Climate Change … Who Cares?

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

Thanks to the blog of the irrepressible Hilary Ostrov, a long-time WUWT commenter, I found out about a poll gone either horribly wrong or totally predictably depending on your point of view. It’s a global poll done by the United Nations, with over six million responses from all over the planet, and guess what?

UN global poll

The revealed truth is that of the sixteen choices given to people regarding what they think are the important issues in their lives, climate change is dead last. Not only that, but in every sub-category, by age, by sex, by education, by country grouping, it’s right down at the bottom of the list. NOBODY thinks it’s important.

Now, people are always saying how the US is some kind of outlier in this regard, because polls in the US always put climate change down at the bottom, whereas polls in Europe generally rate it somewhat higher. But this is a global poll, with people chiming in from all over the planet. The top fifteen countries, in order of the number of people voting, were Mexico, Nigeria, India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Yemen, Philippines, Thailand, Cameroon, United States, Ghana, Rwanda, Brazil, Jordan, and Morocco … so this appears to be truly representative of the world, which is mostly non-industrialized nations.

So the next time someone tries to claim that climate change is “the most important challenge facing the world” … point them to the website of the study, and gently inform them that the rest of the world doesn’t buy that kind of alarmist hogwash for one minute. People are not as stupid as their leaders think, folks know what’s important and what’s trivial in their lives, and trying to control the climate is definitely in the latter group.

The poll will be open until 2015, so you can register your own priorities …

My regards to everyone, I’m off for a staff Christmas dinner with the workmates of the gorgeous ex-fiancee, life is good.

w.

De Costumbre: Please have the courtesy to QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS of whatever you might disagree with. This lets us all understand the exact nature of your objection.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

199 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
BernardP
December 5, 2014 7:08 pm

I have answered this poll… twice. It appears when one leaves certain news websites. The worst thing for climate change is that this item appears on top of the choices, so people are incited to more readily click it.
It’s even more telling that climate change finishes last despite being listed at the top.

December 5, 2014 7:11 pm

The idea of CAGW is important to me because these idiots want to spend our hard earned tax dollars on it. It would be interesting to see how important ending the scam of CAGW is to people.

milodonharlani
December 5, 2014 7:28 pm

Showing yet again that the people are smarter than their would be masters, except when they do the elite’s bidding, as in voting for Obama twice. Not that the alternatives were attractive.
I learned tonight that the State of Oregon has discontinued the long-running, well-sited reporting station at Seneca. It usually showed the lowest temps in the state & sometimes even the nation.
I expect that this is part of a concerted campaign to rid the “record” of good but cold sites. That would be the flip side of emplacing an unnecessary new site in Death Valley, opposite a south-facing cliff, in hopes of “recording” a new US high, although the current, long-standing Death Valley station is among the best sited & most long-lasting locations in the real instrumental record.
I also observe more & more that NOAA stations are recording temperatures systematically higher than those of private weather stations nearby. The corruption is leaking down to ever lower levels.
Only change at the top can stop the rot.

ferdberple
Reply to  milodonharlani
December 6, 2014 9:30 am

as in voting for Obama twice. Not that the alternatives were attractive.
==============
true democracy needs 1 more name to be added to every ballot.
NONE OF THE ABOVE.
If NONE OF THE ABOVE gets a majority, all the candidates on the ballot are disqualified from running again and a new slate of candidates must be presented.
people could actually do this by changing their names legally to:
None of The Above Zzzzz
They on the ballot they would appear alphabetically at the bottom as:
Zzzzz, None of The Above
I expect Zzzzz, None of The Above would have won the last presidential election hands down

December 5, 2014 7:31 pm

My wife, who is out of town called me to let me know that CNN is running a crawl about 2014 being the warmest year ever and that Antarctica has lost the most ice ever this year.
I told her she must be mistaken about the Antarctic ice because it’s been growing but she insisted. I looked around and found this:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/12/141204-antarctic-ice-melt-sea-level-climate-environment-science/
I didn’t see/read the crawl but apparently somebody(s) at CNN decided to combine this study and the warmest year ever claim to broadcast a very misleading and alarming message about Antarctica ice melting.
It really ticks me off when the biased media intentionally uses opportunities to put an alarmist, one sided and distorted spin on facts.
If warming is accelerating and the Antarctic is seeing record ice lost/melting, then sea level increases would also be accelerating higher. I have no problem accepting that some of the surface based thermometers measured the warmest year ever……….by a very tiny amount.
That small amount of warming is beneficial, as is all of the increasing CO2 to life on this planet.
If you use the satellite measurements of temperature, which are more accurate and cover much more area, then we don’t even have that tiny bit of warming over the last 16 years or so.

