CBS News – New York Times Poll shows the public has mostly given up on global warming and the environment

Got some vikes, AB, and a nap for my ear infection, decided to check email, found a link to this poll so figured I’d better pass it on. I was surprised.

Here’s question 88:

88. Which statement comes closest to your view about global warming? 1. Global warming is caused mostly by human activity such as burning fossil fuels or 2. Global warming is caused mostly by natural patterns in the earth’s environment. or 3. Global warming does not exist.

And here’s the results:

12 percent don’t think global warming exists. 42 percent say it’s man-made and 33 percent say it’s natural. 7 percent say it is a mixture of both, and 6 percent are in the “I dunno” or didn’t answer category. With only 42 percent saying it is human caused, that puts it in the minority view.

But what I think is even more telling is the fact that it didn’t even show up on the radar in question 3, which asks:

I’m sure “global warming” was in there somewhere, perhaps in the 14 percent of “other” responses seen near the end, but even with Al Gore’s recent media event to try to bring it to the forefront again, it appears to have had zero effect. Also telling: “Environment” gets less than 1 percent.

It’s jobs and economy which get the lions share of concern, which just goes to show that if people are poor, out of work, and hungry, they don’t have time to worry about elitist causes like Al Gore’s global warming crusade.

The poll with all questions is here: http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/250094/new-york-times-cbs-poll-results.pdf

The NYT news story on it is here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/17/us/politics/obamas-support-is-slipping-poll-finds-but-his-jobs-plan-is-well-received.html?_r=1

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
David, UK

Looks like the Gorefest did the trick.

Braddles

I’d rather see a survey where problems are ranked by the respondents rather than allowing the respondents to name only one problem.

Green Sand

Eh up cloth ears! Well that is what they used to say to me!
Go get sorted, whether or not you like it, or expected it, there is a lot of society that benefits from your wellbeing, not the least youf family.
Please do whatever is needed to get well and be able to enjoy life.
Regards and many thanks for what you have achieved so far, it is significant and will in future, be seen as such.
I lost the top range in my left ear a long time ago, but she always sits on that side.

preposterous

Kind of hard to spin these results. I wonder what the consequences for the team and their sycophants will be as the continue to goad the funding cow though ever greater efforts to manufacture evidence and alarm? They have been adamant that there must be consequences for violating consensus.

Al Gore covertly buying waterfront property at Montecito probably did more damage than all the various eco-gates combined. When future historians look back on this (to them) inexplicable craze, they will mark the moment Al Gore turned his back on the movement as the moment it truly died.

Latitude

If they ask “do you think global warming is important enough to put yourself in the poor house”…..
……/snark
#3…global warming was right below little green men

The TEAM will simply say that “big oil” has paid millions to people to poison the perceptions of the people and that they need even more government money to combat the evil of … Exxon.
Note: I don’t love Exxon much myself, nor BP, but they are not the ones handing out billions of dollars in grant money as I understand it.

Al Gore's Holy Hologram

It’s just tragic that only 7% of people can think logically

Duncan

7% didn’t say it was a mixture of both.
7% objected to the question, and gave an answer that wasn’t even on the list.
Maybe they could re-run the survey with that as a choice, and see how many people change their votes when a non-extreme choice is available.

One can take a further 10% off of the 42 % number to compensate for the weighting inaccuracies that dominate NY Times/CBS polls.

What’s the point in these poll’s, since when does public opinion make any difference to government policy on green issues.

I would love to see a survey where for once, one of the question is “Do you think human activity is going to or may lead to dangerous global warming?”
But, I don’t think they dare to make such a question.
They might not get the answer they want.

H.R.

At the rate the NY Times is losing circulation, a better question would be “Do you believe in the NY Times?”
Hide the decline.

Curiousgeorge

The only poll that means diddly squat is the one coming up in Nov. 2012.

