While Waxman and Markey continue to try to salvage the EPA in hearings on the hill, the public shift clearly says “we aren’t buying it anymore”. This quote from Gallup last year pretty much sums it up
“In a sharp turnaround from what Gallup found as recently as three years ago, Americans are now almost evenly split in their views of the cause of increases in the Earth’s temperature over the last century.”
Last year:
Americans’ Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop
Multiple indicators show less concern, more feelings that global warming is exaggerated
PRINCETON, NJ — Gallup’s annual update on Americans’ attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.

These results are based on the annual Gallup Social Series Environment poll, conducted March 4-7 of this year. The survey results show that the reversal in Americans’ concerns about global warming that began last year has continued in 2010 — in some cases reverting to the levels recorded when Gallup began tracking global warming measures more than a decade ago.
This year:
More Than 4 in 10 Say Seriousness of Global Warming Is Exaggerated
The plurality of Americans continue to believe the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated in the news (43%) rather than generally correct (26%) or generally underestimated (29%). This is the third year in a row that a substantial plurality has believed global warming’s effects are not as bad as they are portrayed, a departure from prior years, when Americans were about evenly split between the three points of view. The percentage who think global warming’s effects are exaggerated is down a bit from last year.

=================================================================
Last year:
For example, the percentage of Americans who now say reports of global warming are generally exaggerated is by a significant margin the highest such reading in the 13-year history of asking the question. In 1997, 31% said global warming’s effects had been exaggerated; last year, 41% said the same, and this year the number is 48%.
Fewer Americans Think Effects of Global Warming Are Occurring
“In a sharp turnaround from what Gallup found as recently as three years ago, Americans are now almost evenly split in their views of the cause of increases in the Earth’s temperature over the last century.”
Many global warming activists have used film and photos of melting ice caps and glaciers, and the expanding reach of deserts, to drive home their point that global warming is already having alarming effects on the earth. While these efforts may have borne fruit over much of the 2000s, during the last two years, Americans’ convictions about global warming’s effects have waned.
A majority of Americans still agree that global warming is real, as 53% say the effects of the problem have already begun or will do so in a few years. That percentage is dwindling, however. The average American is now less convinced than at any time since 1997 that global warming’s effects have already begun or will begin shortly.
Meanwhile, 35% say that the effects of global warming either will never happen (19%) or will not happen in their lifetimes (16%).
The 19% figure is more than double the number who held this view in 1997.

This year:
While Americans’ self-professed understanding of global warming has increased over time — from 69% saying they understand the issue “very well” or “fairly well” in 2001, to 74% in 2006 and 80% in the current poll — their concern about global warming across several measures is generally in the lower range of what Gallup has found historically.
For example, 49% currently believe the effects of global warming have already begun to happen, similar to last year’s estimate and one point above the historical low from 1997. Just three years ago, 61% thought the effects were already occurring. Over the same time, the percentage doubting global warming’s effects will ever happen has increased, from 11% to nearly 20%, including 18% this year.

==================================================================
Last year:
Americans Divided on Causes of Global Warming
In a sharp turnaround from what Gallup found as recently as three years ago, Americans are now almost evenly split in their views of the cause of increases in the Earth’s temperature over the last century.

This year:

