A Dip in Climate Change Concerns Among Young Adults

The recent Monmouth University Poll reveals a noticeable shift in the American public’s perception of climate change, highlighting a reduction in both the perceived urgency of the issue and support for governmental action. This decline in concern, especially among younger adults, prompts a critical examination of what might be influencing these trends and the potential implications for climate policy.

Decline in Perceived Urgency Among Younger Adults

One of the more striking findings from the Monmouth Poll is the pronounced drop in urgency about climate change among younger adults. Previously seen as the most concerned demographic, their dwindling anxiety could signal a significant shift in future public and political engagement on environmental issues.

“Most Americans continue to acknowledge the existence of climate change, but the number who see this as a very serious problem has fallen below half. Support for government action to reduce activities that impact the climate has dipped below 6 in 10 for the first time since Monmouth began polling this topic nearly a decade ago,”

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_050624/

reports the Monmouth University Polling Institute.

The data suggests that while 73% of Americans still acknowledge climate change, the conviction that this constitutes a serious problem warranting immediate action has notably diminished. In 2021, 56% of Americans viewed climate change as a very serious issue, a figure that has now declined to 46%. This decline is mirrored in the support for government action, which has also decreased across the board.

Partisan Differences and Shifting Opinions

The poll outlines a persistent partisan divide in beliefs about climate change, with 92% of Democrats acknowledging its occurrence compared to just 51% of Republicans. This partisan disparity extends to the urgency and required action concerning climate change, with drastically lower levels of concern and support for intervention among Republicans compared to Democrats.

“Republicans (51%) are the least likely to accept climate change as a reality, which is similar to GOP opinion in 2021 (48%) and 2015 (49%), but down from a momentary jump recorded in 2018 (64%),”

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_050624/

the poll notes. This variability, particularly the drop following a temporary rise, could reflect the influence of political leadership and media narratives on public opinion.

Implications for Policy and Public Discourse

The decline in urgency and support for action against climate change among younger adults is particularly concerning. Historically, this demographic has been pivotal in pushing for environmental reforms. The shift could result from various factors, including climate change fatigue, skepticism over the effectiveness of proposed policies, or broader political and social disillusionment.

“Support for climate action remains relatively high in absolute terms, but it has softened due to a drop in the sense of urgency on this issue, particularly among younger adults,”

https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_050624/

explains Patrick Murray, director of the Monmouth University Polling Institute.

This waning enthusiasm could lead to significant challenges in advancing climate-related policies, potentially limiting the scale and scope of actions taken.

Conclusion: A Call for Critical Examination and Renewed Dialogue

The Monmouth Poll’s findings serve as a crucial barometer of public sentiment, suggesting that while belief in climate change remains relatively stable, there is a growing ambivalence about its severity and the effectiveness of governmental action.

I would suggest that a growing distrust of ideologically compromised media, government, and institutions is being propelled by an unending series of pronouncements that are clearly false to anyone with a memory or is capable of looking out a window.

5 14 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
79 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Scissor
May 9, 2024 6:05 am

Such concerns are dying unexpectedly it seems.

Reply to  Scissor
May 9, 2024 10:25 am

Climate Alarmists cried “Wolf!” too many times.

J Boles
May 9, 2024 6:13 am

What if they threw a war and nobody came?
What if they screamed “Climate change!” and nobody cared?

Reply to  J Boles
May 9, 2024 2:17 pm

It is too cold to live in most places outside of the Tropics without heating.

The Earth is still in a 2+ million-year ice age with 90% of the fresh water frozen in glaciers and ice caps.

The ice age won’t end until all of the natural ice melts.

May 9, 2024 6:13 am

I’m noting what effect the COVID lock-downs had on these opinions, especially the support for government action. There has been a ground shift in US politics against government social control and amplified by a negative attitude across the board to the Biden Administration. It is little wonder that this is reflected in the attitude to ‘climate hysteria’ and governmental reaction to it.

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
May 9, 2024 1:12 pm

I agree that Covid must be the cause. The timeline shows it.
But very much doubt that the government interventions during Covid had much to do with it. If you recall, people’s opinion of President Trump were already quite fixed.

Rather it was the pandemic itself that affected people.

