Only 34% of USA Voters Now Blame Humans for Global Warming

rasmussen_table

Note the reversal from just one year ago

On the day the EPA declares CO2 a “dangerous pollutant” we have the from Rasmussen Reports

Just one-out-of-three voters (34%) now believe global warming is caused by human activity, the lowest finding yet in Rasmussen Reports national surveying. However, a plurality (48%) of the Political Class believes humans are to blame.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of all likely voters attribute climate change to long-term planetary trends, while seven percent (7%) blame some other reason. Eleven percent (11%) aren’t sure.

These numbers reflect a reversal from a year ago when 47% blamed human activity while 34% said long-term planetary trends.

Most Democrats (51%) still say humans are to blame for global warming, the position taken by former Vice President Al Gore and other climate change activists. But 66% of Republicans and 47% of adults not affiliated with either party disagree.

Sixty-two percent (62%) of all Americans believe global warming is at least a somewhat serious problem, with 33% who say it’s Very Serious. Thirty-five percent (35%) say it’s a not a serious problem. The overall numbers have remained largely the same for several months, but the number who say Very Serious has gone down.

Forty-eight percent (48%) of Democrats say global warming is a Very Serious problem, compared to 19% of Republicans and 25% of unaffiliateds.

(Want a free daily e-mail update? Sign up now. If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls.) Rasmussen Reports updates also available on Twitter.

President Obama has made global warming a priority for his administration. Half (49%) of Americans think the president believes climate change is caused primarily by human activity. This is the first time that belief has fallen below 50% since the president took office. Just 19% say Obama attributes global warming to long-term planetary trends.

Forty-eight percent (48%) rate the president good or excellent on energy issues. Thirty-two percent (32%) give him poor grades in this area.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of adults now say finding new sources of energy is more important that reducing the amount of energy Americans currently consume. However, 29% say energy conservation is the priority.

A growing number of Americans (58%) say the United States needs to build more nuclear plants. This is up five points from last month and the highest finding so far this year. Twenty-five percent (25%) oppose the building of nuclear plants.

While the economy remains the top issue for most Americans, 40% believe there is a conflict between economic growth and environmental protection. Thirty-one percent 31% see no such conflict, while 29% are not sure.

Please sign up for the Rasmussen Reports daily e-mail update (it’s free)… let us keep you up to date with the latest public opinion news.

See survey questions and toplines. Crosstabs are available to Premium Members only.

===========================

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.

The Rasmussen Reports Election Edge™ Premium Service offers the most comprehensive public opinion coverage available anywhere.

Scott Rasmussen, president of Rasmussen Reports, has been an independent pollster for more than a decade.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Just Want Truth...

Rasmussen Reports is fairly accurate. It’s polls are not done by some obscure personality, or by college students who don’t have experience. They also don’t do their polling via the internet.
I wonder how much of a change would be seen in these numbers in America if everyone there saw “The Great Global Warming Swindle”?

kim

For the times, they are a changin’. Temps, too.
==============================================

Robert Bateman

The most common reaction to finding out that the Sun is in a Deep Minimum is to question Global Warming immediately. You can almost hear the “Aha, I knew it” in thier voices.

“Forty-eight percent (48%) rate the president good or excellent on energy issues.”
Now that is a shame.

David Segesta

One can only hope that awareness of the truth will ultimately result in votes for candidates who support a rational position. But maybe that’s too much to ask.

John Edmondson

No surprises there. My guess is the next warmist argument will be somehow the cold is related to CO2 also. Probably a increased cloud albedo negetive feedback caused by a small warming, resulting in a big temp drop. I kid you not, judging by what has happened to date , anything is possible now.