DirkH
Reply to  Mike Maguire
December 6, 2014 5:09 am

“It really ticks me off when the biased media intentionally uses opportunities to put an alarmist, one sided and distorted spin on facts.”
The only annoying thing about the media is how slowly they die.

SAMURAI
December 5, 2014 7:37 pm

What’s ironic is that the #16th concern (Gloooobal Waaaarming), directly or indirectly has a negative impacts on ALL the other 15 concerns:
#1 Education: Depriving 3rd World countries from cheap fossil fuel energy prevents economic growth, keeping them impoverished and preventing development of primary/secondary school expansion.
#2 Better Healthcare: The $trillions wasted on CAGW policies, reduces funds available for healthcare, especially in developing countries.
#3 Better Job Opportunities: Depriving countries of cheap fossil fuels increases energy costs, which makes goods and services uncompetitive with devastating economic consequences. For every 1 “green job” created, 2 other jobs are destroyed. Depriving impoverished countries from fossil fuels will devastate their economies and job opportunities.
#4 Honest and Responsive Governments: LOL!!! enough said.. Governments created this CAGW scam and couldn’t care less that it’s already been effectively disconfirmed.
#5 Affordable Nutritious Food: Ironically, increasing CO2 to 560ppm will increase crop yields 50%. Depriving 3rd World countries of fossil fuels limits agricultural development. Higher fossil fuel costs increases food prices. Ethanol corn subsidies alone are projected to kill 2 million poor/year from increased food prices.
#6 Crime and Violence: Poverty is one of the major contributing factors to crime/violence. The more detrimental CAGW policies destroy world economies, the more crime and violence can be expected.
# 7 Access to clean water and sanitation: The weaker economies become from wasteful CAGW policies, the less funds available for infrastructure projects.
#8 Support for people that can’t work: The weaker economies become, the less funds available for the indigent.
#9 Equality between Men and Women– A lot of the inequality is caused by poverty. CAGW policies exacerbate poverty.
#10 Better Roads and transport: The goal of the CAGW scam is to deprived people of cheap fossil fuels for their cars. Impoverished countries don’t have funds available to build infrastructure and industrialized countries have less to maintain the infrastructure that exists.
#11 Reliable Energy– The CAGW scam wishes to deprive impoverished people access to cheap fossil fuels. Wind and solar energy are expensive and unreliable forms of energy in developed countries. Electrical grids are precariously close to failure due to CAGW policies.
#12 Freedom from discrimination/persecution: Much discrimination arises from the effects of poverty. The more CAGW policies destroy economies, the more discrimination will occur.
#13 Political Freedom: CAGW is based on command/control government tyranny. Governments want to deprive our freedom to choose our energy sources and steal $trillions from taxpayers to fund unneeded CAGW initiatives. The more economic instability, the more government instability there is, and the more tyrannical governments become.
#14 Protecting forest, rivers and oceans: Increasing CO2 to 560ppm will increase forest growth 50%, leading to less soil erosion, cleaner rivers and cleaner oceans. Also, blaming CO2 on coral damage hides the real causes of coral damage (loss of parrotfish; thanks for your education on this Willis!)
#15) Phone and Internet access- Devastating CAGW policies hurt economies and prevent available funds for all infrastructure development.
Historians will be appalled at how long the CAGW scam lasted and the social and economic consequences the CAGW policies had on people’s lives for absolutely no reason whatsoever.
How long will people allow this CAGW travesty to continue?