For years we were told that climate change was the single biggest issue affecting the world. Then along comes a real problem that needs real action. When a crisis happens people have to do things – like lockdowns for a plague, or enlist in the military for an invasion (Ukraine), or… whatever for another real problem.

Covid made it clear that Climate Change was hype. The Kardashians of the sciences. Lots of attention but nothing of any lasting merit.
If Climate Change was what they said it was we would need to be changing our lives. Yet even the Greenest celebrity still flies to their rallies.

Reply to  MCourtney
May 9, 2024 2:19 pm

And lives in heated houses and apartments.

Editor
May 9, 2024 6:19 am

The encouraging aspect of this poll is that the young adults, 18-34, a HUGE voting block, are beginning to come to their senses on climate change. That means that all our work here and elsewhere are beginning to have positive results in getting reality-based climate science facts out there and into the minds of the voters, at least in the USA.

The age-group polarization is fading. All age-groups now have similar %s of opinions, with a spread of less than 10% between age groups.

Polls should never be even looked at without seeing the actual wording of the questions.

Here’s the “support government action” question:

In general, do you support or oppose the U.S. government doing more to reduce the type of activities that cause climate change and sea level rise?

And “very serious problem”:

Would you say climate change is a very serious, somewhat serious, or not too serious problem?

The question above follows immediately after this priming question: Do you think that the world’s climate is undergoing a change that is causing more extreme weather patterns and the rise of sea levels, or is this not happening?

The Monmouth Poll is biased to the climate crisis side — priming important issues with the Climate Crisis’s mass media meme of “extreme weather and sea level rise” — which the Climate Crisis News Cabals include in every weather story.

The message I get from the poll is that if we want to beat Climate Crisis Inc at its own game, we have to debunk the dual messages of Extreme Weather and Sea Level Rise — with actual facts that the public can see with their own eyes.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 6:42 am

If sea level rise were a real issue, there would be a fire sale on ocean-front mansions.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 9, 2024 8:26 am

Barry and Michelle should be first.

Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
May 9, 2024 9:57 am

It’s a property fire sale not er…ermm….

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 9, 2024 9:39 am

And banks would not lend on them, insurance companies would not insure them.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 7:06 am

The four questions in bold from your post are all loaded questions. The last one, “…or is this not happening?” is akin to: “Do you think the world is flat?” After all, sea level is rising.

A more reasonable first question would be:

     Yes [ ] or No [ ] “Do you think rising CO2 levels would constitute a problem?”

     If you answered No, skip the rest of the questions.

If you Google “loaded question definition” this comes up:

     A loaded question is a form of complex question
     that contains a controversial assumption.

gyan1
Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 9:37 am

They get away with propaganda because people don’t look at the false premises that underly the false narratives. The whole house of cards collapses when those are exposed.

Reply to  gyan1
May 9, 2024 10:58 am

Hope springs eternal

I’m not looking for the Climate Change house of cards to collapse anytime soon. The November 2009 email release, Peter Gleick’s forged documents, Mike Mann’s algorism that produced a hockey stick from red noise, and the 2nd round of climate gate emails released November 2011: All of those things reported at the time are now of no consequence. Such things as data manipulation, cherry picking, impossible claims, and out right lies that should be reported and are not, and if they were wouldn’t make a dent in preponderance of propaganda that constitutes the Climate Change house of cards.

Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 2:02 pm

Certainly true in Wokeachusetts.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 9:23 pm

“Hope springs eternal”

And eternal springs last longer.

Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 10:36 am

“A loaded question is a form of complex question that contains a controversial assumption”

The above article contains a lot of loaded questions and controversial assumptions. Every mention of “climate change” is actually a mention of “human-caised climate change” and the author is assuming human-caused climate change is real, and expects everyone else to assume the same thing.

The author is assuming things not in evidence, which biases everything he says.

Human-caused Climate Change Alarmists assume a lot of things that are not in evidence. They don’t have any evidence or science, so they just speculate, assume, and assert.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 9, 2024 2:26 pm

Plus “climate” has been redefined by the WMO to only mean 30 years of weather.

Reply to  scvblwxq
May 9, 2024 3:38 pm

Plus, if they asked 100 of their respondents to define climate change they would get a minimum of 10 different descriptions/definitions.