Doug

If a poll existed that showed that a majority of people believed that global warming was a significant problem, would that make the SCIENCE stronger?

Przemysław Pawełczyk

Viva Climate Family Feud! *) Long live to polls!
Sure! It is extremely interesting what morons on the street think about climate!
Mr. Watts, how long yet will you feed WUWT pages with this sh** of polls and what for?
Regards
*) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_Feud
[REPLY: Przemysław, you’re right, science is not conducted by polls or consensus, but note the banner at the top of the page “…and recent news…” – the poll is news. Further, CAGW is a political and social issue as well as a science issue. The poll, and its results, are relevant. A data-point, if you will. You aren’t required to read it. -REP, mod]

Zogby has done some polls with properly open-ended questions, not loaded in the usual way. They seem to be learning…..

Doug says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:07 pm
If a poll existed that showed that a majority of people believed that global warming was a significant problem, would that make the SCIENCE stronger?
=======================================
No, just the political advocacy.

DirkH

Przemysław Pawełczyk says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:09 pm
“Sure! It is extremely interesting what morons on the street think about climate!”
For politicians, these are voters…

Przemysław Pawełczyk

Przemysław Pawełczyk says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:09 pm
> [REPLY: Przemysław, you’re right, science is not conducted by polls or consensus,
> (…)
> Further, CAGW is a political and social issue as well as a science issue. The poll, and its results, are relevant.
Tell me then how much relevant they are, the polls? Do the participants know the subject from schools or WUWT pages or what they have learned from MSM (mainstream media)? Polls’ results are relevant? C’mon! Do not soap my eyes, please.
Regards

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/09/16/lawrence-solomon-warmed-right-over/
The global-warming theory is nearing its end as evidence against it mounts
Why do a majority of Canadians — 52% according to the latest Angus Reid poll — still hold the belief that humans are mainly responsible for global warming?
I think I know, based on the feedback I’ve received from literally thousands of Canadians who have commented in recent years on my articles dealing with global warming. Most of that 52% have so often been told that the science is settled on global warming, and so rarely that there is any credible dissent, that they have not yet twigged to straightforward information, such as the rejection by most top scientists of the global-warming dogma.
Just this week, Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever resigned as a fellow from the American Physical Society, saying he could not live with its nonsensical endorsement of global-warming alarmism. Dr. Giaever joins a host of other eminent scientists who have dismissed concerns over global warming, including Freeman Dyson, a Princeton physicist and America’s best known scientist, Antonino Zichichi, the president of the World Federation of Scientists and Italy’s best known scientist, Claude Allegre, a former socialist Minister of National Education, Research and Technology and France’s best-known scientist, and America’s Reid Bryson, known as the “father of scientific climatology” and judged “the world’s most cited climatologist” by the journal of the Institute of British Geographers.
In contrast to this Who’s Who of the scientific world, the list of top global-warming scientists falls far short. No scientist has been awarded a Nobel Prize in a science field for his work on global warming because no piece of science in the field has achieved a major scientific breakthrough. This despite the global-warming issue’s dominance of the scientific world for more than two decades, garnering the lion’s share of scientific funding and an inordinate amount of coverage in scientific publications. The only Nobel Prize conferred on global-warming advocates came from the political wing of the Nobel Prize establishment, which awarded them a prize for peace in consolation for their failure to merit a prize for science.

John David Galt

All of the arguments for the environmental movement, from Love Canal up to today, have amounted to crying wolf again and again. The public has finally figured out that the only real wolf threatening us is the environmental movement, which pushes us toward economic ruin and civil disorder for the personal profit of its leaders.