Lance

I was listening to a BBC call in show, Have Your Say, the day before yesterday. The question being discussed was “Is the human race committing suicide by ignoring climate change?” I was disturbed that during the 45 minutes I listened not one caller or guest even questioned that catastrophic climate change was threatening the planet with imminent doom.
The featured guest was documentary film maker Franny Armstrong. She has apparently made a film appropriately named “The Age of Stupid”.
She is a loon.
Caller after caller waxed on apocalyptically about the “fact” that we, and the planet, faced certain doom if we didn’t adopt a neolithic lifestyle devoid of air travel, private automobiles and meat, among other “suicidal” carbon producing behaviors.
Are the producers of this BBC show screening callers or is their audience predisposed towards this nonsense?

pkatt

speakin of the other planets, its hard to find any current info on what their climates are up to.. anyone got some good sources for that?

Ray

Keep it up people… it’s working and the Truth shall always prevail… and of course Anthony’s surfacestation project has been of major help to expose the fraud behind AGW. Anthony should be named a Knight of Climate Truth Army.

Richard M

I think the latest presidential election caused many people to look at AGW that had ignored it for a long time. With the cooler winters and snow many of these folks can’t help but be a little skeptical.
I think one way to win this battle is to take a page out of the alarmist handbook. For a long time they equated skepticism with big oil. Since many people were/are cynical when it comes to the oil companies they could easily be convinced that AGW was correct. Now it is time to link AGW with Wall street and big finance. By showing the link between cap and trade and the finance/investment industries you can pull many people over to the skeptical camp.

Robert Bateman

They will soon forget about it in the Northern Hemisphere as summer approaches, but they will be very quick to recall the previous winter as the next winter gets underway.
It will not be the weather which will boil over, it will be public outcry.
The sun today is dead quiet.

Jack Green

Thanks to WUWT the truth is coming out. We’re going to have cap and trade. We’re going to have EPA regulation. We need to be able to show that cooling began before this attempt to reduce GHG’s was implemented so 1. they can’t take credit for a natural process and 2. we can reverse and cancel these stupid idiotic economy destroying new taxes.
Watch for alarmist polls that show the opposite and post the questions that were asked. Some of these polls ask questions like “how long has it been since you stopped beating your wife?” or “since polar bears are drowning are you in favor of regulation pollution that is killing them?” Liars figure and figures lie.

When the EPA decision came out yesterday, one of the news broadcasters for the largest talk/news radio station in the United States described carbon dioxide as the gas “emitted by automobiles”.

R Stevenson

Political leaders and their scientific advisors ( if they have any) have a poor grasp of technology. A change to electric cars would increase CO2 emissions because of the lower fuel to power efficiency of power plants compared with modern internal combustion engines.

It does not matter the majority, even if it is 99%, a known religion founder began with just a few followers then they got the idea of recruiting followers by force. Present day green religion´s founder is no less fanatic to do the same, perhaps by using some more efficient means, like “pay carbon tax or die”.

Arn Riewe

WOW!
That’s a stunning reversal. I’m sure mid April blizzards in the Rockies don’t hurt the momentum.
I tried an experiment with an old friend recently. She’s trending liberal with strong political support for the Obama administration. I normally try to keep out of political discussions, but when she said she liked what he was doing, I said that I didn’t like the spending and debt obligations that were building and their implications. I then broached climate change and what I think are damaging policies being considered. I was expecting a fight. Surprisingly, she immediately deferred with the comment that she didn’t understand all that “science stuff”.
I don’t think I necessarily convinced her, but I wasn’t trying to. What she does know is that someone she knows and respects doesn’t buy the AGW story.
Trust me on this. If you’ve been following threads like these, you know 100x what an MSM consumer knows. Don’t be afraid to share your opinions (supported with facts you can back up) with your friends and associates. While they may not switch their opinion, at least they’ll know someone who knows more on the subject than they do has misgivings. Our biggest hurdle is the “everybody believes it” mentality.

Stephen Skinner

I think the problem is the word ‘believe’. ‘Know’ is a much better word. Belief is better suited to religion as knowledge is better suited to science. Therefore to say that so many people believe in global warming is probably worthless. Our understanding of the global climate is not complete and believing it to behave in one way or the other is not good enough. As far as our experience and understanding goes we live on a unique world and as there seems no sign of another one like this turning soon we should be mindful of that. Which means we do need to understand what we have and whether any of our actions will come back to bite us, as happened to the people of Easter Island, who know doubt thought that their beliefs would look after them. I do not think that the ‘AGW’ movement is helping our understanding of our global climate because some of the ‘AGW’ assertions have the flavour of someone with an axe to grind or in some cases are just plain wrong. And to suggest we should act on ‘AGW’ regardless is reckless. Imagine trying to defuse a bomb and being confronted with a blue wire and red wire. Cutting both is not a great idea.

