From the Wall Street Journal.
Related: European views on global warming higher than USA.
A new poll out today on Americans’ attitudes about climate change presents sobering findings for those that favor aggressive action to curb U.S. emissions of greenhouse gases.
The survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press finds a sharp decline over the past year in the percentage of Americans who see solid evidence that global temperatures are rising. According to the survey, conducted between Sept. 30 and Oct. 4 among 1,500 adults reached on cell phones and landlines, fewer respondents also see global warming as a very serious problem; 35% say that today, down from 44% in April 2008.
The survey also points to a decline in the proportion of Americans who say global temperatures are rising as a result of human activity. Just 36% say that currently, down from 47% last year.
Not everything in the poll is bad news for those that favor capping U.S. emissions. According to the survey, a majority (56%) of Americans think the United States should join other countries in setting standards to address global climate change, while 32% say that the United States should set its own standards. And half of Americans favor setting limits on carbon emissions and making companies pay for their emissions, even if this may lead to higher energy prices.
On the other hand, more than half (55%) say they haven’t heard about so-called “cap and trade” legislation being considered in Congress. (Then again, Sen. John Kerry says he doesn’t know what “cap and trade” means, either.)
The poll’s findings come just days before the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works is scheduled to hold hearings on legislation that calls for cutting U.S. emissions 20 percent beneath 2005 levels by 2020.
They also coincide with the release of a new Government Accountability Office study that says most federal, state and local officials have not yet taken steps to adapt to the impacts of global warming that America can expect.
Not surprisingly, opponents and supporters of carbon caps have very different takes on the poll’s findings.
“Perhaps the most interesting finding in this poll, aside from the precipitous drop in the number of Independents who believe global warming is a problem, is that the more Americans learn about cap-and-trade, the more they oppose cap-and-trade,” says Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.), a longtime skeptic of climate-change warnings.
Daniel Weiss at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, says the findings point to the effectiveness of “right-wing media personalities” in “distorting science while the mainstream media remains trapped in its ‘he said, she said’ narrative” about the science.
Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center, says he’s a little surprised by the decline in the percentage of respondents who see solid evidence of global warming. On the other hand, Mr. Kohut said, “we have since the onset of the recession seen people giving lower priority to environmental issues” in polls.
Overall, Mr. Kohut says the disposition of most Americans appears to be “to want to do something” about climate change, “but it’s not as sharp as it would be in a different economic climate.”
Anthony,
You might find this NY Times headline rewrite interesting: the first is Mercury News’ reprint of an article by writer John M. Broder:
“Hopes Fade for Comprehensive Climate Treaty”
http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_13604047?source=rss
But now on the Times’ web site the same story is titled:
“As Time Runs Short for Global Climate Treaty, Nations May Settle for Interim Steps”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/21/science/earth/21treaty.html?_r=2&8au&emc=au
Apparently the Editors at the Gray Lady suddenly changed their mind about softening readers for the Copenhagen collapse. More evidence of skeptic efficacy.
Mr. Moderator, I left tip on an very good article on the tip thread at 20:00:28 tonight. It is by Tim Coleman PhD.
Bill Derryberry
Belief in global warming drop, Obama responds with polar bear habitat
making oil and gas exploration more difficult.
http://unspunamerica.blogspot.com/2009/10/belief-in-global-warming-drops-obama.html
Ron de Haan (16:02:16) :
“American are not worried about Global Warming:”
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Oct1-19.jpg
A picture is worth a thousand words:
The blues and dark blues across the heart of the country are mute testimony.
Just The Facts (18:55:04) :
They don’t want you to have a dog to warn you about strangers approaching.
They don’t wnat you to have a mouser to keep down the vermin.
Into the future without either man’s best friend or the rat trap mobile.
Radical Environism sucks.
Would AGWers perk up knowing the 750,000 km2 DECREASE in the Arctic sea ice extent today as compared to 2008 ?
Interesting interview Glenn Beck-Lord Moncton
http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=4207&linkbox=true&position=5
tokyoboy (20:30:38) :
Is that before or after all the dogs & cats are outlawed and confiscated by those claiming to save the Planet?
My parents taught me a long time ago never to trust people who don’t like animals.
This won’t make Obama happy.
China Pledges Climate Cooperation with Obama, But Also Agrees With India to Resist Legally Binding Targets
http://minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2009/10/china-pledges-climate-cooperation-with-obama-but-also-agrees-with-india-to-resist-legally-binding-ta.html
Tokyoboy, which data set are you using?