Read the entire poll story from 2010 here
…and from 2011 here
======================================================
NOTE: The first published version of this article was incomplete and did not have comparisons from last year’s poll to this year as was intended. This was a consequence of have two browser windows open with editing capabilities, side by side, so I could do comparisons and then cut and paste portions, and the wrong one got published accidentally. My apologies for any confusion this may have caused in the 45 minutes or so the incomplete story was up. – Anthony
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Like all thorough-going sceptics, I believe the Gallup questions to be poorly worded and do not address the anthropegenic component of so-called AGW. Anyone would have to be incredibly unaware if they didn’t know there has been warming on a global scale as the earth recovered from the LIA but temps have shown no statistically significant increase in the past decade and currently appear to be in a slight decline. I find most polls to be either carelessly worded and thus incapable of giving an accurate result or deliberately constructed to avoid arriving at accuracy; yer takes yer pick.
Poor questions lead to poor answers. I agree with those who think the debate needs to be reframed:
1. How much warming has there been? (in last century? In last millennium?)
2. What are the causes? (correlation with CO2 poor, in fact no one knows the answer and that is why we need good science.)
3. Is there reason to believe warming will accelerate and become catastrophic? (ie are the net feedbacks positive or negative? (The stability of the Earth’s climate for eons argues the feedbacks are net negative)
4. Is moderate warming a net good or net harm—-to humans and/or the more general biosphere? (The fossil record and history say net good.)
KW
Jeremy says:
March 16, 2011 at 5:51 am
“That last question is very poorly worded. Most scientists clearly accept that the world has warmed, the question is the attributed cause. They should be asking the public:”
We should have moved beyond the question of “most scientists.” Warmista have used the concept for unabashed propagandizing. Richard Muller (see Youtube) and associates are presently at work demonstrating that the most famous of “most scientists” engaged in dishonesty when they created and promoted and apologized for the hockey stick.
There is certain percentage of the population that are going to believe in AGW no matter what the facts really are. It’s almost a desire to think something bad about mankind, almost a form of self loathing of our race.
The percentage varies depending on the subject of the poll between 20 and 30 percent.
For example Obama is still receiving a “strongly approves” rating from 20% of the population even as he gets ready to jet off to South America despite the worlds current situation.
I suspect that the same 20% would still strongly approve if he declared martial law in the US and declared himself president for life.
Thirty-one Republicans on the House Energy And Commerce Committee — the entire Republican contingent on the panel — declined on Tuesday to vote in support of the very idea that climate change exists.
Democrats on the panel had suggested three amendments that said climate change is a real thing, is caused by humans and has potentially dire consequences for the future. … The global scientific community is in near unanimous agreement that climate change is real, and that humans contribute to it.
None of the 31 Republicans on the committee would vote yes on any of the amendments (Rep. Marsha Blackburn [R-TN] declined to vote on one.) The committee’s 21 Democrats voted yes on all three.
“Here’s the latest decadal trend.
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2001/trend
”
I like that decadal trend. I think it is very likely the decline will get steeper in the next years/decades.
And in line with this… See the Patrick Moore Video On Fox News… He discusses Global Warming and energy
This is a MUST SEE!
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4503674/greenpeace-founder-questions-global-warming/
They are way out to lunch on batteries and GeoThermal — but what the heck!
IMO He is right you know — politics and manipulation
I wonder why the hockey stick starts at 2006? Most of the publicly available sources of info haven’t changed much in those years. Valid info has been available on the web since 1990, and false info has been available everywhere else since 1990. The Climategate revelations were in 2009, and received exactly zero coverage in mass media, so they can’t be the important factor.
Could it be that the last 5 years have featured very hard winters in most of the places where people live? Every year has a bad winter someplace, but urban areas have been hit steadily with serious cold in those years, causing more people to examine the valid info and discount the false info.
Just to be clear, I do not wish global cooling, but I think a bit of cooling is necessary to bring back some real science and stop the hysteria, which is worse and causes more damage than cooling.
One way or the other, we can not do anything about it.
Americans can see with their own eyes the failed prediction about milder Northern Hemisphere winters. Now they are being told that the cold and snow are really signs of global warming. Total crap.
Here is what we were told then and now.
June 4, 1999
“Warm Winters Result From Greenhouse Effect, Columbia Scientists Find, Using NASA Model”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/06/990604081638.htm
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v399/n6735/abs/399452a0.html
Nov. 17, 2010
“Global Warming Could Cool Down Northern Temperatures in Winter”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101117114028.htm
http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009JD013568
How can anyone falsify this two-way-bet?
I wonder what question Gallup will ask should we be prolonged cooling?
Ah, if only polling data had anything to do with the reality of what were really happening with the earth’s climate. For example, how many people believe in ghosts or that the end of the world is coming in 2012? Certainly it’s nice to know what the polls say for those who would like to influence the politics of climate change, but the lesson of history is that perceptions often have very little correlation one way or another with reality…and the herd is a likely to be wrong on an issue as right.