Paul Vaughan

Richard M (10:06:05)
“[…] For a long time they equated skepticism with big oil. Since many people were/are cynical when it comes to the oil companies they could easily be convinced that AGW was correct.”
“[…] the link between cap and trade and the finance/investment industries […]”

– – –
…and (some would say remarkably) this has nothing to do with political affiliation.

Ian Schumacher

We need to get rid of democracy and fast! People are irrational and don’t know what’s best for themselves. We should leave big decisions to group of experts that can make rational decisions on the people’s behalf.
[just-kidding!] But you can just see that some people thinking this can’t you?!

Arn Riewe

R Stevenson (10:18:07) :
“Political leaders and their scientific advisors ( if they have any) have a poor grasp of technology.”
At the risk of being redundant, here’s the great scientific grasp of Henry Waxman, (D, California) head of the House Energy and Environment committee:
“We’re seeing the reality of a lot of the North Pole starting to evaporate, and we could get to a tipping point. Because if it evaporates to a certain point – they have lanes now where ships can go that couldn’t ever sail through before. And if it gets to a point where it evaporates too much, there’s a lot of tundra that’s being held down by that ice cap.”
Remember, this is the guy that’s writing the Energy and Environment policy for Congress. Does anyone else find this incredibly scary?

Dan Lee

I think Cap’n Trade will be forced to walk the plank by congress, and the EPA will be forced to either put up or shut up. They are reserving the right to arbitrarily regulate carbon, so if congress refuses to implement carbon trading, congress will be basically calling the EPA’s bluff. Lots of Democrats oppose carbon trading so I don’t think that will get through congress.
The last thing Obama needs is for one of his regulatory agencies to arbitrarily take action that will raise energy prices. I think the whole point of this maneuver by the EPA is to force congress into acting, “or else” the EPA will impose its own restrictions.
Write your congressman. No carbon trading. Let the EPA put this threat into action. Get the process rolling, and let’s get this whole AGW thing out to where people will have to put their children’s lunch money on the table over it.
That will “raise awareness” in a way that the AGW crowd does NOT want to see happen.

Brian Johnson

We need help in the UK. We used to be able to assess situations, keep a stiff upper lip and do what had to be done…….. Now we have a BBC that is supposed to be impartial and yet uses every available opportunity to propagandize the AGW myth as though it were The Truth. We also have a generation of mindless morons that actually think dramas they see acted on TV are Real! A soap character put her ‘soap’ house up for sale and was besieged with offers from viewers anxious to buy the fictional property!!! Doh!!!
Then we have Bonnie Prince Charlie and his Catlin Arctic Amateurs hell bent on providing ‘evidence’ of melting North Pole ice…….
Lovelock is a Brit, so is George Monbiot, sadly. They both need deporting.
Also, like a rash that won’t stop itching we have Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund and as a coup de grace, Plain, sorry Plane Stupid and a plethora of mini Green nutters.
Where is that bottle of Jura Single Malt?

Richard M (10:06:05) :
I think one way to win this battle is to take a page out of the alarmist handbook. For a long time they equated skepticism with big oil. Since many people were/are cynical when it comes to the oil companies they could easily be convinced that AGW was correct. Now it is time to link AGW with Wall street and big finance. By showing the link between cap and trade and the finance/investment industries you can pull many people over to the skeptical camp.
——————————————-
Why would you advocate using the same tactics that the weak of argument use? How about putting the facts out and letting people make up their own minds, we have one great plus on our side, we are not fanatical.
Fanatics always get unmasked when opposed, so all we have to do is calmly state our case often and publicly, their over-reactions and frantic grasping for control shows the radical agenda each and every time, unfortunately not before many people suffer, so this time I hope we can prevent that here.
Europe, Africa and Asia have suffered quite enough for all the world under failed GHG mitigation policy, biofuel madness, artificially inflated energy costs, hostile action justification amid climate fears have cost thousands of lives.
North America is about the replay all the failed left wing policies using the Socialist Mantra “the reason it did not work was because it was not BIG ENOUGH”, this is the door America opened, it is the driving force in DC, Bride of Stimulus lies waiting for Pelosi-stein to give it life because 787B was just not big enough.
So when Cap and Trade does not reduce GHG, it will be expanded into your living room because … you guessed it! it was just not big enough.