Przemysław Pawełczyk

Marks Powers says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:28 pm
> No scientist has been awarded a Nobel Prize in a science field for his work on global warming because no piece of science in the field has achieved a major scientific breakthrough.
Not only. Also, because we should, no, we must live at least 1000 years to be able to say frankly that someone’s work on climate has been proven beyond doubt (on that level of knowledge) or brought in significant issues in understanding of it. In my view of course. In this context only Peace Prize was “safe” for the “Nobel Prize establishment”.
Regards

Members of society who are the staunchest supporters of the AGW meme are the under 25s, many of whom are members of activist groups such as WWF Greenpeace and Get Up (In Australia).
We need to remember that the origins of this scam goes back to the 80s. The Rio Earth Summit was in 1992. These naive young ‘uns have had the AGW meme pounded into them for their whole lives. They are not old enough to have personally experienced a 30 year climate.
Exclude this group from surveys, then see what the real feelings of the citizenry are regards this scam.

Przemysław Pawełczyk

DirkH says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:22 pm
Przemysław Pawełczyk says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:09 pm
“Sure! It is extremely interesting what morons on the street think about climate!”
> For politicians, these are voters…
🙂 Thanks DirkH for the quiet reminder! I calming down. Yep, Voters *), I crammed it to my mind. 😉
Regards
*) Written from big letter means highest respect (in Polish for sure).

John W

Eric Worrall says:
September 17, 2011 at 4:44 pm
Al Gore covertly buying waterfront property at Montecito probably did more damage than all the various eco-gates combined. When future historians look back on this (to them) inexplicable craze, they will mark the moment Al Gore turned his back on the movement as the moment it truly died.

I couldn’t find an address for Al’s Montecito property but judging from the pictures @ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/17/photos-al-goree-new-8875_n_579286.html#s91252 I think I found a match on Google Earth @ 34 degrees 26 minutes 51.81 seconds North 119 degrees 37 minutes 42.82 seconds West @ an elevation of 509 feet; not even Al has exaggerated sea level rise to that level.
Al’s too heavily invested in CAGW to abandon it IMO.

BigWaveDave

The only way to fix the economy and create more jobs is to start using out own energy resources: instead of pissing our money away on toys and foreign oil.

In San Diego, I’m pointing out that the supposedly accelerating rise in sea level just isn’t shown in the observed data. And I’m taking my info from NOAA, not some evil “denialist” group.
Supposedly, San Diego’s sea level will rise by 12 to 18 inches by 2050, from its 2000 level. We’re 11 years into the projection, and sea level as measured off the coast of La Jolla has risen less than 1 inch. That’s a pro-rated rise of less than 5 inches by 2050.http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/09/17/cbs-news-new-york-times-poll-shows-the-public-has-mostly-given-up-on-global-warming-and-the-environment/#comment-form-load-service:Facebook

Also, watch for a verrrrrry interesting new AGW study. It’s under embargo until 10 am PDT Sunday, or I’d say more. Anthony will have fun with it.
Best wishes for ear health, Anthony.

John W

Przemysław Pawełczyk
Tell me then how much relevant they are, the polls?
Very relevant, because it’s difficult to pass “draconian” regulations without support from the voters.
Do the participants know the subject from schools or WUWT pages or what they have learned from MSM (mainstream media)?
Don’t know, but I would like to.
Polls’ results are relevant?
Again, yes, the science is settled that we must act now scare tactic is failing to incite the public to “force” politicians into economically disastrous regulations and that is GOOD.
C’mon! Do not soap my eyes, please.
Well, I wouldn’t.

Richard Sharpe

This means that they will have to find a new crisis.
I suspect it will be: CO2 is causing the Anthropogenic Global Financial Crisis.

Przemysław Pawełczyk

John W says:
September 17, 2011 at 7:14 pm
🙂
Regards

Pamela Gray

Those of us who pan catastrophic global warming are actually smart enough to keep worrying about clean water in undeveloped countries, clean air in developing countries, and homelessness now becoming evident even on Rodeo Drive. The mass of lemings following the likes of Hansen are not even close to being true environmentalists.

