From the University of Michigan , recognition of a whole new crop of, ahem, deniers. I can hear Joe Romm’s head exploding from my house.
Generation X is surprisingly unconcerned about climate change
ANN ARBOR, Mich.—As the nation suffers through a summer of record-shattering heat, a University of Michigan report finds that Generation X is lukewarm about climate change—uninformed about the causes and unconcerned about the potential dangers.
“Most Generation Xers are surprisingly disengaged, dismissive or doubtful about whether global climate change is happening and they don’t spend much time worrying about it,” said Jon D. Miller, author of “The Generation X Report.”
The new report, the fourth in a continuing series, compares Gen X attitudes about climate change in 2009 and 2011, and describes the levels of concern Gen Xers have about different aspects of climate change, as well as their sources of information on the subject.
“We found a small but statistically significant decline between 2009 and 2011 in the level of attention and concern Generation X adults expressed about climate change,” Miller said. “In 2009, about 22 percent said they followed the issue of climate change very or moderately closely. In 2011, only 16 percent said they did so.”
Miller directs the Longitudinal Study of American Youth at the U-M Institute for Social Research. The study, funded by the National Science Foundation since 1986, now includes responses from approximately 4,000 Gen Xers—those born between 1961 and 1981, and now between 32 and 52 years of age.
Only about 5 percent of those surveyed in 2011 were alarmed about climate change, and another 18 percent said they were concerned about it. But 66 percent said they aren’t sure that global warming is happening, and about 10 percent said they don’t believe global warming is actually happening.
“This is an interesting and unexpected profile,” Miller said. “Few issues engage a solid majority of adults in our busy and pluralistic society, but the climate issue appears to attract fewer committed activists—on either side—than I would have expected.”
Because climate change is such a complex issue, education and scientific knowledge are important factors in explaining levels of concern, Miller said. Adults with more education are more likely to be alarmed and concerned about climate change, he found. And those who scored 90 or above on a 100-point Index of Civic Scientific Literacy also were significantly more likely to be alarmed or concerned than less knowledgeable adults. Still, 12 percent of those who were highly literate scientifically were either dismissive or doubtful about climate change, Miller found. He also found that partisan affiliations predicted attitudes, with nearly half of liberal Democrats alarmed or concerned compared with zero percent of conservative Republicans.
“There are clearly overlapping levels of concern among partisans of both political parties,” Miller said. “But for some individuals, partisan loyalties may be helpful in making sense of an otherwise complicated issue.”
Given the greater anticipated impact of climate change on future generations, Miller expected that the parents of minor children would be more concerned about the issue than young adults without minor children.
“Not so,” he said. “Generation X adults without minor children were slightly more alarmed about climate change than were parents. The difference is small, but it is in the opposite direction than we expected.”
Miller found that Gen X adults used a combination of information sources to obtain information on the complex issue of climate change, with talking to friends, co-workers and family members among the most common sources of information.
“Climate change is an extremely complex issue, and many Generation X adults do not see it as an immediate problem that they need to address,” Miller said.
“The results of this report suggest that better educated young adults are more likely to recognize the importance of the problem, but that there is a broad awareness of the issue even though many adults prefer to focus on more immediate issues—jobs and schools for their children—than the needs of the next generation. These results will not give great comfort to either those deeply concerned about climate issues or those who are dismissive of the issue.”
Established in 1949, the University of Michigan Institute for Social Research is the world’s largest academic social science survey and research organization, and a world leader in developing and applying social science methodology, and in educating researchers and students from around the world. ISR conducts some of the most widely cited studies in the nation, including the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan Surveys of Consumers, the American National Election Studies, the Monitoring the Future Study, the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, the Health and Retirement Study, the Columbia County Longitudinal Study and the National Survey of Black Americans. ISR researchers also collaborate with social scientists in more than 60 nations on the World Values Surveys and other projects, and the institute has established formal ties with universities in Poland, China and South Africa. ISR is also home to the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research, the world’s largest digital social science data archive. For more information, visit the ISR website at www.isr.umich.edu.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
LOL. Good to know!
Growing up I always lived places that were probably primary targets, so there would be no Day After for us.
Bob Rogers says:
July 19, 2012 at 7:19 am
[quote]Not only does GenX remember the global cooling scare, but we also grew up under the shadows of the threat of nuclear holocaust. Every single person I knew in high school believed there would be nuclear war between the USA and the USSR.[/quote]
I remember having to watch The Day After for an assignment. And when we bombed Libya (I was in 11th grade), everyone was so freaked out because we thought it was the start of WW III and we were going to get nuked. We were so worried that our history teacher had a round table discussion about it instead of whatever we were supposed to do that day. He did his best to calm us down, but people were still really upset and scared.