Mike Bryant

“We’re seeing the reality of a lot of the North Pole starting to evaporate, and we could get to a tipping point. Because if it evaporates to a certain point – they have lanes now where ships can go that couldn’t ever sail through before. And if it gets to a point where it evaporates too much, there’s a lot of tundra that’s being held down by that ice cap.”
So, so true… and then the three mile thick ice at the south pole will naturally evaporate and what happens to the tundra down there?!? You guessed it… the tundra won’t be held down any longer. I hate it when THAT happens. There will be tundra floating all over the place.
We have a tundra emergency. Save the tundra!!! Don’t let the ice evaporate!!!
God bless you Henry Waxman!

Roger Knights

“Are the producers of this BBC show screening callers?”
Does a bear sh*t in the woods?
“We’re going to have cap and trade. We’re going to have EPA regulation.”
We’re going to have tea parties.

page48

“40% believe there is a conflict between economic growth and environmental protection. ”
60% of the people apparently don’t have a clue!

Adam from Kansas

According to the Intellicast forecast maps, we’re about to see the first spring heatwave in the western half of the US over the next week or so, for my area, how warm it’s supposed to get depends on what forecast you’re looking at, both Intellicast and Weather Underground do not forecast record highs however, and SST data remains quite a bit below the 2003 peak and getting further away.
Northern sea-ice extent is on the verge of seeing a noticable lead over 2003 and temperatures in most of the arctic region are to not get to the point which favors rapid melting.

Jack Green

Ask someone in Colorado right now what they think about Global Warming?
http://blog-url.com/I

Jack Green

Sorry Anthony. That one was good but politics. I meant this one about all the snow in Colorado right now. The pictures are amazing for April 17th.
http://www.14ers.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?t=18388&p=223933#p223933

Frank K.

Jim Watson (10:14:31) :
“When the EPA decision came out yesterday, one of the news broadcasters for the largest talk/news radio station in the United States described carbon dioxide as the gas “emitted by automobiles”.”
I wonder if the news reader knew that at that very moment he too was exhaling that gas “emitted by automobiles”. I have given up on most of these dunderheads in the MSM…

Flanagan

If you compare dot the 97% if climate rearchers who think Global warming has an anthropic origin, this only proces lobbying works on masses…
What is the percentage of Americans who think invisble objects really exist? Because they actually do…

Mitchel44

Don’t know that it does much good, but I started keeping track of the regional paper a while back and every time an article comes up on “Global Warming” or climate change, or whatever term it is today, I pass it and the best real life explanation for what is really going on, with links, that I can find to my Member of Parliament. Normally with a reminder that lots of us played with models when we were younger, and that now, just like with video games, some people still get to play with models as adults, except it’s for money too.
He’s gonna get sick of me, but hey it’s slightly amusing.
I know that Christopher Monckton’s language can be off key at times, but I found this one from IceCap that hit some pretty good notes.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/markey_and_barton_letter.pdf

geophys55

Quoting:
“…And if it gets to a point where it evaporates too much, there’s a lot of tundra that’s being held down by that ice cap.”
Remember, this is the guy that’s writing the Energy and Environment policy for Congress. Does anyone else find this incredibly scary?”
Commenting:
Yo! Me, over here! I find it scary. Waxman, you say? I’ll email him.