Levis original jeans original hypocrisy:
http://greenhellblog.com/2009/10/22/levis-original-jeans-original-hypocrisy/
Ron de Haan (16:02:16) :
James F. Evans (20:18:01) :
So is the question is not if the October anomaly will be negative but by how much will it be negative?
it is interestimg to note, that the only political group with an increase in worries are the liberal democrats.
even if you believe in agw, weather and climate have not been supportive to that view recently. therefore a decline in worries is what you would expect anywhere.
an increase in worries, however, demontrates that liberal democrats views are particulalry disconnected from facts.
“If Copenhagen gets signed it wont matter what the opinion polls say”
The most likely outcome if it is signed is for no-one to take any action to comply. See Kyoto.
Unfortunately, the frickin’ greenies will pull out all the stops and sue the government until we all give up.
“James F. Evans (20:18:01) :
Ron de Haan (16:02:16) :
“American are not worried about Global Warming:”
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Oct1-19.jpg
A picture is worth a thousand words:
The blues and dark blues across the heart of the country are mute testimony.”
That’s easily fixed. Filnet will use the orange thermometers to fill in the 1200km radius.
Hey presto new record heat.
Gene, ron and others: there’s so to say no chance the october anomaly could be negative. Check this out:
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/
channel 5 it is.
The question is rather: is it going to be above 2007 or not?
“Unfortunately, the frickin’ greenies will pull out all the stops and sue the government until we all give up.”
This of course requires permission. From the government. Who made the mess in the first place.
T-Reason gets hung.
While a majority of Americans have become “deniers”, governments continue to pursue sconomy-killing cap & trade – even while their economies are dying already:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aoJTUKcx.E9A
I think everybody who reads this site should have a watch of “Fall of the republic”
The things it details aren’t even theories about what will happen anymore. They have happened and are currently happening this very moment. Lord Monckton’s speech earlier this month is very much related.
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel#g/c/176BE6231994A4B7
Daniel Weiss at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, says the findings point to the effectiveness of “right-wing media personalities” in “distorting science while the mainstream media remains trapped in its ‘he said, she said’ narrative” about the science.
Give that man the Cognitive Dissonance award.
It’s always the media’s fault isn’t it. It seems that when the left gets backed into a corner they start pointing fingers, blaming and name calling. None of that changes the fact that this cap and trade legislation is not the way to affect a positive change on the environment. It won’t do anything towards that end, but one thing we do know is that it will devastate the US economy. Write your Senators at http://tiny.cc/pxIgi. Let them know you do know what cap and trade is and that you do not support the job killing, tax raising, environmentally ineffective legislation.
Rob Vermeulen (23:21:22) :
Gene, ron and others: there’s so to say no chance the october anomaly could be negative. Check this out:
http://discover.itsc.uah.edu/amsutemps/
channel 5 it is.
The question is rather: is it going to be above 2007 or not?
Rob,
In my opinion it’s not about having a monthly anomaly hitting positive or negative territory.
It’s about the following:
1. are anthropogenic CO2 emissions screwing up our climate by causing a thermogeddon?
2. Is it justified and effective to shut down our economies, even from a “precautionary principle” view? (As is written down in the Lisbon Treaty of the EU)
3. Do we need a totalitarian World Government to enforce the draconian measures and payments?
The answer to these three questions is No.
Why?
1. If we look a the temperature extremes of the past 1000 years, Medieval Warmth Period (High) and the Maunder Minimum (Low) we can safely conclude thet the temperatures of the past Century until today are well within the the “upper and lower” temperature band.
2. The claim that CO2 is a dangerous climate driver is now completely debunked by
Prof Richard Lindzen: Carbon Dioxide irrelevant in climate debate.
This conclusion is based on measured data over a period of twenty years and the conclusion is irrefutable.
see: http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-7715-Portland-Civil-Rights-Examiner~y2009m8d18-Carbon-Dioxide-irrelevant-in-climate-debate-says-MIT-Scientist
3. This means that Copenhagen lacks the scientific basis to come to any agreement about CO2 emission reductions.
There is no reason whatsoever to shut down our economies and there is no reason whatsoever to reduce CO2 emissions.
This brings us to the true objectives of the Copenhagen Climate Conference, the UN, the IPCC and our world leaders.
But that is an entire different story but it has to do with Marxism, Fascism, Population Control and Rent Seekers.
http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2009/10/rent-seekers-green-corporations.html
Do you want more crazy? Here you have it:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/23/world/europe/23degrees.html?_r=1
We are near december. What will it be after Copenhagen, once it has been signed by the majority of countries?, it will be signed by third world countries because of the benefits they are supposed to receive from the developed world, and, for sure, it will be signed also by those countries who wish the occidental countries a premature fall. What will follow then?
A visual approach to explain the human contribution of CO2 in our atmosphere:
From: http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=4204&linkbox=true&position=2