First there is nuclear summer…somewhat brief… 🙂
USAF handed this out as part of survival training:
SHELTER
1. Underground shelters covered with 3 ft. of earth are safest. Shelters offering best protection in order are:
a. Caves and tunnels.
b. Storm or storage cellars.
c. Culverts and basements.
d. Abandoned mud or stone buildings.
2. Hills, side of ditches, ravines and river banks are best if digging is necessary.
3. In flat, level areas such as snow— fields and sand, dig a foxhole or slit trench.
4. Keep all skin covered when exposed to fallout.
RADIATION INTENSITY HALF VALUE
1. Thickness indicated if placed between an individual and source will reduce radiation intensity by one-half.
Material Thickness
Iron/Steel .7 inch
Brick 2.0 inch
Concrete 2.2 inch
Dirt 3.3 inch
Ice 6.8 inch
Wood 8.8 inch
Snow 20.3 inch
INSIDE SHELTER
1. Keep warm, sleep and rest as much as possible.
2. Do not bring contaminated material into shelter such as leaves and grass.
3. Decontaminate clothing prior to entering shelter by dusting off garments. If Outer clothing isn’t necessary for warmth, bury under ft. of dirt at end of shelter.
4. Wipe face and exposed skin to remove dust and dirt. If possible, use soap and water, without leaving shelter. If not available, use a c1ean cloth or uncontaminated dirt obtained by scraping off top few inches of soil.
5. Fallout particles are in the form of white ash, normally. Remove ash as soon as possible.
6. If exposure necessary, make it as brief as possible and only for valid reasons.
7. Factors to be considered whether amount of radiation known or not:
a. Time of entry in shelter versus time of last explosion.
b. Distance from explosion.
c. Degree of protection provided by shelter.
TIMETABLE
1. Stay sheltered 4-6 days after last weapons delivery. A brief exposure not to exceed 30 minutes, to get water on the 3rd day is permissible.
2. On the 7th day, one exposure of not more than 30 minutes.
3. On the 8th day, one exposure of not more than one hour.
4. From the 9th day through the 12th day, exposure of 2-4 hours per day.
5. From the 13th day on, normal operation followed by rest in a protected shelter.
6. Times are conservative. If forced to move after one or two days, make sure exposure is no longer than absolutely necessary.
STAY CALM
USE YOUR HEAD
YOU WILL SURVIVE
I lived 50 miles from Three Mile Island when it came close to meltdown, didn’t even get the day off school. The Day After was pretty scary, but nuclear war was pretty scary. The science is pretty robust on this. 🙂
ANN ARBOR, Mich.—As the nation suffers through a summer of record-shattering heat, a University of Michigan report finds that Generation X is lukewarm about climate change—uninformed about the causes and unconcerned about the potential dangers.
Yeah, right. Anyone who does not agree with CAGW must be “uninformed”. There’s not other possible explaination is there?
Sounds like the ABC questionaire all over again. You say you’ve spent a lot of time informing youself, reading about and you are not convinced. They present a summary of your opinoins saying you are ignorant of the issues.
The real result here is that this age group old enough and wise enough to spot bullshit when they see it. They don’t necessarily need a degree in climate science to know it’s phoney. I was fortunate to go through an educational system that still aimed at education rather than training.
The younger generations have now been brainwashed from kindergarten upwards by schools, TV and other media with carbon footprint hysteria, on a daily basis.
Apparently Miller’s idea of “better educated” means “more like me”.
“Most Generation Xers are surprisingly disengaged, dismissive or doubtful about whether global climate change is happening and they don’t spend much time worrying about it,” said Jon D. Miller, author of “The Generation X Report.”
Where does this Gen Xer fit in? I’m engaged but dismissive, convinced of climate change but spend far more time worrying about alarmists destroying our way of life than about climate change. (And I would like more care in distinguishing between climate change, which is undeniably happening all the time and AGW, which is a nice theory currently lacking evidence).
Adults with more education are more likely to be alarmed and concerned about climate change, he found.
Adults with more education are also more likely to leave their children unvaccinated for fear of autism. Educated people are suckers for “alternative” theories.
Maybe we aren’t concerned because we have been through the whole thing so many times before. Fool me once….
Pull My Finger says:
July 19, 2012 at 9:28 am
“I lived 50 miles from Three Mile Island when it came close to meltdown, didn’t even get the day off school. The Day After was pretty scary, but nuclear war was pretty scary. The science is pretty robust on this. :-)”
TMI is another example to not trust the official story. Trust what is logical, reasonable, and “robust science.” Nuclear energy is good; if you live near it be smart. No reason to tailgate a stinking bus.
TMI just happened to occur less than two weeks after the China Syndrome movie was released so people freaked out far more than necessary. It was bad, but the reactors were so well built that very little radiation escaped. 30+ years later there is no discernable effect in the area. On the other hand, you build cheap crap like to Soviets you get Chernobyls rather than TMIs.
