47 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Tom O
February 26, 2013 5:22 pm

Regarding –
Michael says:
February 26, 2013 at 2:55 pm
“The surveys indicate some expectation for greater future concern about climate change. “The greater mentioning of climate change as a problem by those under 30 versus those 70 and older probably reflects generational effects and if so, should tend to increase levels of concern in the future,” Smith said.”
Smith Soesn’t understand that those over 70 have lived through a “climate cycle” while those under 30 have only seen the upward swing of the sine wave.
Micheal, and Derek as well, please remember this – the under 30 has had AGW drilled into their heads in school. Yes, there will be a greater concern later about climate change. What Smith misses, though, is that by the time these “under 30s” are 45 or over, the climate may have chilled to the point that they will be VERY interested in how to survive the next mini ice age.

DesertYote
February 26, 2013 5:31 pm

“In the surveys, respondents were asked the relative importance of eight issues: health care, education, crime, the environment, immigration, the economy, terrorism and poverty.”
###
Right out of the gate, this survey shows its Marxist intent by listing only the issues that they like to use as drivers of change.
Whats your favorite color?
In the surveys, respondents were asked the relative appeal of eight colors: pink, maroon, crimson, magenta, red, cinnabar, rust and rose.

Lil Fella from OZ
February 26, 2013 5:31 pm

Not having the facts to back up a theory will always eventually create problems.

MinB
February 26, 2013 6:11 pm

GingerZilla : I’m still pushing for my question to be included in these surveys; ‘what worries you more climate change or a sneezing chicken?’
Hey, avian flu is no joking matter! Climate change on the other hand…

jbird
February 26, 2013 6:11 pm

You can only cry wolf for so long before people start to ignore you.

Sean
February 26, 2013 6:18 pm

Wamron says:
February 26, 2013 at 2:58 pm
When ordinary people who have hitherto had no axe to grind in this debate are helpless to prevent the death of their elder relatives through hypothermia, then I think we may begin to see hope of change.
————————————–
Yes – I am hoping for that. We will finally get that social justice the progressives love to talk about, when the mobs of angry freezing peasants start dragging the green activists, crooked politicians and crony capitalist green energy crooks down the streets and hanging them from the non-functional street lights.

February 26, 2013 6:43 pm

So why is POTUS pushing an unpopular theme and where did all those freezing protesters come from in Washington? Odd that. Oh yeah. I get it. He wants people to accept a carbon tax to assuage their guilt over not caring. And to foist that tax on all imports. And tie that to foreign policy through John Kerry. Hmm. Wonder what THAT will do to the US economy? Boxer and Sanders have it all figured out. /sarc off.

Alex Heyworth
February 26, 2013 7:00 pm

Those of the population 70 and over have lived through so many scare stories that never came to pass that they apply a heavy discount to them. Remember the cold war, MAD and nuclear armageddon? The oil crisis of the early 70s and how we were all about to run out of oil? The Ice Age scare of the later 70s? Ehrlich’s prognostications of mineral shortages that never happened? The Club of Rome and how we were going to run out of food? SARS?
No doubt there will be more scare stories in the future, none of which will come to pass and which will lead to tomorrow’s 70 year olds being just as cynical. It’s called the benefit of experience.

Mark Bofill
February 26, 2013 7:01 pm

Sean says:

Yes – I am hoping for that. We will finally get that social justice the progressives love to talk about, when the mobs of angry freezing peasants start dragging the green activists, crooked politicians and crony capitalist green energy crooks down the streets and hanging them from the non-functional street lights.
——————————————
Insanely enough, there is evidence to suggest that the ‘angry freezing peasants’ will never get it. Read this over at Bishop Hill:
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2013/2/22/shameless.html
To quote Ron White, ‘You can’t fix stupid.’

Robber
February 26, 2013 7:16 pm

But did anyone survey those poor polar bears? 🙂

February 26, 2013 8:35 pm

Ironically, I am concerned about climate change, but I think cooling is much more likely than warming and would also have worse effects, especially considering our large population and its food requirements.

nc
February 26, 2013 8:43 pm

Well myself I am a bit concerned about climate change. Since all the real science seems to be pointing toward a cooling period, ya I am a bit concerned seeing I live at 53N Canada. Move over Floridians, another Canuck in his motorhome coming at ya.

Ted Swart
February 26, 2013 11:02 pm

Personally I am very concerned about the environment — particulate pollution, deep sea trawling, pouring plastics into the ocean and so on are in urgent need of attention. Unfortunately so much time. money and effort have been spent on the non-existent CO2 caused global warming issue that tacking really pollution has been badly neglected. I think the survey would have been more useful if it had completely separated out genuine — fact based — environmental concerns from global warming.