Plus, they didn’t define climate change before they asked the questions.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 9, 2024 3:34 pm

I don’t always put “Climate Change” in quotes, but you’re right.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 9:24 pm

I do.

Neil Lock
Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 10, 2024 1:28 am

The United Nations actually has its own definition of climate change. ‘”Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods.’

But we here at WUWT use a very different definition, “a change in the climate.” Which allows us to say, yes, there is climate change, but no, not much of it is caused by human activities. The UN’s clever run-around means that, if you concede that the climate is changing, you are accepting that it is human-caused. The media, and therefore many of the general public, seem to use the UN definition, and so fall into the same trap.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 10:50 am

Sadly, the phraseology may be needed given the indoctrination via rhetoric to think in those terms.

Reply to  Steve Case
May 9, 2024 2:19 pm

Apart from a slight warming since probably the coldest period in 10,000 years…

… in what way has the global climate changed ???

Jim Masterson
Reply to  bnice2000
May 9, 2024 9:28 pm

“… in what way has the global climate changed ???”

The only item they reference is temperature–there is no global defined temperature. Then they say storms are getting worse, but that’s a lie too. In a warming world, storms should be less violent.

MarkW
Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 8:06 am

I note that in the “seriousness” question, there is no option for “not a problem”.
Nor is there an option for the correct response, “net benefit”.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 8:25 am

I’ve said this here before recently. We need to fund and conduct our own poll. We can insure the questions asked are balanced and get at exactly what people believe without pushing them or using loaded language. Trouble is, polling is costly, especially when you get to 1000+ respondents to be statistically significant.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
May 9, 2024 9:30 pm

Plus conservatives don’t poll.

gyan1
Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 9:34 am

I spend an inordinate amount of time correcting sensationalist headlines and alarmist comments in news articles. I’m seeing results because my local paper has allowed scientific facts and citations that destroy their false narratives to stand without censorship most of the time. The brainwashed are a lost cause but people reading the comments can see who has the empirical evidence and who are being emotionally manipulated by propaganda.

Reply to  gyan1
May 10, 2024 11:22 am

I monitor the comments on YouTube videos, and such comments are becoming more and more dismissive and cynical about the Climate Change narrative.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 11:17 am

These loaded questions actually make the results more interesting, if indeed concern is declining to the extent shown by this poll then I would suggest the actual decline of concern is even greater. The 18 to 34 year olds have more relevant concerns on their mind, can I get a job, where will I live, will I ever get out of my parents basement. Climate change doesn’t feature.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 1:59 pm

“That means that all our work here and elsewhere are beginning to have positive results in getting reality-based climate science facts out there and into the minds of the voters, at least in the USA.”

I hope you’re right but I see no sign of such an awakening.

Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 9, 2024 2:23 pm

Most people don’t even realize that “climate’ was redefined by the WMO to be only 30 years of weather instead of the thousands to millions of years that “climate” meant.

They have been trying to sensationalize weather with terms like Bomb Cyclone, Atmospheric River, and so on.

Neil Lock
Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 10, 2024 1:19 am

That third question,  “Do you think that the world’s climate is undergoing a change that is causing more extreme weather patterns and the rise of sea levels, or is this not happening?” is a terrible conflation of several completely different things.

(1) Sea levels are rising, but weather patterns are not becoming more extreme. So I couldn’t answer either Yes or No to that part of the question.

(2) These things may, or may not, be due to a change in the world’s climate. I guess that the fact that CET temperatures have been going up for about 350 years suggests that there may be some change going on.

(3) Words like “anthropogenic” or “human-caused” are conspicuously missing from the question. Even if I accepted that there is a change in the world’s climate, how much of it is due to human activities is still an unknown. Personally, I think it’s positive, but small compared with the non-human processes.

Now, can I answer Yes or No? I pick up my pencil, and move on.

cwright
Reply to  Kip Hansen
May 10, 2024 4:03 am

Thanks for that, it’s always important to know the exact wording of the questions.