Unfortunately, at this time in American history, all that polls can indicate is the effect of the white hot fury that the MSM has created from the most recent natural disaster. In the case of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, the MSM, now including Fox, changed the topic from the natural disaster and its effects on the Japanese people to the nuclear power industry. Apparently, the MSM have developed the ability to identify the spin that will most increase the tendencies toward hysteria and panic that exist in the public. The storyline of impending nuclear meltdown was always an illusion. There was no reason whatsoever to believe that the nuclear facilities would explode or release a significant amount of radiation. Yet the MSM grabbed this storyline and holds it today. Either all of the MSM are fools or they are deliberately exploiting public nervousness about all things nuclear and the climate. In doing so, they have created a panic of historic proportions. (By panic, I mean such things as Germany backing off from nuclear power, Senator Lieberman calling for a moratorium, etc.) This is Yellow Journalism turned White Hot Fury Journalism. This bodes ill for the future of civilization.
If the MSM support Obama in 2012 then there is no question he will win, unless he self-destructs, something that is likely. We have just seen the power of the MSM and we have learned that there is nothing in the public arena to oppose it. Our rulers are now chosen by masters of hysteria and panic.
Between now and November 2012, look for the MSM to grab every environmental news event and to promote Greenie spin with the same apocalyptic fervor that they have promoted nuclear disaster in Japan. Expect public opinion to swing toward the view that manmade CO2 is the devil.
There are a number of reasons for this “uncertainty” which includes “contradictory evidence.”
I am working on a list of about 30 papers, abstracts and IPCC reports which not just ‘appear‘ contradict each other but come to opposite conclusions. I hope Anthony allows me to post the list up by the end of the month. Here is a taste. ;O)
Northern Hemisphere winters warmer [Gavin Schmidt et. al.]
Northern Hemisphere winters colder ;O)
Plant methane emissions significant
Plant methane emissions insignificant
Malaria may increase
Malaria may continue decreasing in a warming world!
Malaria to increase in Burundi
Malaria to decline in Burundi [via sciencedaily]
UK to get more droughts
UK to get more rain
They know they need to do a better job selling what they prefer to call “climate change”.
To that end, a TV and movie producer by the name of Marshall Herskovitz is working on a multi-tiered campaign involving an “absolute ‘A-Team’ of people”, and “a lot of money”: http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.html?programID=11-P13-00010&segmentID=7
Unfortunately for the Warmistas, the harder they try to sell it, the less people want to buy what they’re selling.
Herskovitch: “…we need to hit people over the head. We need people to act right now, and we need people to act in a huge manner. It’s very hard to get across to people the scale at which we have to act.” Sounds like he’s going with the advice of Stephen Schneider who fifteen years ago, said “we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.” Yeah, that’ll work.
Given that some of the people who come to this website argue that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas, the results of this poll ar enot surprising.
Since Gallup polled from March 6 to 13 last year, that means they’ve done this year’s survey, probably. I wonder how soon its results will be out. A month from now?
Whoever said that ‘there are no stupid questions’ obviously never read that poll.
Interesting example of the way in which statistics are viewed as solid, whereas in fact they are +/- quite a bit. The last couple of years are certainly within the same wiggle room for those questioned, when they are questioned and how strongly they hold the answer they gave.
Basically half of all people are not convinced, but half the people are that AGW is real and some level of CAGW is real. That’s not trivial. Elections that lead to national wars are decided over much less.
You are right. I always tried to make that point in the past, “consensus is meaningless.” But the argument never seems to die, everyone wants to argue by authority.
I think the AGW hand has been way over played. The claims are too abstract, people just don’t see it. It’s not just global warming but news reports in general, every hour, on the hour, highlighting some report about how what we eat, breathe and do will kill us, make us unhappy, poorer, whatever. I think it’s our nature to cut out this noise, too much information that we can’t do anything about.
Eat, drink and be merry!
eadler says:
“Two different polls of climate scientists on a similar question get 97% of scientists believe global warming is a result of human activity.”
Enough with your 97% nonsense. It has been repeatedly debunked, yet you cling to it like a drowning man clings to a stick. You couldn’t get a poll where 97% believed Hitler was a bad guy. But you actually believe that 97% of scientists believe humans cause global warming? Get a grip.
This is a sad statement, because there is no rational reason why people should be failing to grasp the “seriousness” of climate change and global warming.The vast majority of working scientists and the entire world’s Academies of Science are aware of this seriousness and they have given us enough evidence to alert us to problems ahead. It is tragic that anyone can reject this evidence and that a do-nothing, business-as-usual approach is being supported. Our children and grandchildren will not forgive us.
Is there a trend? Anomalies? Is there a computer model? Does it predict a further rise in non-consensus due to positive feedback from near-fraudulent studies being exposed? How about the feedbacks from failure to agree with the real world and failures to predict…. well, a lot of things?
Hugh Pepper says…
With Japans nuclear problems you can kiss it all goodbye then. If what you believe is true, there is no possibilty of mitigation without nuclear power. And you think we’re deluded….