Steep Decline In Americans' Belief In Global Warming

[TH89]

"Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?"
[url=http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf][img]http://www.wunderground.com/hurricane/2009/survey97.png[/img][/url]
[quote]WASHINGTON — Americans seem to be cooling toward global warming.

Just 57 percent think there is solid evidence the world is getting warmer, down 20 points in just three years, a new poll says. And the share of people who believe pollution caused by humans is causing temperatures to rise has also taken a dip, even as the U.S. and world forums gear up for possible action against climate change.

In a poll of 1,500 adults by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, released Thursday, the number of people saying there is strong scientific evidence that the Earth has gotten warmer over the past few decades is down from 71 percent in April of last year and from 77 percent when Pew started asking the question in 2006. The number of people who see the situation as a serious problem also has declined.

The steepest drop has occurred during the past year, as Congress and the Obama administration have taken steps to control heat-trapping emissions for the first time and international negotiations for a new treaty to slow global warming have been under way. At the same time, there has been mounting scientific evidence of climate change – from melting ice caps to the world's oceans hitting the highest monthly recorded temperatures this summer.

The poll was released a day after 18 scientific organizations wrote Congress to reaffirm the consensus behind global warming. A federal government report Thursday found that global warming is upsetting the Arctic's thermostat.

Only about a third, or 36 percent of the respondents, feel that human activities – such as pollution from power plants, factories and automobiles – are behind a temperature increase. That's down from 47 percent from 2006 through last year's poll.

"The priority that people give to pollution and environmental concerns and a whole host of other issues is down because of the economy and because of the focus on other things," suggested Andrew Kohut, the director of the research center, which conducted the poll from Sept. 30 to Oct. 4. "When the focus is on other things, people forget and see these issues as less grave."

Andrew Weaver, a professor of climate analysis at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, said politics could be drowning out scientific awareness.

Story continues below

"It's a combination of poor communication by scientists, a lousy summer in the Eastern United States, people mixing up weather and climate and a full-court press by public relations firms and lobby groups trying to instill a sense of uncertainty and confusion in the public," he said.

Political breakdowns in the survey underscore how tough it could be to enact a law limiting pollution emissions blamed for warming. While three-quarters of Democrats believe the evidence of a warming planet is solid, and nearly half believe the problem is serious, far fewer conservative and moderate Democrats see the problem as grave. Fifty-seven percent of Republicans say there is no solid evidence of global warming, up from 31 percent in early 2007.

Though there are exceptions, the vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is occurring and that the primary cause is a buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from the burning of fossil fuels, such as oil and coal.

Jane Lubchenco, head the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, told a business group meeting at the White House Thursday: "The science is pretty clear that the climate challenge before us is very real. We're already seeing impacts of climate change in our own backyards."

Despite misgivings about the science, half the respondents still say they support limits on greenhouse gases, even if they could lead to higher energy prices. And a majority – 56 percent – feel the United States should join other countries in setting standards to address global climate change.[/quote]
[url]http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/22/steep-decline-in-american_n_330315.html[/url]

It's totally this guy's fault. He's like the Kent Hovind of climate science.
[img]http://www.npr.org/thisibelieve/jillette/jillette_lg.jpg[/img]

[Lazor]

We need an aggressive campaign against all the misinformation out there.

Just air greenman or something

[CivilProtection]

People don't believe in global warming because not much has happened to the average American regarding it while the information and warnings have been around for a while.

give it a couple of decades

[Figgis Fiddis]

[QUOTE=TH89;17970359]It's totally this guy's fault. He's like the Kent Hovind of climate science.[/QUOTE]

Bananas prove global warming, silly

[TH89]

Hot bananas.

[thisispain]

Aww come on TH89, Penn said on his show that he didn't actually know. He was against the green movement's hypocrisy, not the actual concept behind it which is education of global warming.

[JohnnyMo]

[QUOTE=TH89;17970359][img_thumb]http://www.npr.org/thisibelieve/jillette/jillette_lg.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]

Fucking Penn Jillette and his not knowing shit for sure.

PICK A SIDE WISHY-WASHY MCSKEPTIC

[TH89]

[QUOTE=thisispain;17970554]Aww come on TH89, Penn said on his show that he didn't actually know. He was against the green movement's hypocrisy, not the actual concept behind it which is education of global warming.[/QUOTE]
Maybe he should have found out before he made a show about it?

It's not hard, all you have to do is pick up a science journal.

[img]http://rhoi.berkeley.edu/images/Ardi_cover.gif[/img]

[JohnnyMo]

I've just bought SuperFreakonomics and I heard it's generating some controversy because it's challenging global warming in some way. Can't wait to read that bit now.

[TH89]

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17970577]I've just bought SuperFreakonomics and I heard it's generating some controversy because it's challenging global warming in some way. Can't wait to read that bit now.[/QUOTE]

Apparently the main source they used for that part is denouncing the book.
[url]http://climateprogress.org/2009/10/18/error-riddled-superfreakonomics-stephen-dubner-says-romm-has-done-a-great-job-amazon-search/[/url]
[url]http://www.e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2201[/url]

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=TH89;17970576]Maybe he should have found out before he made a show about it?[/QUOTE]

Yes, but I do think it's unfair to demonize someone who says I don't know.