I’d like to see someone doing car stickers with mail orders.
I also find it extraordinarily hard to get skeptic material in print through Amazon.
Also, is there a nice friendly presentation “Climate Science for Dummies” that skeptics could take around places for talk + discussion? Get the word out that the “consensus” claim is a lie (as well as non-scientific)?

Robert Bateman

Do your bumper sticker as a Cap & Trade Tax Tea Party.
Tea Parties are all the rage.

GailC

Ian Schumacher said “We need to get rid of democracy and fast! People are irrational and don’t know what’s best for themselves. We should leave big decisions to group of experts that can make rational decisions on the people’s behalf.
[just-kidding!] But you can just see that some people thinking this can’t you?!”
Unfortunately TPTB are not kidding. Why do you think they invented global warming to herd the sheeple in the direction they want them to go?
“The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.” David Rockefeller speaking at the Bilderberger meeting in June 1991 in Baden Baden
Brian Johnson “…Also, like a rash that won’t stop itching we have Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund and as a coup de grace, Plain, sorry Plane Stupid and a plethora of mini Green nutters…”
Guess who is funding Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, World Wildlife Fund… Rockefeller of course!
http://www.activistcash.com/foundation.cfm/did/166
http://www.activistcash.com/foundation.cfm/did/167
http://www.activistcash.com/foundation.cfm/did/168
http://www.activistcash.com/foundation.cfm/did/154
Maybe Anthony should apply for a grant; ….No then he would have to tell us the earth is getting warmer due to Mankind’s CO2 emissions. Or Maybe.. Maybe…the Rockefellers will give some of that money to ME!

philincalifornia

Lance (10:01:29) :
I was listening to a BBC call in show, Have Your Say, the day before yesterday. The question being discussed was “Is the human race committing suicide by ignoring climate change?” I was disturbed that during the 45 minutes I listened not one caller or guest even questioned that catastrophic climate change was threatening the planet with imminent doom.
The featured guest was documentary film maker Franny Armstrong. She has apparently made a film appropriately named “The Age of Stupid”.
She is a loon.
Caller after caller waxed on apocalyptically about the “fact” that we, and the planet, faced certain doom if we didn’t adopt a neolithic lifestyle devoid of air travel, private automobiles and meat, among other “suicidal” carbon producing behaviors.
Are the producers of this BBC show screening callers or is their audience predisposed towards this nonsense?
—————————————
Here’s a great link to a review of that garbage that was posted on here a couple of weeks or so ago:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/6359/
I typically would not spend the time or money watching this trash, but I might actually go check out the class racism parts. This is quite disturbing.
If the future involves telling Indian and Nigerian people (and the Chinese) that they can’t fulfill their energy needs, something is going to give on that concept (English class pomposity would be my bet). I also wonder why they picked on the Indian, when they could have just got Richard Branson to play himself ??
Oh, I remember, he flew two planes on biodiesel so he’s one of them, right ??

John M

Lucy Skywalker (13:44:39) :
The “Dummies” books are already dominated by warmers (surprise!).
Try this one

Ron de Haan

Lucy Skywalker (13:44:39) :
I’d like to see someone doing car stickers with mail orders.
I also find it extraordinarily hard to get skeptic material in print through Amazon.
Also, is there a nice friendly presentation “Climate Science for Dummies” that skeptics could take around places for talk + discussion? Get the word out that the “consensus” claim is a lie (as well as non-scientific)?
Lucy, that is a good idea.
What’s about a WUWT bumper sticker?
In the mean time there is one sticker you probably could order or print out yourself if you have the right printer: http://algorelied.com/?p=1302
You can also order “I love my carbon dioxide stickers at the website of Hans Schreuder, http://www.ilovemycarbondioxide.com
I personally use an EPSON and it even prints stickers and transfers for T-shirts.
In Europe it is ill advised to drive big cars, especially 4×4, let alone advertise skeptic opinions like a bumper sticker.
They simply trash your car.
It’s think it is time to start a European edition of WUWT.

Evan Jones

Probably a increased cloud albedo negetive feedback caused by a small warming, resulting in a big temp drop.
Probably. but that’s the point, isn’t it? Negative feedback = No emergency.