In general, do you support or oppose the U.S. government doing more to reduce the type of activities that cause climate change and sea level rise?”
This question is completely loaded because it effectively makes statements which are contested. Human activities may have caused a small amount of warming, but there is zero evidence that global sea level rise is caused or influenced by humans. The modern sea level rise started in the early 19th century at the end of the Little Ice Age (in 1820 according to one peer reviewed study). Since then the rate has been remarkably constant with no sign of acceleration. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think SUV’s and mass air travel had really taken off in the 19th century.

Would you say climate change is a very serious, somewhat serious, or not too serious problem?”
This question is also loaded, because it does not recognise the possibility that climate change/global warming is not overall even a problem – it is not. Global warming has been of huge benefit for the planet and humanity. If it had not been for the modern global warming we would still be in the depths of the LIA. That really would have been a catastrophe. The LIA was a terrible time for humanity.
It would be interesting to see how the results would change if they used the term “global warming” instead of “climate change”.

Still, although clearly biased, it’s good to see that opinions are moving in the right direction. Long may it continue and many thanks to WUWT for helping to bring this about.
Chris

scadsobees
May 9, 2024 6:23 am

I would be optimistic about this, but I have a bad feeling it’s just a “pause” as they’re just getting distracted by pandemics, wars, and of course mutilating themselves trying to become something they’re not.

It’s not over.

Reply to  scadsobees
May 9, 2024 6:45 am

Trends come and go. What’s trendy now? Protesting against Israel, especially by people who would be virtually enslaved or literally thrown off buildings if they went to Gaza.

What’s next? What’s the next social justice meme that’s going to distract so-called young “adults?”

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 9, 2024 10:42 am

Protesting aginst Israel appears to be a paid-for trend.

Eighty percent of Americans support Israel.

Those protesting Israel and supporting terrorists are a very small fraction of the Universities they attend and the population in general.

The terrorist supporters on campus are well-funded by radical leftwing billionaires and Islamic religious fanatics and these demonstrations have been in the planning stages for months. It is not a grassroots movement. And now the campus terroist demonstrators have the support of the President of the United States.

You know you are on the wrong side when you start getting praise from terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah, and from their leaders, the Mad Mullahs of Iran.

Joe Biden is firmly behind Islamic terrorists.

MarkW
Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 9, 2024 12:02 pm

One observer reports that he recognized several of these “protesters” from an earlier Black Lives Matter riot.

Reply to  MarkW
May 9, 2024 2:43 pm

from an earlier Black Lives Matter riot.

“I’m for the latest thing”
So many have no idea WHY they’re protesting, or even WHAT they’re protesting. They’re just there for the attention.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  Tom Abbott
May 9, 2024 9:36 pm

“Joe Biden is firmly behind Islamic terrorists.”

Typical Democrat.

Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 9, 2024 11:06 am

Wearing Palestinian keffiyeh’s are the latest campus fashion statements.

You cant be hip without wearing one.

Reply to  doonman
May 9, 2024 11:49 am

I dunno. Hillary has big hips and all she wears are pantsuits … the size of Barnum’s Big Tent!!

MarkW
Reply to  doonman
May 9, 2024 12:04 pm

I think it was Missouri that recently announced they are getting ready to start enforcing a law they’ve had on the books for decades. One that makes it illegal to wear a mask that hides your face during a protest. From reading the statute, it looks like it was originally aimed at Klan rallies, but it does look like it would apply here.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  MarkW
May 9, 2024 9:37 pm

Getting ready?

Jim Masterson
Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 9, 2024 9:35 pm

They are traitors and should be treated as such. Unfortunately, traitors like Jane Fonda still are free and destructive.

Sparta Nova 4
Reply to  scadsobees
May 9, 2024 10:53 am

I remember when it was “New and Improved!” followed by “Designer” followed by “Mega.”
Some of this is fad trend just as is played by advertisers. Meaning, the fads fade and are replaced with something new. MeToo! BLM etc.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  scadsobees
May 9, 2024 9:32 pm

You mean a Presidential “pause!”

Sean Galbally
May 9, 2024 6:49 am

It is not whether climate changes that should be questioned. Most people know that it is always changing and always has. The correct question is whether it is man made. There is no evidence to say that it is and plenty to show that atmospheric carbon dioxide is not only innocent but essential to life. It is presently at dangerously low levels and has been much much higher in the past. Carbon dioxide capture should be banned as should the impoverishing and useless Net Zero policy.