Well being a gen-xer, I agree I generally don’t care about climate change. That’s mostly because they spent allllll the time while I was in school trying to brain wash me, and while I was growing up my parents taught me to question everything. So I did.
I remember when the nuclear winter pushers predicted the soot from the oil fires in Kuwait would cool the atmosphere and lead to crop failures.
I also remember after the news media discovered El Nino/ La Nina every newsworthy weather event was linked to one or the other.
31% of Americans identify as Democrats, 27% as Republicans, and 40% Independent. link
So where does he address the largest group, the Independents? Also if less than 50% of democrats are concerned and 0% of the republicans that is 27% + 0.5*31% = 42.5% are not concerned about CAGW and that is before you address the largest group, the Independents.
The Rasmussen report has human influence at 40%, Planetary Trends at 44% and other at 6%. link “A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 52% of Likely Voters think there’s a conflict between economic growth and environment protection…” too. SO most people have got that idea straight. 57% Favor Use of ‘Fracking’ To Find More U.S. Oil and Gas
The thing that bothers me is the definition of a generation. I am a Boomer B (Boomers 1946-1964, A = 1946-1954, B=1955-1964) so the X works 1964-1992, not 1961-1981. Did they change the definition from 18 years to 20? Plus why is there such a large overlap?
Generations are distressingly arbitrary. I’ve seen definitions of Generation X that map anywhere from 65 to 85, 60 to 80, 70 to 90, 60 to 75, etc, etc, etc.
Basically, “generations” are just media-speak for “a bunch of people that we think should all be treated as having common habits, interests and characteristics”. i.e. BS.
Thank you johnbr. Boomers, though, should be fixed because the name came from the years in the US where there were 3 to 4 million births per year, something that never happened before 1946, and didn’t happen after 1964 until very recently.
I’d be interested if people could find a few other subjects where what is presented to the public is not what goes on.
Then you could correlate belief in AGW with belief in other things presented in a contentious manner by the media.
It’d be interesting to know if there is a general credulity group, a set of specific credulities and a group of healthily skeptical folks.
Often, being duped is a function of credulity. Particularly if you are duped by family members, people may be seeking healthy family relations in the big bad world. That tends to make them duped………
Eco fascist Greens whose indoctrination process accepts the impossibility of molding the older members of society see brainwashing the schoolchildren as a political investment for future ascension. Perhaps that’s what Mann means when he speaks of ‘priming’.
Sounds like the goal posts keep moving. Darn. /sarc
johnbr: July 19, 2012 at 4:58 am – brilliant – really enjoyed your observation.
I recall reading that other studies have found that the more facts people know about the climate, the less concerned they are about climate change. Wasn’t that a post on WUWT?
Focusing on the needs of the next generation is one of the most important reasons I am against alarmists destroying economies under the ruse of CAGW. And minor children? Nothing like a few teenagers running around the house to put global [not] warming in perspective…
This is another in a long line of “If you don’t agree with the dogma, you are illiterate” studies. I disagree with the man’s basic premise of what is scientific literacy. Climate change is a fact of life. Variability, cycles, solar activity, land use, etc all are impactors. The argument is over root causes and how much of each factor is involved with CO2 likely to have insignificant contributions. The science is not even fully defined at this point and overly educated social scientists are assigning it the status of dogma? Is he going to reissue his analysis when AGW is shown to be a crock of “that which makes things grow, the power of which is irresistible”? I doubt it, because this is not scientific, it is propaganda pure and simple.
http://climateaudit.org/2012/07/19/scotland-yard-interviewed/
clipe says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
July 19, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Oops wrong thread. Please ignore.
[Moderator’s Note: I know you are not being deceptive, but you also gotta know that we get really bent out of shape when cvommenters use more than one screen name. Just sayin’. -REP]
I’m a classic GenXer, born in early 70’s, was in college when Nirvana got famous and “grunge” became king. I was very liberally minded (still am, in many ways), always voted “anti-republican”, very concerned about the environment and GW. As Alex the Skeptic described, I went through the process of researching the facts, which of course eventually led me to WUWT. And I have come to conclusion that the science is definitely not settled. The problem is there is so much noise out there from both sides that it’s hard to get down to the real data.
clipe says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
July 19, 2012 at 2:57 pm
Oops wrong thread. Please ignore.
[Moderator’s Note: I know you are not being deceptive, but you also gotta know that we get really bent out of shape when cvommenters use more than one screen name. Just sayin’. -REP]
I’m posting as “clipe” but have to sign in to WordPress. If I forget to sign out after each comment…
Test
[REPLY: Yeah, just do the best you can, or some troll is gonna complain that clipe gets to use two screen names, so why do we care if he uses four or five…. -REP]
test
[REPLY: Fine. You are you. -REP]