BigWaveDave

Richard Sharpe said
“This means that they will have to find a new crisis.
I suspect it will be: CO2 is causing the Anthropogenic Global Financial Crisis.”
Close. Anthropogenic CO2 vilification has caused Global Financial Crisis.

What those silly fools on the left just don’t understand is that their environmental concerns are a narcissistic luxury of the rich. A person who cannot feed, house, or cloth his family doesn’t give a damn about little reptiles in the oil fields of west Texas. If they (the Eco-Nazis) destroy the economy, the environment will become as bad as it was in the Communist countries. Wealth leads to a better environment.
Regards,
Steamboat Jack (Jon Jewett’s evil twin)

davidmhoffer

BigWaveDave says:
September 17, 2011 at 7:56 pm
Richard Sharpe said
“This means that they will have to find a new crisis.
I suspect it will be: CO2 is causing the Anthropogenic Global Financial Crisis.”
Close. Anthropogenic CO2 vilification has caused Global Financial Crisis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh, just wait for it! Can’t you just see the analysis pieces on the news?
“…since the government cancelled funding for AGW research, tens of thousands of people have been thrown out of work world wide. the community of XXXXX has been hard hit in particular. Over 25% of the jobs in XXXXX were directly or indirectly related to AGW research… Wannabe Ananchor reports from XXXXX…”
“Yes Tom, I’m here with Dr Worser Thanwethought, whose entire career has been in climate research. Now he’s trying to feed a family of four by ecking out a living as a taxi driver. Worser, this must be very hard on you and your family…”
“You have no idea Wannabe. Its like suddenly I’m not qualified for anything. Just today I got chewed out by a client who refused to pay the $86.00 fair. They claimed the meter said $22.00 and that’s all they owed me. What is it with these people? Are they professional taxi drivers? Do they have any training? Don’t they understand how specialized taxi meter reading is? Do they think they can just get in a cab and interpret the meter themselves? I’m a PhD professor for crying out loud, what right do they have to question me like that? And then they wanted to see the rate card. The rate card! That’s DATA! You can’t just give a rate card to someone with no training and let them calculate the fair themselves, that’s ridiculous. They’ll just try and prove my numbers wrong, so why should I let them have it? ”
“Well uhm……..uhm….. back to you Tom.”

Mark H.

Doug says:
September 17, 2011 at 6:07 pm
If a poll existed that showed that a majority of people believed that global warming was a significant problem, would that make the SCIENCE stronger?
You heathen, everyone knows it’s spelled “SCIENCE!”‘.
Get with the program, why don’t you?

Jerry Haney

Back in the Carter years when inflation, unemployement and interest rates were all in double digits, and the environmentalists were screaming about the next ice age that they said was coming soon, the saying among the working class was, “if you are poor, out of work, tired and hungry, eat an environmentalist”.

Rosy's dad

When the global warming fans started their campaign the US was riding high and perhaps it looked like price was no object. Now 20 or 30 years later the country has gone bust. Growth of one percent not six and unemployment officially over nine percent. This poll, while not at all surprising should send a message to the politicians that the time to bleed the public in the name of saving the planet has passed and won’t be back soon.

Fred Allen

Hopefully the poll will highlight to the editors of the NY Times that many readers aren’t swallowing the CAGW line that the NY Times and its relatives like to push…and the other readers don’t really care. Perhaps the NY Times might look at the evidence for and against CAGW with a more critical eye and not devote space to obviously crap alarmist press releases that support a policy argument rather than a scientific determination.
Did anyone see that pig just fly past my window?

R. Gates

For those who wish to use their view of the “science” to move the political football one way or another for their team, the results of such public polls must be encouraging or discouraging, depending in which team you’re on. For others, perhaps its all too depressing and sign of the sad state of America and the pending dark ages…

Owen

Canadians still believe in the global warming lies. They’ve swallowed the koolaid big time. Saint Suzuki has brainwashed the country into economic suicide. Canadians have trouble thinking for themselves and believe what the media tells them to believe. It’s all quite pathetic. The only bright spot is we have a Prime Minister who – while not having the balls to call global warming the hoax it is – behind the scenes at least scuttles the waco environmentalist plans to destroy the Canadian economy.

davidmhoffer

R. Gates says:
September 17, 2011 at 9:05 pm
For those who wish to use their view of the “science” to move the political football one way or another for their team>>>
You crack me up. Coming from you, that comment is positively hilarious.