stan stendera
Reply to  SAMURAI
December 5, 2014 8:15 pm

Welcome to WUWT Samurai. I don’t recall ever seeing your comment here before and I am a regular WUWT reader and occasional commenter. Again, welcome..

jolly farmer
Reply to  SAMURAI
December 5, 2014 11:03 pm

Hear hear!
Let’s not forget that warming would in itself be a good thing. We are naked apes, covered in sweat glands. For cold climates, we need animal skins or plant/fossil-fuel based fibres, and energy sources to warm our dwellings.
I don’t expect warming, but it would be great if it happened.

ferdberple
Reply to  SAMURAI
December 6, 2014 9:38 am

#10 Better Roads and transport:
===========
by pricing fuel higher via CO2 taxes, less people will be able to afford to drive, reducing road congestion.
the rich in will be able to get where they want without having to line up in traffic behind a bunch of “common” people.
the beauty of the plan is that if you are truly rich, your fuel costs are likely tax deductible through a business. the higher the carbon taxes, the more the common people end up paying for your fuel. while at the same time, less of them can afford to drive. truly a win-win. less congestion, more deductions.

December 5, 2014 7:46 pm

Reblogged this on longbanchan and commented:
…what happened to a degree or two points of temperature degree increasing?

Goldie
December 5, 2014 7:51 pm

Seems about right. First three are about taking care of “me” and then number four says it all. Quite possibly the expressed need for an honest and responsive Government is a statement that that is precisely what most people are not getting. Hey United Nations! We’d like you to be honest and responsive! Hey Australian Governments we’d like you to be honest and responsive. I think we’ve got more chance of reducing carbon emissions than we do of actually getting honest and responsive Governments. Though quite possibly we might gain some real traction on climate change management if we did have honest and responsive politicians.

Keith Minto
December 5, 2014 8:09 pm

It is interesting that the lack of interest in “Action on Climate Change” is pronounced in the younger age group, those under 15 years and those 16-30, where you assume the opposite.
http://data.myworld2015.org/

Anne Ominous
Reply to  Keith Minto
December 6, 2014 2:30 pm

It is certainly interesting, but what it is NOT is surprising.
Why should it be a concern for them? It hasn’t warmed during their entire lives.

DirkH
Reply to  Anne Ominous
December 7, 2014 5:12 am

It points to the abysmal failure of the 1968 wannabe revolutionaries – who all became teachers – to brainwash the next generations. It’s a wonderful sign.

ossqss
December 5, 2014 8:22 pm

This has to be one of 2014 biggest “Oh ThePain” climate science moments. There have been many. Perhaps worthy of a poll?
http://youtu.be/rKwwcCpa2Ag

December 5, 2014 8:27 pm

You can vote here, http://vote.myworld2015.org/

December 5, 2014 9:13 pm

Rotate the graph by -90 and then make a mirror image and voilà, CAGW!

Harold
Reply to  vuurklip
December 6, 2014 11:46 am

Like this?

Reply to  Harold
December 7, 2014 7:27 am

Xacly!

