support your claims. This page is full of scientific evidance that, if GW exists, it is not AGW. So, unless you want to give us some counter evidance, keep your insults to yourself.

Jeff
April 21, 2008 7:00 am

I have to aggree with ‘braddles’. This question does not represent the peoples overall concerns. But it is interesting none the less.

Bruce Cobb
April 21, 2008 8:13 am

Sure, keep on heating the planet and call the science nonsense, just as long as your can keep on drillin’ and drivin’ for Jesus and the American way.
Wow, that’s a slap in the face. Ow, ow, ooh! Can’t stand the pain.
Where did you dig that gem up, notuibrightguy?
AGW is a real problem. Only for drooling pablum-gobbling climate alarmists like you, tuibguy. Instead of AGW pseudoscience, you might give actual science a try: The Great Global Warming Hoax? is a good place to start.

Jeff Alberts
April 21, 2008 9:50 am

Sure, keep on heating the planet and call the science nonsense, just as long as your can keep on drillin’ and drivin’ for Jesus and the American way.
Denial accelerates the inevitable. AGW is a real problem. The sun and the pacific ocean have an effect, but the contributions of pollutants is now undeniable.

Tell me, then, why you haven’t given up your technological lifestyle? The only way to get rid of the human industrial influence is to forgo ALL human activities beyond hunting/gathering. Agriculture? Sorry, not natural, plants do grow in straight lines unless planted by humans.
No amount of switching light bulbs or driving hybrids will make a whit of difference. So I ask you what I ask everyone else who preaches the doom and gloom and science is settled. Why are you still here? They never have an answer, they just cast insults.

Evan Jones
Editor
April 21, 2008 9:51 am

tuibguy: The question is not whether CO2 has the direct effect the IPCC says it has. The question is whether the positive feedback equation is correct. If there are no positive feedbacks, AGW is a near-nonissue, perhaps a 0.1 to 0.2C effect at most.
Most skeptics do not deny CO2 warming, but we question the feedback equation.
I commend you for admitting the possibility of ocean oscillations and solar factors having an impact. Most AGW proponents dismiss both the “sea witch” and the “sun worshiper” out of hand.

Jeff Alberts
April 21, 2008 9:51 am

Oops, that should have said “plants do not grow in straight lines…”

Evan Jones
Editor
April 21, 2008 9:58 am

Given the American public’s recent track record in identifying what’s going to hit it (dot-com bubble, 2000 elections, 9/11, Iraq, housing bubble)
I will grant this is true in the realm of economics (though the economy over the last half-century, on the whole has been a miracle).
But every environmental panic over the last half-century has been a very shrill, very wet firecracker. And the proposed radical “solutions” to the nonexistent crises have been draconian and–extremely–costly. For a small example, look at the horrible suffering and many deaths that the biofuels “solution” has already inflicted upon the pooest people the world over.

Dell
April 21, 2008 10:36 am

I wonder if Al Gore will ask for a recount on this poll?

crosspatch
April 21, 2008 10:53 am

Well, if I read this graph correctly, it shows that CO2 levels can be thousands of times above today’s levels and average temperature of the planet never rises above 22C.
It is from an article on the IPCC and their apparent inflation of CO2 feedback over the years. It seems that with every passing year the IPCC inflates the climate feedback numbers. Trouble is that when climate isn’t warming in response to increased CO2 in the atmosphere as has been the case over the past decade, the inflation results in their predictions being increasingly wrong with every passing year.
Global Warming would be much easier to sell if the climate was actually warming globally. That is hard to do when you have a state like today where we have about 3 million kilometers more sea ice globally than we had a year ago … over both hemispheres. In Gore’s world of runaway warming and temperatures that spike higher and higher and higher with each passing year, that sould be impossible.

jeez
April 21, 2008 11:48 am

tuibguy
Undeniable yes. Also unquantifiable, potentially trivial. That is the point.
“the science” is shoddy, done behind closed doors, and based primarily on computer models which currently have predictive power approaching zero.

James Chamberlain
April 21, 2008 12:46 pm

Why do all of you enviro-alarmists like tuibguy above relate us sensible, skeptical scientists with Jesus, flat earthers, conservatives, SUV drivers, industrialists, and creationists? I am none of those things and you don’t know me or other people chatting on here. I care about the environment, but I care about truth and good science even more. People like you are a testament to the alarmist, propaganda junk that you spew and possibly believe.

Craig Moore
April 21, 2008 12:58 pm

Montana just set new weather records for this date. From the NWS:
Statement as of 10:45 am EDT on April 21, 2008
…Latest Below Zero Temperature For The Season In North Central
&Nbsp;&Nbsp;&Nbsp;Montana…
Location new record old record year set
Great Falls Aprt -8 on Apr 21 -1 on Apr 20 2008
… Record low temperatures for Apr 21 in north central and
southwest Montana…
Location new record old record year set
Great Falls Arpt -8 11 1951
Belgrade field 15 (tied) 15 1951
Lewistown 0 1 1967
Helena 6 14 1951
04/20/2008 0733 am
7 miles N of Gold Butte, Toole County.
Heavy snow e16.0 inch, reported by trained spotter.
Total snow accumulation of 12 to 16 inches… with drifts
up to 7 feet. Strong northwest winds occurring… with
snow continuing.