Reply to  Sean Galbally
May 9, 2024 10:51 am

“The correct question is whether it is man made.”

That *is* the correct question.

The author of the article just assumed climate change is man-made. He left no room for doubt. Human-caused Climate Change Alarmists are bad about doing that. Of course, it’s understandable since Alarmists don’t have any evidence on which to base their claims, so assumptions are all the Alarmists have to work with.

Coeur de Lion
May 9, 2024 7:22 am

It used to be ‘global warming’ until that 15 year hiatus in the 1980s. Big panic. Change nomenclature. And to attribute an ‘unprecedented’ Brazilian snowfall to global warming gets you laughed at. But call it ‘climate change’ and we all stroke our beards and look wise

Rud Istvan
May 9, 2024 7:44 am

Let’s see—
Climate change versus Bidenomics
Climate change versus illegal aliens
Climate change versus Russia in Ukraine
Climate change versus climate change not happening as promised
Climate change versus impossible climate change solutions like BEV trucks

Monmouth poll result was inevitable.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 9, 2024 9:06 am

If only that translates to this fall’s US elections.

MarkW
Reply to  More Soylent Green!
May 9, 2024 12:08 pm

First Hispanics and now Blacks are starting to switch from Democrat to Republican in growing numbers.
If the youth fail to turn out in large numbers, the Democrats are in a heap of trouble.
They are going to have to make sure that the dead vote in record numbers this fall.

May 9, 2024 8:18 am

Single issue polls can be misleading as there is no contrast with other issues to show its true importance to people when a MULTIPLE issues polls are published it always shows climate concerns at or near the bottom of the list which indicate the true view of how people view climate issues.

Let’s face it there is NO climate emergency developing.

Fact: NO Lower Tropospheric Hot Spot exists.

Fact: NO Positive Feedback Loop exists.

People need to stop listening to government and MSM claims who continually lie and distort the evidence as they have a vested interest in keeping the power and money flow to sustain their climate delusions for their own benefit.

Reply to  Sunsettommy
May 9, 2024 2:50 pm

Apart from the slight warming since the LIA.. a really good thing…

… nothing much has changed about the global climate…

… certainly not much that can be definitively put down to human causation.

David H
May 9, 2024 9:23 am

These people are NOW just Liars and Sociopaths!!!!
“storytip” https://www.theverge.com/2024/5/7/24151375/renewable-energy-global-electricity-report-us-gas
“The amount of electricity and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants likely peaked in 2023, according to the annual global electricity review by energy think tank Ember. That means human civilization has likely passed a key turning point, according to Ember: countries will likely never generate as much electricity from fossil fuels again.”

AGW is Not Science
Reply to  David H
May 9, 2024 2:07 pm

Likely. Always note the weasel words.

David Goeden
Reply to  David H
May 9, 2024 2:56 pm

How many lies would a liar lie if all they have are lies?

gyan1
May 9, 2024 9:24 am

The strong majority still supporting government action shows how many are blind to the inflationary costs they are being burdened with for the fictional crisis.

Only the brainwashed can’t see that the hyperbole being promoted is pure BS.

Charlie Kirk is doing amazing work educating young people about how intellectually bankrupt woke ideology is. I wonder how much of the shift he is responsible for?

Rational people eventually can see when narratives aren’t supported in the real world. The easily manipulated need to be shamed as brain dead useful idiots for parroting sensationalist lies.

technically right
May 9, 2024 10:39 am

Whether this poll is an outlier or not remains to be seen. However, I would postulate that as the real cost of addressing “climate change” begins to hit people where it gets their attention, i.e. their pocketbook, all of those graphs will head for the basement. It’s beginning to happen in Europe. It will happen here as well.

May 9, 2024 10:55 am

Support for climate action remains relatively high in absolute terms…

Climate “action” involves controlling the weather for 30 years. There is no other method by definition.

Past efforts to control the weather by government officials included:

1) beating drums
2) mass dancing
3) throwing virgins into volcanoes
4) burning witches
5) praying for rain

I’m not sure exactly what the latest plans to control the weather for 30 years are, but it seems to involve forcing energy poverty onto the masses, walking or riding bicycles everywhere and sitting in cold dark houses.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  doonman
May 9, 2024 10:24 pm

Let’s not throw virgins into volcanoes. They need to experience a different fire. As for witches–there’s Hillary.

