WUWT and its large readership are often blamed for such results, in this case, we have nothing to do with it. Luboš Motl writes on his blog The Reference Frame
ABC1, an Australian TV channel, is planning to air…
I can change your mind about… climate
…on Thursday, April 26th, 8:30 pm. You may click the link above and check the trailer as well as the results of a poll about the attitudes concerning global warming.
When I was taking the screenshot, the “dismissive” group (including your humble correspondent) was covering 52% of the respondents. The number of alarmed respondents is more than twice smaller.
Seems like they’ll have an uphill battle changing those minds. Maybe the Australian Skeptical Science team of warm and fuzzy wombats can rally the charge for a turnaround. 😉
I dont think 52% dismissive is a poll that has gone horribly wrong and I dont think anyone here should have completed that survey. It would be much better to get 25% dismissive
then the follow up poll, ‘have you changed your mind then’ to get 52% dismissive
I started out 10 years ago as being in the “Concerned” category, which is why I wanted to know more about it. For the first couple of years, the more I asked, the less I was sure. I was asking anyone and everyone that I could find back then for papers and studies and hard data of what is actually happening, so I could confirm for myself what is happening, against what is projected to happen.
I found that I was getting two different sides of a debate which one side denied was even happening. The more I investigated, the more alarmed I became… Not at the risk of a catastrophic global climatic hazard, which raw data could not confirm, but at the tactics of the one side which constantly projected its faults and failings upon the other side, and still claimed the other side did not exist, and was irrelevant and tiny, when pushed into admitting that it did exist. I was assured that this other “non-existent” side, which was tiny and unrepresentative, was none-the-less the richest and most powerful enemy which was supported by global corporations and governments and the media. This meant that the scientific method could be dispensed with to provide evidence which supports the cause, and all counter evidence could be hidden, denied or dismissed as irrelevant or cherry picked by denialists. Climate Science ceased to be science and instead became a cause.
The more I approached the alarmist’s side with honest and friendly, yet sceptical, questions, the more I was convinced that I was not dealing with scientists in the honest pursuit of truth.
The only side that presented me with honest answers, AND the possible counter evidence was the sceptical side. They would say something like, [scientist and scientist et al 2006] state that blah blah blah which is suggestive of the possible effect of…. however, there is dispute because [scientist 2008] discovered something else whilst looking for something else. Whilst this may mean (A) it could also mean (B), my preference would be (A) because….
Alarmists would write with religious certainty and only provide “accepted” papers even if those papers had been debunked.
Then Climategate happened…. then 10:10 and exploding children. Then Plane stupid and polar bears falling from the sky. Then climategate 2… then fakegate and so on and so on. as all this non-scientific rhetoric and propaganda was peddled by the alarmists side in lieu of empirical scientifically valid evidence, I found myself moving through the Dismissive and Doubtful categories and now I am in a category which is not even listed. Downright Hostile. I do not like being lied to, manipulated and being charged for it all in the name of a political cause.
Now I am not Dismissive, or doubtful, but downright
“twice as small” is journalist speak for “I failed math.”
the podcast on the same topic in the sat edition of ABC (once was) Science show..
has the anna shiela refusing flatly to even listen to Marc Moreno as..
shes been told he lies..
gee really?
and the mann and the rest who keep adjusting things to suit or not providing any data for verification are not?
shes a classic dumb ***greentard.
we do have em here,
the drop bears are slipping on the job:-(
As this poll can apparently be taken as often as one wants, I can’t imagine the reason why they put it on. Statistically it means exactly nothing.
Unless it is a very elaborate manipulation with the target to have watermelon clones doing the poll over and over AFTER the programm took place.
To show that if 60% were dismissive BEFORE the program, it was a matter of ignorance (and the high quality of the program of course) BECAUSE there were only 25% of dismissive AFTER the program.
This is one rational explanation I can find. The second would be that they are dumb like rocks.
First action of Tony Abbott on taking government:bring the Abc AFirmly to heel. Heck get rid of the biased reporting if they keep doing it and save some money in the process.
Ken Hall @ur momisugly 3.30am:
Hear Hear on not liking being lied to.
I have an Aussie postcode but do not intend to take part in this poll at present. I daresay I’d be dismissed as ‘dismissive’!
Actually, I am not so much Dismissive or Downright Hostile as Flamingly Angry.
The ABC survey appears to be based on the recent American Meteorological Society survey (findings published on February 12, 2012). Links:
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/changeyourmind/survey/
http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/images/files/AMS_CICCC_Survey_Preliminary_Findings-Final.pdf
For example, the definitions of “global warming” are almost exactly the same: “the term “Global warming refers to the idea [“premise” according to the AMS] that the world’s average temperature has been increasing over the past 150 years, may be increasing more in the future, and that the world’s climate may change as a result”. Note in particular the completely unnecessary (and prejudicial) words added after “the past 150 years” – which IMO would probably deter some sceptics from completing the polls. The early questions of the ABC poll follow the AMS poll closely but are considerably less nuanced.
BTW, although far from perfect, the AMS probably the best-designed global warming poll there’s been so far – and, with 1862 respondents, is probably a good reflection of opinion. And, despite that off-putting GW definition, an analysis of the responses to questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 shows that only a minority of respondents (probably less than 20%) is really worried about anthropogenic global warming. (I’ll post that analysis if anyone’s interested.)
So I managed to get an Alarmed by selecting all the extremist answers and that also got me an invitation to appear on the program.. I used the postcode of my French house which is 6 numbers starting with the Department code. If I do the survey again after the program and choose all the opposite answers I will be their greatest success as they will have changed my mind(aka poll result) about climate. Shame they are not offering expenses to go on the program, I have some mates there and the air fare from Latvia is crippling [ :)]
“Survey
If you would like to attend the Q&A special climate discussion in Sydney that follows this documentary, please click here
Your profile is:
Alarmed
The Alarmed are the group most convinced that global warming is happening. Global warming is very important to you and you are very worried about it. You have thought a lot about the issue, believe you are well informed about the causes, consequences, and potential solutions, and are highly unlikely to change your mind. You believe there is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening, and overwhelmingly believe that human activities are the primary cause. Compared to the other five groups, you are the most likely to view it as a threat to you personally and to future generations, and as already harming people now rather than in the distant future.
Read about other types: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, Dismissive.
Fun Fun Fun.
I don’t think it’s working – Dismissive has been sitting on 52% all day (where its been sitting for over a week now). That percentage should’ve shifted with the amount of activity in the last 12 hours or so. Maybe not recognizing the foreign URLs?
Disko Troop @ur momisugly 4.39am:
What fun, and how telling that you have been invited to appear on the programme! It sounds like the way the BBC seem to load their audiences for “Questiontime” over here in theUK.
The survey is RIGGED. Not only by biases questions and predefining arbitrarily that warming will continue for 100 years but by misrepresenting what you enter.
My responses won entry as a “Doubtful”. Despite my entering, truthfully, that I have thought about it a lot and am well informed , they turn round and tell me I’m “informed only a little”.
Clearly the categories were written before the survey started and anyone who doubts global warming is important is A PRIORI ill-informed REGARDLESS of what they reply to the survey questions !!
>>
The Doubtful say they don’t know whether global warming is happening or not. You also say the issue is not personally important to you and you are not worried about it. ***You have thought only a little about global warming, and are informed only a little about the causes, consequences, and potential solutions, yet say that you are somewhat unlikely to change your mind about the issue***. Most of the Doubtful believe there is a lot of disagreement among scientists over whether global warming is happening and believe that if global warming is happening, natural changes in the environment are the primary cause. A majority of the Doubtful say global warming will harm them personally or future generations only a little or not at all, although some simply say they don’t know. Finally, you believe global warming will not start harming people for at least 100 years.
>>
Gilliard blatantly lied about her carbon tax, it looks like Australian state owned TV is not better.
Still, does not look like the survey is showing what they wanted, despite being rigged from the outset.
Apparently the number of votes has gone down quite a bit. At the moment just 7621 votes counted….
I selected that climate change is occurring, and that man is not the cause. I was lumped as a dismissive that didn’t believe climate change was happening. What a crock. I sent the developers a nasty email 🙂
At the end of the programe (the purpose of which is to CHANGE PEOPLES MINDS) I’d run a new poll (participants will hopefully be pinko leftard commo ABC watchers, GetUp members, Pravda on the Yarra readers etc) the poll should show a much higher percentage ‘alarmed’ and bingo, we’ve changed peoples minds.
So for those of you who hurriedly took the poll and ended up being ‘dismissive’ etc, you’ve fallen for the ABC Commie propaganda trap. I suggest you go back and ‘alarm’ yourselves now, then be ‘dismissive’ after the show.
So I have don just that, I will go back later and change it to “Dismissive” Please do the same as me.
Alarmed
The Alarmed are the group most convinced that global warming is happening. Global warming is very important to you and you are very worried about it. You have thought a lot about the issue, believe you are well informed about the causes, consequences, and potential solutions, and are highly unlikely to change your mind. You believe there is a scientific consensus that global warming is happening, and overwhelmingly believe that human activities are the primary cause. Compared to the other five groups, you are the most likely to view it as a threat to you personally and to future generations, and as already harming people now rather than in the distant future.
Read about other types: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, Dismissive.
You fall in the 26% of Australians, who’ve taken this ‘climate challenge’ who are Alarmed by global warming.
Warmists! Aggggggggg.
Btw, for outsiders, in case you need a postcode for the last page of the survey, the Australian Parliament one is ACT 2600 ;0))
I have an opinion question that they’d never dare run: “Can either public or scientific consensus make one iota of difference in regard to any scientific truth?” Let’s vote on which way the earth rotates or the atomic weight of hydrogen. ‘Mob rule’ mentality is infecting scientific principle; ABC is Typhoid Mary.
“Dismissive” here. Having taken a number of such poorly-worded, biased, push-polls, I’ve learned how to finesse them. Yeah, I’m a denier
And proud of it.
I’m sure they are grouping these as Alarmed, concerned, and cautious…
…and Dismissive, doubtful, and disengaged
Which are not the same…………..
Nick Minchin is an older man – personifying a father/grandfather figure – it doesn’t look good for him to do battle with a sweet, cherub-faced, well-meaning, innocent, young female. An ABC set-up.
Values at the moment:
Dismissive: 51% 9545
Alarmed: 26% 4915
Concerned: 9% 1728
Doubtful: 9% 1672
Cautious: 3% 586
Disengaged: 1% 124
No need to worry, as 1% of the votes have disappeared: total is only 99%!!!
LOL
I would encourage people to take the quiz and see how they rate. I took it, and although I am a true “denier” the poll came up with a designation for me as “doubtful”. From the answers I gave, I don’t see how this is possible. Bruce, you must have truly finessed this poll to get a “dismissive” rating.
I gave honest answers and I truly believe that the man-made warming theory is a corruption of science. I believe the “doubtful” rating given to me is indicative of the corruption.
As far as people actually changing their minds at this late stage, it ain’t gonna happen, at least not in the direction they’d like. I believe their last “success” in alarming people about climate change was Al Gores An Incovenient
TruthFairy Tale. Unfortunately for them, people with at least half a brain discovered it was all a bunch of hooey, dressed up as science. Their latest gambit, the “connect the dots” campaign is laughable, without even the slightest pretense of science, aimed, I guess at the truly brainless, or those willing to set aside reason, logic, and truth for a Belief system offering them relief from the guilt of living and the warm fuzzy feeling of helping “save the planet”.Of course I’m alarmed! Without the sun’s radiant energy, what on earth would this planet’s temperature be? (no pun intended)
And who needs a poll to tell you that?