JohnD

If the administration’s trend toward CO2 regulation policies has gained enough inertia that they are inevitable, then I say let’s get on with it.
The sooner the better that the CO2 scam be excoriated in a court of law.
I want to see Hansen cross examined by an unsympathetic non-ACLU lawyer.
I want Gore to justify his alarmism via disclosure and on the witness stand, finally forcing him into an AGW debate, of sorts…
I want to see the IPCC models’ code subpoenaed.
I want them all to be forced, under oath, to present the scientific justification for their demands that western civilization get set back 150 years.

DJ

As you know, climate scientists massively and overwhemingly accept CO2 from humans as a driver of warming (viz the recent EOS paper) and the scientific literature from the “sceptics” is nonexistent.
Why would you “boast” about (perhaps) the greatest disjoint between science and public opinion in history?

Ron de Haan

Lucy,
What do you think about a simple booklet that takes on the AGW subjects that dominate our media.
It could start with the title:
Are the Global Warming Disasters Real they tell you about real?
The booklet simply takes on the fiction and the facts.
Is CO2 warming the atmosphere?
Is CO2 increasing the sea levels?
Is CO2 causing the icecaps to melt?
Is CO2 causing Glaciers to melt?
Is CO2 causing polar bears to drown?
Is CO2 causing an increase of weather disasters?
– hurricanes
– droughts
etc.
Debunking the second hoax of so called green energy alternatives is also important:
Are windmills a viable solution?
Are bio fuels a viable solution?
Are electric cars a viable solution?
Is solar a solution.
Have we really reached the end of the carbon fuel era?
It could end with a conclusion like:
Why should our Governments make us believe CO2 is a threat to our planet?
It’s a matter of power, tax income and the emergence of an elite that make money
from the new “green” industry.
Tax to be paid by you, additional cost for energy paid by you, possible travel restrictions forced up to you.
The most tricky part is to get good graphic material, pictures and graphs free from copy rights.
But it is doable.
Do you have any ideas?
I think I can make a dummy in a few days time, ready for print or distribution as a PDF file so you can print it yourself.
The same goes for sticker designs.

DJ

>The sooner the better that the CO2 scam be excoriated in a court of law.
It already has been to court and the “sceptics” said very different things in a court of law and lost the case (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/12/further-comment-on-the-supreme-court-briefs/langswitch_lang/sp). You can find the CEI petition on their webpage… which accepts CO2 is a greenhouse gas and will drive large warming.

Robert Bateman

The picture of the submarine surfacing in the Arctic in 1959 is great.
Caption: “It’s President Eisenhower, sir, he wants to know how thick the ice is”.
2 picture of a beach, one 50 years ago and one today, with a caption : “How’s your sea level working out for you?”.

Mr Lynn

Lance (10:01:29) :
. . . Caller after caller waxed on apocalyptically about the “fact” that we, and the planet, faced certain doom if we didn’t adopt a neolithic lifestyle devoid of air travel, private automobiles and meat, among other “suicidal” carbon producing behaviors.
Are the producers of this BBC show screening callers or is their audience predisposed towards this nonsense?

Undoubtedly both of the above.
Re bumper stickers, I propose:
“CO2 is GOOD for plants, GOOD for the Earth, and GOOD for you!”
/Mr Lynn

Anders L.

I don’t believe that the number of people who believe or do not believe that humans are causing global warming at any given moment in time has a significant influence on the ability of the CO2 molecule to absorb and emit infrared photons.

crosspatch

I don’t put much stock in polls like this. There is sort of an implied message that whatever most people believe must be the reality. What the poll reflects is who is winning a marketing campaign, not what the real science is.

Ellie in Belfast

All the comments from this side of the pond tonight remind me why I am a bit of a closet skeptic and use a handle here. Christopher Booker also has relevent comment on the climate madness in the UK:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5177468/Save-the-planet-rhetoric-soars-to-crazy-new-heights.html

Ellie in Belfast

..And Chrisptoper Booker gives WUWT another mention re the Catlin Expedition.