From the Pew Research Center:
Views about the existence and causes of global warming have changed little over the past year. A new Pew Research Center poll finds that 59% of adults say there is solid evidence that the earth’s average temperature has been getting warmer over the past few decades. In October 2009, 57% said this.
Roughly a third (34%) say that global warming is occurring mostly because of human activity, such as the burning of fossil fuels, which also is little changed from last year (36%).
The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Oct. 13-18 among 2,251 adults reached on landlines and cell phones, finds that 32% say global warming is a very serious problem while 31% think it is somewhat serious. A year ago, 35% described global warming as a very serious problem and 30% said it was somewhat serious.
In 2006, far more Americans said there was solid evidence that the average temperature has been rising over the past few decades. In July of that year, 79% believed there was evidence of global warming, and half (50%) said it was mostly caused by human activity. Much of the change in attitudes about global warming occurred between April 2008 and last fall, with the decline coming mostly, though not entirely, among Republicans and independents. (See “Fewer Americans See Solid Evidence of Global Warming,” Oct. 22, 2009).
Two other indicators of opinion on the issue were not included in the October 2009 survey, and both show significant changes from earlier polls. Currently, 46% of the public says global warming is a problem that requires immediate government action. In July 2006, 61% said the issue needed immediate action. This decline is mostly a consequence of the fact that fewer now say global warming is a problem.
The public is divided on the question of whether scientists themselves agree that the earth is warming because of human activity: 44% say scientists agree, and 44% say they do not. In July 2006, when a much higher percentage of the public said there was solid evidence of global warming, 59% said that scientists agree that global warming is caused by humans, while just 29% said scientists do not agree.
The new survey finds continuing support for a range of policies to address the nation’s energy supply, including requiring improved vehicle fuel efficiency and increasing federal funding for research on wind, solar and hydrogen technology. Support for allowing more offshore oil and gas drilling – which declined during the Gulf of Mexico oil leak – has rebounded modestly. Currently, 51% favor allowing more offshore oil and gas drilling, up from 44% in June.
======================================================
Read the complete report here
Caveat: some of the usual suspects will complain that the graph I presented has “bias” due to it showing only the range of change in the data on the Y axis, and not the full possible range.
If lodging such a complaint, please consider lodging a complaint about the Y axis of these graphs also:
Sea Ice, Sea Level, Temperature rise
Thank you for your consideration – Anthony
Adam says:
October 27, 2010 at 10:14 am (Edit)
Why do 46% say it requires government action where only 34% believe in AGW?
Good question. It seems people don’t think mankinds bulk emissions of co2 are responsible for any global warming there has been, but that we ‘have the technology’ to be able to ‘do something’ about it.
It might be interesting to explore that with a further poll.
What sort of government action would be best:
1) Take co2 out of the atmosphere
2) Geo-engineer cooling particles
3) Offer grants for more efficient aircon systems
R. Gates says:
October 27, 2010 at 11:23 am
their opinion is just a regurgitation of the viewpoint spewed out by their favorite “news” anchor or whatever the general attitutude or position issued forth from their particular political party. In short, the average person really knows nothing about the science or the deeper issues involved in the AGW “debate”.
Oh really? So how come the number believing in AGW has fallen dramatically over the last 4 years?
The American mainstream media still largely toes the ‘consensus’ line.
The political parties haven’t changed their positions.
So what do you think is the cause of the decline in AGW belief?
Scientists behaving badly?
Three cold winters?
Catastrophe fatigue?
A mixture of all three?
R. Gates says:
“In short, the average person really knows nothing about the science or the deeper issues involved in the AGW “debate”.”
You forgot to mention: least of all most of those who claim to be ‘climate scientists’, like the members of the Team and all those addicted to uninterrupted grant funding.
Antropogenic Global warming is becomming or has allready become the prime sociological phenomenon of our age. AGW is far less a climatological, geological or meteorological phenomenon, than a socio-political one. Polls like this one are kind of funny as much as irrelevant. The questions are stunning as far as they adress either factual circumstances or are phrased ambiguously:
Is the earth warming?
Yes: the earth has warmed since the peak of the last ice age maximum- after all this is an interglacial- this is non controversial. Sea levels have been rising for some centuries and may continue to do so for some time to come.
How serious a problem?
This has been is a serious problem for some – now submerged- areas – it is a relief for other areas. There is no evidence of an immanent threat for large populations.
Do scientists agree that the earth is getting warmer because of human activity?
Yes: hardly any scientist will argue that human activity has had no impact on average surface temperatures, the controversy is generally about the extent, varying from negligible to primary cause.