December 5, 2014 9:44 pm

Very Interesting Willis, thanks!
I always get curious about vote/poll totals so out of whack with reality; statistics be da–ed, there is no accurate representation when polls are ‘targeted’. Considering how targeted this poll must’ve been, climate change must be a bottom choice for a very long list.
6.65 million votes out of, say a conservative world population of 7.2 billion for a whopping 0.0927% of total population voting.
Votes by country are also quite interesting.
Mexico cast 23% of the votes. Mexico has approximately 1.7% of the world’s population.
Nigeria cast 18.6% of the votes. Nigeria has approximately 2.5% of the world’s population.
India cast 13.4% of the votes. India does have a substantial 17.23% of the world’s population.
Pakistan cast 10.5% of the votes. Pakistan has approximately 2.7% of the world’s population.
Sri Lanka cast 10% of the votes. Sri Lanka has approximately 0.3% of the world’s population.
Yemen cast 3.3% of the votes. Yemen has approximately 0.36% of the world’s population.
Philippines cast 1.2% of the votes. Philippines has approximately 1.5% of the world’s population making their proportional votes oddly right.
United States of America cast a whopping 0.9% of the votes. USA has approximately 4.44% of the world’s population.
Canada is in for 0.2% of the votes. Canada has approximately 0.49% of the world’s population.
United Kingdom managed to vote for 0.5% of the votes. United Kingdom has approximately 0.89% of the world’s population.
Australia is in for 0.3% of the votes. Australia has approximately 0.31% of the world’s population.
As a quick comparison ‘Democratic Republic of the Congo’ also cast 0.3% and their population is roughly 0.06% of the world’s population.
China also cast approximately 0.3% of the votes. China’s share of the world’s population is approximately 18.9%.
Checking down further on the poll results page one comes across ‘Partners’ listing votes by partners.
The top five listed partners are:
‘Instituto de la Juventud del DF’ (Mexico) cast 1,467,937 votes for 22.06% of the total.
‘MDGs Nigeria’ cast 1,197,931 votes for 18%. Their website has a poll at the bottom where MDG’s help is rated; Yes at zero %, No at 100%.
‘Youth Revolution Clan’ (Pakistan) cast 658,647 votes for 9.9%.
‘Action for Pune Development’ (Pune City, India) cast 611,020 votes for 9%.
‘Sri Lanka Youth’ cast 299,671 votes for 4.5%.
It is a very long list of Partners, heavy on the youth organizations, but includes some surprises; Coca Cola, Microsoft, Girl Scouts of USA (27 votes) and so on.
Whatever, the poll is not random nor does it seek a broad diversity. As Willis points out so well, even with a targeted supposedly motivated poll participation ‘Action on climate change’ ranks darn low as a choice.

Leigh
Reply to  ATheoK
December 6, 2014 1:55 am

And still socialist left bent governments around the world funnel money into the UN.
On behalf of their peoples in a fraudulent exercise in saving the world.
From exactly what still eludes so many of us sane people.

Truthseeker
Reply to  ATheoK
December 6, 2014 3:14 am

I have also determined that you can vote as many times as you want. So people, vote early, vote often.

Tom Harley
December 5, 2014 10:09 pm

I just wish it would warm some more … and I live in the tropics.

December 5, 2014 10:17 pm

Polls, schmoles.
They (the Progressive Left Elitists) really don’t give a damn about what the People think is important or their opinions. A UN poll of the unwashed masses is a meaningless exercise for the elitists.
As Dr. Gruber explained, the Progressive Elitists know what is best for everyone else and they will do it regardless. Such is why they must be marginalized to irrelevance. Real democracy from an informed electorate is an existential threat to Progressives.

Steve Oregon
December 5, 2014 10:20 pm

This is another reason for Obama to take action. Since the people of the world won’t take action he must!

jorgekafkazar
December 5, 2014 10:24 pm

Well, of course, they’ll just think up a bunch of lies about how climate change will keep your education from sticking to your neurons, yatta-yatta, and so on.

tom0mason
December 5, 2014 10:43 pm

I’m sure Cook et al could fix those poll results over a coffee-break.
It’s a pity they didn’t ask if anyone is concerned that the Arctic could be ice-free. In my book it is not a concern, and never has been.
Who gives a darn if the NorthPole has ice or not?

jolly farmer
Reply to  tom0mason
December 5, 2014 11:14 pm

The ice for my gin and tonics comes from the freezer, not the arctic.
If polar bears have fewer seals to prey upon, due to ice conditions, they can always try to catch homo sapiens.
Good job the Inuit (and other indigenous) have guns.

tom0mason
Reply to  jolly farmer
December 5, 2014 11:47 pm

Nature has ways of fixing things.
For the polar bears, or seals, or Arctic foxes, or even the Inuit people, if it is their time for extinction then so be it. It would indicate nothing more than ‘nature’ is quite brutal – evolutionary cycles especially so.
For some humans though this seems very ‘unfair’, and somehow we all must waste our time and money ‘protecting’ these things.
You probably guessed, I do not subscribe to this stasis philosophy of nature.

December 5, 2014 11:28 pm

I’ve seen this UN list before. Where is affordable housing on the list?