Sparta Nova 4
May 9, 2024 11:00 am

 that are clearly false to anyone with a memory or is capable of looking out a window.

Spot on.

Duane
May 9, 2024 1:06 pm

One can only frighten people so long before they finally figure out they’ve been had.

May 9, 2024 1:56 pm

A Call for Critical Examination and Renewed Dialogue”

It’ll never happen here in Wokeachusetts.

May 9, 2024 2:10 pm

Most people probably don’t know that the WMO redefined “climate” to be only 30 years of weather instead of the thousands to millions of years people were taught in school.

May 9, 2024 2:13 pm

A simple question…

Apart from a slight warming out of probably the coldest period in some 10,000 years…

… In what way has the global climate changed ???

Edward Katz
May 9, 2024 2:27 pm

It could be that more of these young people are taking a closer look at the facts surrounding the theories and controversies. Then they realize that there are no major climate changes, just the annual weather fluctuations that they’re grown up with. Next, they see that despite all the alarmists’ doomsday scenarios, fossil fuels continue to dominate global power generation, while the much-touted renewables consistently prove they’re not ready to fill the bill. Finally, they assess their own lifestyles and decide they have few inclinations to change them just to supposedly take action against a non-existent “crisis”.

Reply to  Edward Katz
May 10, 2024 11:29 am

A large proportion of young people in the US and Europe have much more pressing concerns on their minds, like finding a job and paying their rent every month. Climate Change Hysteria is a luxury restricted to kids with trust funds.

May 9, 2024 4:13 pm

Young adults, 18-34, have seen none of the predicted climate catastrophes promised by tiresome old fingerwaggers and Greta-wannabes. Is it any wonder they have other priorities than trying to change the weather?

Bob
May 9, 2024 9:32 pm

We need to get our message out in clear and simple language. I haven’t heard of a single new development coming from the CAGW crowd to back up their claims. They are coasting on lies, anecdotal evidence and computer models. They have nothing, we need to use that to our advantage.

Jim Masterson
Reply to  Bob
May 9, 2024 10:28 pm

Bob is probably the clearest thinker on this site.

John Power
May 10, 2024 6:11 am

Quote from the article:
“Most Americans continue to acknowledge the existence of climate change, but the number who see this as a very serious problem has fallen below half (46%). Support for government action to reduce activities that impact the climate has dipped below 6 in 10 (59%) for the first time since Monmouth began polling this topic nearly a decade ago,”
 
That’s weird. These figures imply that 13% of Americans who don’t see ‘climate change’ as a very serious problem nevertheless support government action to reduce its assumed causes. Is there a rational explanation for this, or are 13% of Americans simply nuts?

Neo
May 10, 2024 10:09 am

It all looked so easy to do this amazing energy transition.
Then, reality butted in. EVs started to burn, trees were cut down for solar and wind.

Kieran O'Driscoll
May 12, 2024 7:42 am

If you ask the wrong questions you get the wrong answers… Here is the real problem with the media, the political clowns and the rest of the climate cult con-men as described by Bonhoeffer’s “theory of stupidity”: We have more to fear from stupid people than evil ones: https://bigthink.com/thinking/bonhoeffers-theory-stupidity-evil/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR205aiJpqpt4nhkwBSPalz99-I1qIE4CQ8FIbKEF5jAYf51579ikTGd3Xc_aem_AQaBcVE66gTV_K5VmAFwF3zIbb4k14i3bAoCzSzQ6abmA9_RsTkbIm1vTGoKQGX2RrZwCUalhoObP0vRWUioU6GK

Corrigenda
May 14, 2024 3:45 am

When both NOAA and NASA have both had to apologise for manipulating data to make anthropomorphic climate change look real, when India and Chine are the only two countries that generate the most CO2 are also the only two countries exempted from the Paris agreement and when the Maldives are spending their Paris money on building five new airports at beach level we see all too clearly that climate changes are NOT largely or even all man made.

Verified by MonsterInsights