Bad poles do not add up to anything anybody can use.
@R.Gates: ‘Best to stick with science, and realize that public perception means very little…’
Not something the Team or people like Connolley or 10:10 or the EPA or the UK enviro-ministry or the Met Office appear to be convinced about.
Alexander Vissers says:
October 28, 2010 at 5:04 am
“Do scientists agree that the earth is getting warmer because of human activity?
Yes: hardly any scientist will argue that human activity has had no impact on average surface temperatures, the controversy is generally about the extent, varying from negligible to primary cause.”
Actually, no. Although “hardly any scientist will argue that human activity has had no impact on average surface temperatures” we do not even know whether the (small) net effect is positive or negative. CO2 emissions (probably) tend to be warming, but aerosols tend to be cooling, and land use changes can go either way.
Pamela Gray says:
October 27, 2010 at 6:03 pm
R Gates, I can’t believe you would dismiss the people so frivolously. Have you not read that document with the preamble that begins with “We the People…”?
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
_______
Pamela, I don’t “dismiss” people, and American Democracy (in theory) is one of the best things ever created by mankind, but American Democracy is practice has become an exercise in who can put the most money in, get’s the most money out. It would be different if the best leaders made it into office, and not just the best financed. $$ makes Washington go round, and “we the people” have very little to do with it. Major Campaign finance reform is the only solution so that “we the people” can get our full voices back, but it will never happen as it would endanger the livilhoods of the professional politicians and threaten to sever the deep seated ties between money and power that is the true form of our current plutocracy.
@R.Gates: ‘Best to stick with science, and realize that public perception means very little…’
True. I wish you would do it.
JPeden says:
October 27, 2010 at 11:35 pm
R. Gates:
Cool and skeptical distrust is as much an emotion as the warm and fuzzy compassion sparked by the poor stranded photoshopped polar bear– they are both at root an emotional reaction and will win far more votes than any attempt to explain the science.
By which statement, Gates, you prove why you don’t know anything about the Scientific Method, where “cool and skeptical distrust” is in fact its very heart.
_____
Indeed, that may be true, but in terms of the actual basis of the scientific mind, I believe that is based on curiousity and an unwavering faith that the mysteries of the universe can open up to us and be comprehensible. Furthermore, some of the greatest “discoveries” in science were not based on the scientific method at all, but rather pure hunches and intution about the nature of things, and behind these hunches and intuiton was a faith that the cosmos could be understood by reason…an interesting nexus of emotions that had nothing to do with skepticsim.
R. Gates says:
“In short, the average person really knows nothing about the science or the deeper issues involved in the AGW “debate”.”
To know nothing is no problem. Knowing something that ain’t so is the problem. So those fake “scientists” who think they know are the problem.
It is really not that difficult to know, or better, to understand that CO2 is not one of the biggest players (if at all) among the factors influencing earth climate changes. In fact, I suggest that the so-called climate “scientists” have the poorest understanding of the science of earth climate changes. Because:
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.”
R. Gates says:
October 28, 2010 at 7:27 am
Furthermore, some of the greatest “discoveries” in science were not based on the scientific method at all, but rather pure hunches and intution about the nature of things, and behind these hunches and intuiton was a faith that the cosmos could be understood by reason…an interesting nexus of emotions that had nothing to do with skepticsim.
==========================================
Where do you get off saying this “nexus of emotions” has “nothing to do with skepticism”?
Mule fritters!
And following your “logic” above, I am sure its even plausible that some scientific discovery is arrived at by talking out of one’s arse.
But I’m very skeptical on that one.
Chris
Norfolk, VA, USA
R. Gates says:
October 28, 2010 at 7:27 am
Furthermore, some of the greatest “discoveries” in science were not based on the scientific method at all, but rather pure hunches and intution about the nature of things, and behind these hunches and intuiton was a faith that the cosmos could be understood by reason…an interesting nexus of emotions that had nothing to do with skepticsim.
Nonresponsive, Gates: the Scientific Method is what validates those “greatest discoveries”, and scepticism is its heart. Moreover, if you’re trying to say that the greatest discoveries by great scientists did not involve scepticism right from the start, especially about the “settled science”, you are most likely going to be proven wrong. Or perhaps you think that great discoveries solely involve just pulling things out of one’s arse?
Pew is a leftist organization of the first order. There is no reason to trust the accuracy of this poll, even if it is reporting things you want to hear.