Chris Schoneveld
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 6, 2014 3:02 am

Season’s Greetings is another generic one

Grey Lensman
Reply to  Willis Eschenbach
December 6, 2014 10:03 am

Merry Christmas

Hoplite
December 5, 2014 11:55 pm

Not sure if this has been discussed in WUWT before now.
Anyone following Aaron Sorkin’s newish TV series ‘The Newsroom’? I think it is alright but not great. He’s a super liberal type so I would guess he’s all into the CAGW meme. In episodes 2 and 3 of the latest series 3 there’s a story line about one of the journalists getting an embargoed report from a VP at the EPA who eventually is persuaded to go on air to be interviewed by the anchor Will McAvoy. His basic line is all hope is lost as we’ve passed 400ppm and there’s absolutely nothing we can do about it. Despite repeated questioning and prompting about things that could be done to save the planet he sticks resolutely to the line that we’re done for. It’s hard to read the reaction of the other characters – it’s either horror at the impending doom or horror at this fellow going off the rails. I find it hard to read it and know for sure – I need an American to translate it for me! Could this be a super liberal like Sorkin getting tired of the constant doom and gloom scenarios that never materialise and appear to be gross exaggerations?

hunter
Reply to  Hoplite
December 6, 2014 3:58 am

That show is the best way to present to the world the preachy, arrogant, badly conceived, poorly acted, ignorantly hateful, perspective of hard core lefty hacks. I have sat through enough of it to know to never waste more time on its unoriginal pretense.

Hoplite
Reply to  hunter
December 6, 2014 5:14 am

I know and it annoys me for those reasons too – however the anchor McAvoy is portrayed as a soft right republican who gives it between the eyes to the lefties on occasions.
I was very interested in the story line about the EPA report and 400ppm and expected it to be the usual preachy lib/left stuff and then all of a sudden it appeared to me that the program was dissing the EPA and all the doomsayer glooms that inhabit it. I was just wondering if I had got the right take on it and thought it was significant that a hard left script writer like Sorkin was mocking the doomsday predictions.

JJM Gommers
December 6, 2014 12:09 am

They forgot to adjust the data, putting it upside down than GC is first

toorightmate
December 6, 2014 12:19 am

Mr Oh Bummer’s head honchos believe the people in the USA are too dumb to understand Obamacare.
They probably also believe the people from the other countries listed are also dumb.

Chip Javert
Reply to  toorightmate
December 6, 2014 4:40 pm

Apparently Mr Oh Bummer’s head honchos are still too dumb to understand Obamacare has never has above a 50% public approval rating…and that zero Republican congressional legislators voted for it.
It’s generally not too difficult to identify the demographic that actually believes in this cowpie (Gruber is one of them).

gh
December 6, 2014 12:21 am

Australia has climate change at 7th. I feel ashamed. So many gullible fools. I guess the more warmist media there is, the higher climate gets voted. I wonder how many warmist sites linked to the poll?

December 6, 2014 12:56 am

Curious. The age ranges all put “Action on Climate Change” last.
Except for 46-60 (3rd from last)..
And 60+ (2nd from last).
Maybe watching TV inclines you to believe it’s a problem?
Or maybe kids just don’t believe their school curricula.

A C Osborn
Reply to  MCourtney
December 6, 2014 4:57 am

I am also surprised by this being a 60+, having lived through plenty of “Climate Change” I am not the slightest bit bothered.

DirkH
Reply to  A C Osborn
December 6, 2014 5:05 am

A typical 1968 culturally Marxist student revoluzzer, being say 20 at the time, would now be 66.

Gerard
December 6, 2014 1:21 am

I am not so sure our political leaders think we are stupid – they know we are more interested in education, healthcare, jobs, travel, food, safety, political stability than climate change. But they also know many of their voters are climate change hypocrites who say their leaders should cut fossil fuel usage then burn JetA1 fuel to fly overseas for a holiday.
That is why our politicians SAY they want action at climate change conferences to please the hypocrites then immediately forget what they said and turn to the serious problems people are really worried about,