James Bull
February 27, 2013 1:02 am

Today in the Daily Telegraph Matt got the two least worried about subjects linked beautifully in his cartoon.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
What’s Kenji’s concern on this subject.
James Bull

Man Bearpig
February 27, 2013 1:11 am

Mark Bofill says:
February 26, 2013 at 2:11 pm
Clearly the IPCC must unleash ManBearPig at once to terrorize the countryside and make CAGW real to these slackers who don’t think this personally affects them! /sarc
——————
Eh ?
Hows this …. grrrrrrr come on you slackers oink oink or else the Arctic sea ice will melt and everything. You are really really naughty you bad people you.
Scared yet ?
/sarc

Steve Thatcher
February 27, 2013 2:26 am

Jon says:
February 26, 2013 at 3:44 pm
First rule of government: try to make people care about the things you can actually fix.
Second rule of government: if you can’t fix anything, pretend you can and make people care about that.
Third rule of government: don’t light any fuses that are shorter than your remaining term in office.
**********************************************************************************
I am so stealing that. Thankyou.
SteveT

February 27, 2013 3:25 am

Ted Swart:
Dang, you beat me to it.

GeeJam
February 27, 2013 3:27 am

The report states “Climate change was listed as the top environmental concern in Japan, West Germany, Canada, Britain and Scandinavia, where between 19 and 26 percent of the population indicated it was their top environmental issue.”
Whoever this survey went to (the questionnaire was probably completed by a lot of hoodwinked school pupils, left wing greenies, politicians, solar panel salesman, BBC employees, the Guardian’s editorial team, renewable energy company directors and Geoffrey Lean), the multiple-choice questionnaire should have included:
Q: “In your opinion, what is the primary reason for our planet to warm up to unprecedented levels?
Is it . . . .
A: The vast amount of man-made CO2 in the air – especially now that it’s increased by a whole 8% in the last 17 years – and that’s A LOT! and it’s all YOUR fault!
B: Look, it’s only warmed by half a degree since 1997 despite predictions of armageddon – so it’s probably just the weather or the sun or something like that.
C: Don’t be daft, it’s bloody freezing cold.
D: Er, China or India or Michael Mann I think.
If they answered option A, then someone needs to help them (yet again) by explaining in very simple layman’s terms that there is hardly any CO2 in the atmosphere and, therefore, CO2 cannot be the only factor which affects climate. This was brilliantly explained on Anthony’s WUWT by one of our regular commenters a few years back. It went something like this . . . .
“If the Earth’s atmosphere were represented by a large swimming pool filled with 3,200 gallons of water:
2,498 gallons would be Nitrogen (78.084% of atmosphere by volume),
670 gallons would be Oxygen (20.9476% of atmosphere by volume),
30 gallons would be Argon (0.934% of atmosphere by volume),
1 gallon would be a mixture of Methane (0.002%), Neon (0.001818%), Helium (0.000524%), Krypton (0.000114%), Hydrogen (0.00005%) and Xenon (0.0000087%)
and
1 gallon would be Carbon Dioxide (0.0314% of atmosphere by volume).
Of the SINGLE GALLON of Carbon Dioxide, SEVEN and THREE QUARTER PINTS are naturally occuring. This leaves a QUARTER OF A PINT (5 fluid ounces) which is man-made. If this amount was a small 5 fl.oz. bottle of Red Food Colouring and we poured it in to the other 3,200 gallons of water in the pool, how much will it affect the colour of the water? We’ll even give you a big whisk so that you can mix it up as much as you like. Go on, have a go.
Unfortunately, some people visualise that all the water in our swimming pool has now turned an intense shade of bright red – so a reason for taxing people (including CO2 emmisions based vehicle excise duty in the UK and new ‘carbon taxes’ being introduced throughout the world).
Meanwhile, the rest of us all huddle patiently around the edge of our swimming pool looking puzzled as we stare through the transparent depths of beautifully clear water to the bottom – and wondering why the world’s political figures continue to spend billions trying to prevent the screw cap coming off the top of a small 5 fl.oz bottle of red food colouring.
Thanks to the original person that came up with this excellent analogy and I hope this has been of help to some of the people who visit Anthony’s site simply looking for inspiration.
Footnote: If CO2 has increased by 8% since 1997, then it’s gone up to from 0.0314% of atmosphere by volume to 0.033912%, a difference of 0.002512%. Think of this in monetery terms instead of the swimming pool analogy. There’s £3,200 in the bank, £1 is CO2 and it’s gone up by 8p in the last 16 years.

michael hart
February 27, 2013 7:37 am

If a political movement attempts to crowd-source itself using a physical metric (temperature) that people actually experience everyday, then they shouldn’t be surprised that people don’t care when disaster keeps on not arriving as predicted.
Hence the switch to “weird weather”, and the hope that people are not old enough to remember the last time it happened.

DesertYote
February 27, 2013 7:59 am

Robber says:
February 26, 2013 at 7:16 pm
But did anyone survey those poor polar bears? 🙂
###
Yes but they haven’t reported back yet.

more soylent green!
February 27, 2013 9:30 am

Environmentalism is primarily a wealthy person’s concern. The greens have more green to spread around to the politicians and bureaucrats. As the squeaky wheel gets the grease, it’s no wonder the government is focused on climate change instead of employment or the economy.

March 5, 2013 8:32 am

Thanks, Anthony, this is a related media article about “green fatigue” with interesting graphics….http://www.science20.com/science_20/climate_change_runs_against_green_fatigue-105131
(Mod, could you please fix the title? From the University of Chiago = Chicago of course!)