Hate to break it to you, Trev, but that “lemming thing” is an urban myth. L
I receive from time to time; newsletter e-mailings from the Prime-Minister of New Zealand, and a short while back I wrote him regarding the NZ ETS carbon trading scheme. Apparently under the previous long running Labour Government, NZ signed on to the Kyoto accords; and apparently the current (I believe National or multi-party ) Government is intent on continuing that. NZ gets a big black mark for its very large (per capita domestic farm animal population; largest in the world), and is not allowed to use its very extensive Forestry Farming to offset those flatulent beasts; so they are in a similar boat to the USA.
So I pointed out to him that the wheels were coming off that chariot; and NZ could be a leader in returning to sanity.
He did refer my letter to his Minister of Climate etc; who is an engineer by training; and I just received a courteous response from him saying in essence that the Science is settled, and they will continue with their program; and he also cited his principal science advisor. I informed his Administrative Assistant that I would nevertheless continue my efforts to point out the deficiencies in the current “concensus” science; and hopefully one day help rid the free world of this onerous and quite useless burden on their citizens.
So we can only achieve so much; but it is well worth the effort.
NZ has quite a few serious scientists who are not in tune with the concensus science, including Dr Vincent Gray, and Dr Chris de Freitas. So the Israelites wandered in the Sinai for 40 years, before they entered the promised land; well a typical climate interval isn’t it; but hopefully we will reach the truth earlier than that; I plan to stick around to see it.
The present NZ Government will likely be replaced by then.
“”” R. Gates says:
October 28, 2010 at 7:17 am
Pamela Gray says:
October 27, 2010 at 6:03 pm
R Gates, I can’t believe you would dismiss the people so frivolously. Have you not read that document with the preamble that begins with “We the People…”?
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
_______
Pamela, I don’t “dismiss” people, and American Democracy (in theory) is one of the best things ever created by mankind, but American Democracy is practice has become an exercise in who can put the most money in, get’s the most money out. It would be different if the best leaders made it into office, and not just the best financed. $$ makes Washington go round, and “we the people” have very little to do with it. Major Campaign finance reform is the only solution so that “we the people” can get our full voices back, but it will never happen as it would endanger the livilhoods of the professional politicians and threaten to sever the deep seated ties between money and power that is the true form of our current plutocracy. “””
Well the USA doesn’t have a Democracy; which is the ultimate in chaotic inertia.
Articl IV, Section 4 of the US Constitution, says:-
“The United States, shall guarantee to every State in this Union, a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; ……”
However we do use some Democratic principles internally to those 57 Sovereign Republics.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yhN1IDLQjo&fs=1&hl=en_GB]
I wonder if opinion polling on global temperatures could operate as a proxy for temperature data… 😉
Is there solid evidence the Earth is warming?
51% believe the Earth is either not warming or warming due to natural patterns.
34% believe the Earth is warming due to human activity.
6% believe the Earth is warming but don’t know why.
9% Don’t know if the Earth is warming.
How serious a problem?
63% indicate its a somewhat to very serious problem.
34% indicate it not too serious or is not a problem.
3% don’t know if its a problem
Is it a problem requiring immediate government action?
Yes: 46%
No: 50%
Don’t Know: 3%
Do scientists agree the Earth is getting warmer?
Yes: 44%
No: 44%
Don’t Know: 12%
Of those believing Global Warming is a Very Serious, Somewhat Serious, or Not Too Serious problem.
Is there solid evidence the Earth is warming [due to human activity]?
Tea Party Republicans: 84% No
Republicans: 71% No
Democrats: 31% No
Independents: 48% No
How serious a problem?
Tea Party Republicans: 74% Not too serious or Not a problem
Republicans: 57% Not too serious or Not a problem
Democrats: 15% Not too serious or Not a problem
Independents: 35% Not too serious or Not a problem
Is it a problem requiring immediate government action?
Tea Party Republicans: 39% No
Republicans: 39% No
Democrats: 19% No
Independents: 31% No
Do scientists agree the Earth is getting warmer?
Tea Party Republicans: 71% No
Republicans: 58% No
Democrats: 32% No
Independents: 45% No
Which would seem to prove the theory that if you ask an uninformed person for an opinion the answer you get will be an uninformed one.
I’m sure if you asked most of these people why muons and a neutron’s are monitored they would think you were asking something about cats rather than Cosmic ray research or the number of the general public who still confuse the ozone issue with with CO2 emissions.
Why do those in the denier camp keep telling us that the opinions of scientists in terms of consensus doesn’t mean anything, yet you keep posting this meaningless rubbish about what the general public think which would be uninformed consensus.