EcoAmerica Poll: Climate skeptics are the majority, not the minority

Only 18 percent of survey respondents strongly believe that climate change is real, human-caused and harmful.

Yes you read that correctly, it is all in this article on the Nature Conservancy webpage. And that goes along with what was discovered in June this year by the newspapers UK Guardian and Observer, which reported that:

The majority of the British public is still not convinced that climate change is caused by humans – and many others believe scientists are exaggerating the problem…

The Nature Conservancy story citing 18 percent, is citing the American Climate Values Survey (ACVS), conducted by the consulting group EcoAmerica It also found that political party affiliation is the single largest indicator as to whether people see climate change as a threat.

It seems it is all political, as there are some other fascinating tidbits. For example:

  • Convinced it’s happening: 54 percent of Republicans, 90 percent of Democrats.
  • Think that weather has gotten more severe: 44 percent of Republicans; 77 percent of Democrats.
  • Noticed the climate changing: 54 percent of Republicans; 84 percent of Democrats.
  • Trust Al Gore when he talks about global warming: 22 percent of Republicans; 71 percent of Democrats.
  • Trust environmentalists who talk about global warming: 38 percent of Republicans; 71 percent of Democrats.
  • Trust anyone who talks about global warming: 39 percent of Republicans; 75 percent of Democrats.

     

 h/t to Tom Nelson

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

221 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Philip
October 28, 2008 9:34 am

The ACVS summary report is here for those who want to see (some of) the actual questions asked. The 18% who strongly agree that GW is real, manmade and harmful are exactly balanced by 18% who strongly agree with the opposite assertions (Page 22). Frustratingly this is just a meta-analysis and does not give the breakdown of responses by question so of those who do not strongly agree or disagree with the proposition, we are no wiser as to how many simply agree with or are neutral on the question.
Still, some fascinating conclusions here e.g. Education is strongly correlated with acceptance of the reality and responsibility of global warming.. ;-O.

James Lyons
October 28, 2008 9:35 am

What climate Goreites ARE beginning to change, is the one that produced the axiom: You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time. But you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
The only thing proven by the responses, is that Republicans have not yet discovered the Pot ‘O Gold that pseudo-environmentalists began to scarf as soon as Gore received his igNobel Prize. Once they do find the profits to be had from the CO2 industry, that’ll be it for scientific facts…as IPCC has already proven.

Gary Gulrud
October 28, 2008 9:35 am

“stupid and narrow minded…wackos…fringe idiots”
These maligned unfortunates are better organized and attended to than are ‘we’.
The only certain outcome next week is that ‘the majority’ will be worse off.
What are ‘we’ to do about that?

JimB
October 28, 2008 9:54 am

Ed Scott (07:35:48) :
TerryBixler (22:13:16) :
“He will vote Obama to help his 401k, IRA and fix AGW as well.”
I read that article yesterday. I’ve tried to get several Obama supporters to read it, and they refuse. It would alter their “reality” if what I was telling them about it was true, so they refuse acknowledge it. I’ve witnesses this many times over on different subjects. I am truly surrounded by members of a cult, it seems.
How far this will go remains to be seen.
And AGW is the same. If you tell someone something that goes against what they consider to be the consensus, they won’t take 5 microseconds of time to see if it’s actually true or not.
And I don’t know where the numbers in the poll come from, but I can say they are NOT representitive of the people I talk to almost daily. I am known in some circles as “…the ONLY guy who DOESN’T believe in AGW”.
Jim

MarkW
October 28, 2008 10:04 am

Aileni Noyle (05:28:58) :
Oh heck – I’m a republican !!?
—————-
Welcome to the dark side my child.

Richard deSousa
October 28, 2008 10:04 am

Daniel: I read the article on thin arctic ice which was in CNN. I did a double take until I realized they were talking about last year’s record!! BBC puts out more rancid and old propaganda.

Alan the Brit
October 28, 2008 10:07 am

Cunning use of word play here i feel. The use of the tense of “thinning” as opposed to “thinned”, to suggest an ongoing event as opposed to one that has occurred, & may well be recovering.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7692963.stm
It’s a clever technique, throw in a whole bunch of associated articles so it appears at first glance that a raft of new data has been made available about failing arctic sea-ice levels. Half a metre ain’t much you know, & it wouldn’t surprise me to learn that as “area” goes down an element of thinning would likely happen too. Interesting to know if the current ice state has thickened, or perhaps “less thinning” than 2007 has occurred!

Jeff Alberts
October 28, 2008 10:07 am

The government paid for my attic to be insulated so I got that for free.

You mean you and everyone else paid the government so you could get your attic insulated “for free”.

MarkW
October 28, 2008 10:07 am

Hell, even ultra right-wing conservative farmers who are still looking for their slaves understand when global warming occurs.
—————
Such people only exist in the fevered dreams of far left non-thinkers.

MarkW
October 28, 2008 10:11 am

Of the two parties.
Obama is a creature of the far left. He has consistently had one of the most liberal voting records in Congress.
McCain on the other hand is despised by the social conservatives who supposedly run the Republican party.

Jeff Alberts
October 28, 2008 10:11 am

It always amazes me that so many people in the U.S. completely miss this point. Listen to any politician that wants to tax “Big Oil” and you’ll hear cheering, but no one there can explain to you how this is going to lower prices. In fact, they can’t explain why this increased tax won’t just get passed along in the sale price of the product.

In reality, due to fuel taxes, the states and fed government in the US make more money from a gallon of gas than the oil companies do.

Jeff Alberts
October 28, 2008 10:28 am

I believe there are UFOs. Oh, you mean alien spacecraft visiting the earth, and not just objects which might be flying which one can’t identify…. No I don’t believe in those.