[Luke510]

ofcorse theres no global warming
its just god holding us closer.
[/s]

[TH89]

[QUOTE=thisispain;17970590]Yes, but I do think it's unfair to demonize someone who says I don't know.[/QUOTE]
He says "I don't know" and then brings on a bunch of people (from the ultra-right Cato Institute) who say it's not real. And he doesn't bring on any climate scientists.

[Mr. Mcguffin]

[QUOTE=thisispain;17970590]Yes, but I do think it's unfair to demonize someone who says I don't know.[/QUOTE]

is it fair to demonize someone who doesn't show a single climatologist in their show about the climate and then says none of us know yet and we shouldn't do anything

because i think thats fair

[editline]06:34AM[/editline]

penn can be such a dumbass

fucking libertarians

[thisispain]

i'm just covering yo ass people really take his shit as religion

penn & teller isn't an informational show anyway

[JohnnyMo]

[QUOTE=TH89;17970587]Apparently the main source they used for that part is denouncing the book.
[url]http://climateprogress.org/2009/10/18/error-riddled-superfreakonomics-stephen-dubner-says-romm-has-done-a-great-job-amazon-search/[/url][/QUOTE]

"The right target for both mugging little old ladies and carbon dioxide emissions is zero."

Every time you exhale you might as well be raping someone.

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17970607]
fucking libertarians[/QUOTE]

bad mcguffin

groupin people and shit

[Mr. Mcguffin]

[QUOTE=thisispain;17970613]i'm just covering yo ass people really take his shit as religion

penn & teller isn't an informational show anyway[/QUOTE]

neither is glenn beck but it turns out that most people dont give a shit

[TH89]

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17970607]is it fair to demonize someone who doesn't show a single climatologist in their show about the climate and then says none of us know yet and we shouldn't do anything[/QUOTE]

More on this whole thing:
[url]http://logicalscience.com/skeptics/bullsheit.html[/url]

[Canned Induvidu]

I really don't trust anyone around this.

It seems like everyone wants money for thier "cause"

[Mr. Mcguffin]

[QUOTE=thisispain;17970618]bad mcguffin

groupin people and shit[/QUOTE]

if i can group self proclaimed gangstas and creationists then i can group libertarians goddamnit

your not my mom

[JohnnyMo]

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17970631]if i can group self proclaimed gangstas and creationists then i can group libertarians goddamnit

your not my mom[/QUOTE]

I am your English teacher.

*You're

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17970631]if i can group self proclaimed gangstas and creationists then i can group libertarians goddamnit

your not my mom[/QUOTE]

dont group gansta libertarians

we be drinking malt liquors without the government son

[Mr. Mcguffin]

[QUOTE=Canned Induvidual;17970624]I really don't trust anyone around this.

It seems like everyone wants money for thier "cause"[/QUOTE]

what

who the fuck is asking you for money

were asking you to send a fucking letter to your congressman or some shit

so unless postal money is a fucking fortune for you i think youre good

[editline]06:40AM[/editline]

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17970634]I am your English teacher.

*You're[/QUOTE]

shut up youre doesnt work without punctuation

it looks weird so i say your

[thisispain]

album covers work too

[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_cLI19EXK2oU/Sg4VNtzFOAI/AAAAAAAAAFg/Z80JVdEu5-c/s400/2_big.jpg[/img]

[JohnnyMo]

[QUOTE=Mr. Mcguffin;17970644]shut up youre doesnt work without punctuation

it looks weird so i say your[/QUOTE]

Use punctuation.

[Mr. Mcguffin]

[QUOTE=thisispain;17970638]dont group gansta libertarians

we be drinking malt liquors without the government son[/QUOTE]

ho shit mothafucka ron paul in this crib gonna lay down ome funkay lyrics

[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_eZejqxN7kCE/SZGPG2BpY6I/AAAAAAAAA9o/A6-HVbhS4M8/s400/pg2_a_vanillaIce_300.jpg[/img]

[thisispain]

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;17970657]Use punctuation.[/QUOTE]

Right'o dear chap.

[JohnnyMo]

I like how people are bitching that Penn (and Teller too probably) got it wrong one time when basically every other thing they say is awesome. If we held politicians to this standard no one would vote.

[TH89]

[QUOTE=Canned Induvidual;17970624]I really don't trust anyone around this.

It seems like everyone wants money for thier "cause"[/QUOTE]
Two things:

1 - All reputable scientific organizations have reached a consensus on this, so for them to all be faking would require either everyone to be some kind of massive conspiracy (since scientific research is publicly available and anyone with a background in climate science can and do fact-check these studies as they come out), or essentially all climate scientists to be in it for nothing other than the money (even though most of them don't really make that much). Neither is very plausible.

2 - Even if it WAS an enormous fraud in order to get funding, as soon as it became clear they were lying about it for money, they would lose ALL their funding and their credibility as organizations would be ruined forever. So to perpetrate a massive fraud now (or even play up statistics) for a little extra money would be a stupendously short-sighted and stupid move on the part of the scientists. They make their reputation by being right about things as often and in as much detail as possible.