(Gary G) Otter
April 21, 2008 1:52 pm

Denile is a river in Egypt. Go cry in it.

Robert Wood
April 21, 2008 2:12 pm

tuibguy,
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is necessary for life. More the better.

Chris
April 21, 2008 2:16 pm

Tuibguy,
CO2 is not a pollutant. I exhale it everyday. Actually, the lack of real pollutants have warmed the planet. Less volcanic ash, less aerosols emitted by the Former Soviet Union, etc., in combination with a warmer sun have caused surface temperatures to rise. This is why troposhere temperatures have not risen faster than surface temperatures, in direct contrast to GW theory.

Neil Fisher
April 21, 2008 3:25 pm

Sure, keep on heating the planet and call the science nonsense,

If only it were science in the true sense…

David Jay
April 21, 2008 3:43 pm

Tuib:
Undeniable to whom?
Can you show me your evidence (and models are NOT evidence, they are mechanisms of hypothesis)?
Perhaps the increasing satellite temperatures over the last 10 years?
Perhaps the warming of the oceans?

old construction
April 21, 2008 5:55 pm

tuibguy says
AGW is a real problem.
How many parts of the CO2 drives the climate theory must be falsified by observed data before you understand that CO2 does not drive the climate!
1) CO2 lags temperture.
2) The upper part of the troposhere is not warming faster than the surface.
3) oceans evporation is not causing heat trapping clouds.
4) oceans have been cooling for the last few years eventhough CO2 have been increasing.
5) global tempature have not been increasing since 1998 eventhough CO2 have increasing.
The EPA has every right to deal with harmful pollution. But CO2 is a non harmful gas. Without it we would die.

Jon
April 21, 2008 8:10 pm

After this past winter there is no one left who is willing to believe it is a problem. On top of it, Gore’s campaign is doing a terrible job of getting good endorsees. Al Sharpton and Pat Robertson. Newt Gingrich and Nancy Pelosi. These people are liked by few and disliked by many. The message “from the left and right” is being rejected by that all important middle, especially middle America who is tired of shoveling snow.

Evan Jones
Editor
April 21, 2008 10:23 pm

it shows that CO2 levels can be thousands of times above today’s levels and average temperature of the planet never rises above 22C.
Not thousands, but around 20 times. (385 ppm vs. 7000 ppm.).

April 21, 2008 11:50 pm

I believe people are starting to sense that the relentless ‘climate campaign’ has very little to do with science but is actually being used to push a much deeper agenda. Being an Environmental Scientist myself the whole thing made no sense until I began to investigate where this phenomenon had come from, who was funding it, and what their motivation is. As bizarre and conspiratorial as this sounds it is the only logical explanation. We should fight them and condemn them with their own words. To that there is no defense.
http://www.green-agenda.com/

Evan Jones
Editor
April 22, 2008 1:41 pm

Funny you should say that. I am currently working on it.

jcspe
April 22, 2008 4:41 pm

See the 4/22/08 version of:
http://www.grimmy.com/comics.php
Cartoonists are never early to a party. A cartoon like this one reflects an impression by the artist that a lot of people will be in tune to his sense of the ridiculous.

April 25, 2008 3:20 pm

Tuibguy is obviously a rote learner, not a cognitive thinker. With this type of mind, repetition is the key to learning.
Let’s try a different approach:
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
CO2 lags, not leads, temperature. The future does not influence the past.
There, that should do it…
Jim Peden

May 6, 2008 8:38 pm

[…] one noticing it.    Add to that the news of a couple weeks back that no one in an ABC News poll of 1,197 US adults named Global Warming as an issue in this year’s elections.  No one.  […]

May 14, 2008 1:16 am

[…] the threat of rising sea levels, Al has played all his cards. A recent ABC News/Washington Post poll found that precisely zero per cent of Americans — yes, zero, that’s not a typo — […]

May 16, 2008 6:03 am

[…] A recent ABC News/Washington Post poll found that precisely zero per cent of Americans — yes, zero, that’s not a typo — rated global […]

May 16, 2008 7:38 am

[…] threat of rising sea levels, Al has played all his cards. A recent ABC News/Washington Post [17] poll found that precisely zero per cent of Americans — yes, zero, that’s not a typo — rated global […]

Perry
July 24, 2008 3:14 am

We should all be grateful that Tuibguy is such a self abuser over AGW. It follows that little Tuibguys will not be following in his wayward thinking. How did he escape a meaningful education. I blame his parents that Tuibguy is so mentally challenged. Still, there’s nowt so queer as folk.

%d bloggers like this: