When hockey stick creator Dr. Michael Mann responds to valid questions about his science by blocking the person asking the questions as well as deleting them so that others can’t see them, is it really any surprise that distrust of climate scientists is on the rise?
From Stanford University
Support for climate change action drops, Stanford poll finds
The drop was concentrated among Americans who distrust climate scientists.
By Rob Jordan (Stanford)
The study found that, overall, the majority of Americans continue to support many specific government actions to mitigate effects of global warming.
Americans’ support for government action on global warming remains high but has dropped during the past two years, according to a new survey by Stanford researchers in collaboration with Ipsos Public Affairs. Political rhetoric and cooler-than-average weather appear to have influenced the shift, but economics doesn’t appear to have played a role.
The survey directed by Jon Krosnick, a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, shows that support for a range of policies intended to reduce future climate change dropped by an average of 5 percentage points per year between 2010 and 2012.
In a 2010 Stanford survey, more than three-quarters of respondents expressed support for mandating more efficient and less polluting cars, appliances, homes, offices and power plants. Nearly 90 percent of respondents favored federal tax breaks to spur companies to produce more electricity from water, wind and solar energy. On average, 72 percent of respondents supported government action on climate change in 2010. By 2012, that support had dropped to 62 percent.
The drop was concentrated among Americans who distrust climate scientists, even more so among such people who identify themselves as Republicans. Americans who do not trust climate science were especially aware of and influenced by recent shifts in world temperature, and 2011 was tied for the coolest of the last 11 years.
Krosnick pointed out that during the recent campaign, all but one Republican presidential candidate expressed doubt about global warming, and some urged no government action to address the issue. Rick Santorum described belief in climate change as a “pseudo-religion,” while Ron Paul called it a “hoax.” Mitt Romney, the apparent Republican nominee, has said, “I can tell you the right course for America with regard to energy policy is to focus on job creation and not global warming.”
The Stanford-Ipsos study found no evidence that the decline in public support for government action was concentrated among respondents who lived in states struggling the most economically.
The study found that, overall, the majority of Americans continue to support many specific government actions to mitigate global warming’s effect. However, most Americans remain opposed to consumer taxes intended to decrease public use of electricity and gasoline.
Rob Jordan is the communications writer for the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment.
Media Contact
Jon Krosnick, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment: krosnick@stanford.edu, (650) 725-3031
Rob Jordan, communications, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment: rjordan@stanford.edu, (650) 721-1881
===============================================================
Here’s the survey in PDF form: http://woods.stanford.edu/docs/surveys/GW-Policy-Trend-2010-2012-1.pdf
Separate the independents from the Democrats and you might find evidence of the lemming left that does not read or question anything about their green pogroms. Their information sources tend to be constricted compared to others and filled with predictable buzz words in place of facts or independent thinking or fact finding. In other words the term Yellow Dog Democrat applied to critical science issues and massive policy inertia is dangerous and costly, especially in the presence of a society already in slow decline mode. Call it Green Stagflation, right Jimmy?
Gail Combs has it right. The survey is loaded. It ASSUMES CO2 is Pollution. It isn’t.
And more…
The other point is ‘respondents’. We used to get the Nielson Poll of TV preferences. They would give you a quarter to fill it out. My folks gave it to the youngest kid in the house to ‘respond’. (That was me). Now as an adult, I respond to no polls. Selection bias…
Finally, the interpretation.
It looks to me like there are two cohorts. Those that have gotten a clue that the science is being cooked, and those that have not yet. The latter are flat lines. The former are every growing, so ever less interested in funding the boondoggles. That Republicans started off a bit more cluefull than the “Democrats and Independents” is interesting, but not particularly meaningful. One group was just more steeped in the Dogma and Propaganda and has further to go.
More about starting points than POV. More about rate of exposure to the issue vs cocoon of friends in the echo chamber of AGW.
So truth is slowly beating back the multi $Billion propaganda machine of UN / NGOs / Govt. Kinda nice to know that all it takes is some well placed questions…
I think if you take out the Democrats who, even if data is not supporting CAGW, will still go for the mitigation strategies and government intrusion anyway (“Let’s exaggerate the problem, or lie about it if necessary because we want to go for green tech and do away with evil fossil fuels” – remember Schneider’s justifying lying to the public to get the “desired” policy accepted.), then there is no essential difference between the majority of Americans. The curves simply indicate that ~5-10% of Americans are Post Normal in their science.