From the PEW RESEARCH CENTER and the department of unintended consequences, comes this study that suggests the “March for Science” and the “People’s Climate March” didn’t really have any impact when it comes to public opinion. Personally, I think it hurt more than it helped, because as I demonstrated with pictures of the marchers and their signs, a lot of them came off looking like total buffoons.
Americans divided on whether recent science protests will benefit scientists’ causes
More Democrats and younger adults believe the science marches in April will lead to public support for science
WASHINGTON, D.C. (May 11, 2017) – Americans are split in their support of recent science marches and whether these events will make a difference, according to a new Pew Research Center survey. Some 44% of U.S. adults think the protests, marches, and demonstrations will boost public support for science, while an equal share (44%) believe the protests will make no difference and 7% believe the demonstrations will actually hurt the cause.
The representative survey of more than 1,000 U.S. adults finds consistent divides on this topic along political and generational lines. Fully 61% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents believe the marches will increase public support for science, while only 22% of Republicans and those who lean Republican say the same. Instead, 60% of these Republican supporters think the protests will make no difference, compared with just 32% of Democratic partisans who think that.
Younger adults, ages 18 to 29, are particularly likely to think the marches will increase public support for science (55%). Yet 54% of seniors, ages 65 and older, believe the recent science marches will make no difference to public support for science and just 29% say the marches will help.
“The data speak to the difficulties of making the case for science in the politically polarized environment,” said Cary Funk, lead author and associate director of research at Pew Research Center. “These survey findings show the American public is closely split in their views about the protesters’ goals — a sizeable share of the public is aligned with the protesters’ arguments but a roughly similar share are either opposed to the goals of the protesters or have yet to be convinced.”
These are some of the findings from a Pew Research Center survey conducted among a nationally representative sample of 1,012 adults, ages 18 or older from May 3-7, 2017. The margin of sampling error based on the full sample is plus or minus 3.7 percentage points.
###
Read the report: http://www.pewinternet.org/2017/05/11/americans-divided-on-whether-recent-science-protests-will-benefit-scientists-causes/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I have another idea for a placard — or better a chant to be shouted very loudly.
People of color are not color blind !!!
Eugene WR Gallun
The science that discovered that CO2 is a ghg just scratches the surface.
Delve deeper into the science and discover that thermalization and the Maxwell-Boltzmann velocity distribution explain why CO2 does not now, has never had and will never have a significant effect on climate. http://globalclimatedrivers2.blogspot.com
You can’t handle the truth? An excellent Globe and Mail environmental commentary gets universally ignored
It is so sad that such a great story, from scientists who are as much scientists as the IPCC’s legions, was so widely ignored. The fact that it was speaks volumes about the current quality of the discussion – there is none. Environmental discussions have become religious discussions. The ten percent that are driving the climate change debate are trying to get the other 90 to adopt their god, but the commandments are way harder than the old Christian ones. Sure, I can promise not to kill anyone, but give up flying? Outta my way, weirdo.
Sincere environmentalists will want to take note of articles like these, and because they are thoughtful they will start to move down the proper axis, from destruction to construction, rather than the false battleground between good and bad that is currently being promoted.
http://boereport.com/2017/05/15/you-cant-handle-the-truth-an-excellent-globe-and-mail-environmental-commentary-gets-universally-ignored/
http://www.pressreader.com/canada/the-globe-and-mail-ottawaquebec-edition/20170508/281861528416333
China Eyes U.S. Energy Next After $20 Billion `Belt, Road’ Deals
http://boereport.com/2017/05/14/china-eyes-u-s-energy-next-after-20-billion-belt-road-deals/
That 40% could imagine the marches help “science” is the saddest statement imaginable both about the obvious political motivations of the marchers and the post normal definition of “science” itself.
Well, carrying signs advertising the fact that they share every bit of Progressive Correctness in place of an opinion, unrelated to science or climate change, couldn’t have possibly helped their case for scientific objectivity.
These events were not marches for Science but for Anti-Science! There is nothing in AGW/CAGW/climate change that bears even the slightest resemblance to science.
PMK