Brandon Caswell

R. Gates…
Are you using quotes from another source or just only allowed to have one theme each day? Your football comment is very similar to your comment on another thread. Struck me as humourous.
As far as the dark ages, it will exist as soon as we allow a small group to control the masses. It doesn’t much matter if it is a group of self-important scientists, A religious council, A dictator or a “for the people” socialist party. When a small group demands obidience without question, thats the dark ages.

R. Gates

davidmhoffer says:
September 17, 2011 at 9:43 pm
R. Gates says:
September 17, 2011 at 9:05 pm
For those who wish to use their view of the “science” to move the political football one way or another for their team>>>
You crack me up. Coming from you, that comment is positively hilarious.
_____
Your comment would imply that you know anything about me, which you don’t, so your comment falls into the meaningless category.

R. Gates

Brandon Caswell says:
September 17, 2011 at 10:06 pm
R. Gates…
Are you using quotes from another source or just only allowed to have one theme each day? Your football comment is very similar to your comment on another thread. Struck me as humourous.
As far as the dark ages, it will exist as soon as we allow a small group to control the masses. It doesn’t much matter if it is a group of self-important scientists, A religious council, A dictator or a “for the people” socialist party. When a small group demands obidience without question, thats the dark ages.
_____
I would suggest that “dark ages” mean just that…an age in which the light of reason is dimmed by the darkness of anti-reason, whatever the source. No group is needed to “control the masses”, as they are quite capable of finding their own paths to dim their light of reason. The “dark ages” are not a political process, but a psychological and sociological one that may in turn be manifested in a politcal and/or religious environment.

ferdberple

“Rosy’s dad says:
September 17, 2011 at 8:56 pm
When the global warming fans started their campaign the US was riding high and perhaps it looked like price was no object. Now 20 or 30 years later the country has gone bust. ”
At that time the OPEC nations needed $$, so they started pumping more oil, and as they did the price fell, so they had to pump more oil, and the price feel even more, until it ended up at $12.50 a barrel in the Clinton years. Those were boom years. Then oil went up and as it did, the economy went into the tank.
Want to solve unemployment in the US, take steps to drive down energy prices. Want to reward loyal cronies while pretending to create jobs, announce a stimulus package.

rbateman

R. Gates says:
September 17, 2011 at 9:05 pm
That’s exactly what they said in the 70’s, the 50’s, the 30’s, the Teens, and the 1890’s.
Except we won’t be going just to the Dark Ages, we will be going to the Dark Ice Ages.
Back in the Little Ice Age, we actually had science.
Where did it all go wrong? #1, the Thermometer became widespread, then the Satellites, then the Computer Models, and finally the Anomalymometer was born. It’s like your car when something goes haywire and you can’t put your finger on the cause….and the mechanic at the garage promises to tear up the bill if you will please just go away.
42% of some fraction of the Other 14% are worried about global warming, and the science mechanics want Big Al and Co. to take thier Carbonic Phobia someplace else.

P.G. Sharrow

@R. Gates says:
September 17, 2011 at 10:18 pm
“Your comment would imply that you know anything about me, which you don’t, so your comment falls into the meaningless category.”
You have exposed yourself on this site for many months. You are judged by your words. pg

rbateman

The good news is that we have survived the Little Ice Age, the Modern Warming and cyclic hysteria that comes with each uptick/downtick in the climate ever since.
The bad news is that the hysteria cycles are outswinging the climactic uptick/downticks.