Denis Hopkins
October 28, 2008 10:37 am

another BBC report on artic ice.
Not a comment about the increase in extent of ice cover, rather another “tipping point” article about ice thickness.
It does seem the old adage is true. Good news doesn’t sell papers.
Similarly, the BBC is overboard on any doom story.
I would give it more credence if they reported the non doom-laden stories as fully!

Bill P
October 28, 2008 10:44 am

A debate hosted by I.Q Squared (IQ2) in March, 2007 demonstrated this same result.
“Global Warming is Not a Crisis”
http://www.michaelcrichton.com/video-iq2debate-part2.html
A before / after poll of the studio audience showed a portion of them actually reversing their held positions on the argument. Perhaps it was just the calliber of these speakers, but I tend to think that open and honest debate is, and will continue to be, unhealthy for the AGW adherents.
For the proposition: Michael Crichton, Richard Lindzen and Philip Stott.
Against the prop: Brenda Ekwurzel, Gavin Schmidt, and Richard Summerville
Pre-Debate Survey of Audience: For the Motion = 30% Against = 57% Undecided = 18%
Post-Debate Survey of Audience: For = 46% Against = 42%
Whatever predilection most people have, the fact, as Gavin Schmidt asserts in the debate, is that the preponderance of power-holding scientists are believers in AGW, and they are eager to act to mitigate it. The agencies he cites are: National Academies of Science of all the G-8 nations; the major scientific societies, and the White House. I would add both presidential candidates, the leaders of congress and the mainstream media — among the now-vociferous spokesmen / claimants for the cause(s) of global warming. The consequences of headlong action to “fix” the problem, as Crichton says, may well be hundreds of trillions of dollars, a tiny portion of which well save millions of lives and relieve suffering among millions of others in the near term.
It’s bizarre that a minority of intelligent skeptics might let this happen.
It’s unconscionable that a majority should allow it.

Pierre Gosselin
October 28, 2008 10:54 am

Dee,
“The issue of international participation may very well be one of international researchers not being able to afford to attend the conference…”
That’s an awfully weak argument. Could be true for a few, but I seriously doubt it in general. C’mon!
I’m not talking about affirmative action here. I just think getting representation from around the globe would be far more effective than a good ol boys get-together. Step back and take a look at it. It’s bad PR.
And where are the women reps? Good question. There are good women out there. The organisers are squandering the opportunity to capitalise on resources that are out there.

Denis Hopkins
October 28, 2008 11:09 am
Dan McCune
October 28, 2008 11:20 am

James Lyons (09:35:51)
The axiom you referred to is actually attributed to the greatest Republican president (next to Reagan) of all time. Here’s another of his quotes that seems very relevent to this thread.
“I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national [global] crises. The great point is to bring them the real facts. ”
Abraham Lincoln -16th US President (1809-1865)

John
October 28, 2008 11:30 am

The thing is if my fringe idiots win we all go home and watch TV, if your fringe idiots win we all have to buy a horse and a tent and pitch it down by a stream and fish and hunt and gather for a living (taking care to maintain the forest and not endanger any species).

Jon Jewett
October 28, 2008 11:47 am

Mark W,
You need to review history. The “father” of the Democrat Party owned slaves and DNA evidence indicated he took sexual advantage of women in his power.
The “father” of the Republican Party put the Union back together after the Democrats (President and party) spilt the union. In the process he ended the Democrat’s ownership of slaves.
It was the Republicans who passed the 13th and 14th amendments. You seem weak on history and might want to review their content and history.
It was the Democrats that got us into WW1 (Wilson), WW2 (Roosevelt), rounded up American citizens and put them into concentration camps (Roosevelt signed an executive order to intern the Japanese-it was not debated in Congress), used the atomic bomb on the Japanese (Truman),the Korean War (Truman), the Cold War (Truman), the Vietnam War (Kennedy/Johnson), and the War on Terror (Clinton, according to Osama bin Laden in a 1997 interview-we were already at war.)
Bull Connors was a Democrat when he turned the dogs and fire hoses on the civil rights marchers. And Orville Faubus was the Governor that tried to prevent the integration of the Little Rock schools.
That was then and this is now. It’s a different world and it’s time to get on with our lives. Give it a rest.
Your comment about “ultra right-wing conservative farmers who are still looking for their slaves” shows a monumental ignorance of history. I am embarrassed for you.

M White
October 28, 2008 11:54 am

Nuclear war
New Ice age
Aids
CJD
Bird Flu
Global Warming/Climate Change/Climate Chaos/etc/etc
I’m still alive

M White
October 28, 2008 12:13 pm

Forgot volcanos and near earth objects.
All sensationalised in the media. I wonder why us Brits are slightly skeptical

G Gaskell
October 28, 2008 12:23 pm

M White
You forgot to mention “The Millenium bug” which was pretty much the same non-existant threat as AGW except it had a time limit on it. The AGW alarmists are not going to make that mistake again, they want this one to run and run!

UKIP
October 28, 2008 1:24 pm

Well we rarely have football matches called off in the Uk for anything other than waterlogged pitches or severe frost… but if you take a look at http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/live_videprinter/default.stm over the next couple of hours, you’ll notice we have three games off – due to snow. A couple in London. Remarkable – the coldest October day ever in some places.

actuator
October 28, 2008 1:44 pm

Jon Jewett,
While I agree with almost all of your post, I believe that Truman’s use of atomic weapons, despite the tragic impact on the civilian population, provided the best demonstration possible that these weapons should never be used. Had the world not received this horrible demo, I believe a nuclear war of unsurpassed dimensions would have already occurred. Truman made the right choice and fewer people died as a result of an action that shortened the war.

actuator
October 28, 2008 1:49 pm

Oh & BTW Truman may have been a Democrat, but he was no socialist and was more conservative than Obama or McCain. Pailin is the only one who comes close.