The latest Rasmussen poll in the US shows a majority of people now believe the science on global warming is not settled, and only 25% of those surveyed believe a 'consensus' really exists.
The poll also shows 59% of people say it is at least somewhat likely that "scientists have falsified research data to support their own theories and beliefs about global warming. Thirty-five percent (35%) say it's Very Likely. Just 26% say it's not very or not at all likely that some scientists falsified data."
As the Rasmussen report makes clear, the poll results are in sharp contrast with statements from politicians:
But just in the last few days, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs seemed to reject any such disagreement in a response to a question about global warming, "I don't think … [global warming] is quite, frankly, among most people, in dispute anymore."
Similar noises have been made in New Zealand by the Government's climate gnome Nick Smith, which illustrates that politicians have blinded themselves to the public mood, possibly to their own downfall.
Although the new poll does not attribute blame for this massive shift in public perceptions to Climategate…
This skepticism does not appear to be the result of the recent disclosure of e-mails confirming such data falsification as part of the so-called "Climategate" scandal. Just 20% of Americans say they've followed news reports about those e-mails Very Closely, while another 29% have followed them Somewhat Closely.
That's a lower level of interest than has been shown about the White House party crashers and suggests that Americans have had their doubts about the science of global warming for some time.
…Personally I think that is even more significant: if public feelings about climate change and science can be this negative before the real impact of Climategate percolates through the community (and that will take a number of weeks), then I think it is safe to conclude the one world government nutters are buying themselves a massive fight if they and the gullible politicians they are leading by the nose try to ram their daft ideas through after Copenhagen.
Other main points from Rasmussen:
Even as Obama and senior members of Congress are pushing major anti-global warming initiatives, Americans overwhelmingly believe they should focus on the economy instead. Seventy-one percent (71%) say the bigger priority for U.S. national leaders is stimulating the economy to create jobs. Only 15% say they should focus instead on stopping global warming to save the environment.
Forty-four percent (44%) of U.S. voters see a conflict between economic growth and environmental protection, although 31% disagree. Forty-seven percent (47%) say global warming is caused primarily by long-term planetary trends, not human activity. Obama, Vice President Al Gore and other climate change activists believe human activity is the chief culprit.
Voters express mixed feeling about the bill aimed at fighting global warming that is now working its way through Congress, but by more than two-to-one they say it will hurt the economy rather than help it.
Most voters also think the news media makes global warming look worse than it really is.
As for Gore, despite winning both the Nobel Peace Prize and an Academy Award for his advocacy of efforts to fight global warming, only 31% of Americans consider him an expert on the topic.
The UN is another leading advocate for major anti-global warming initiatives, but just 29% of voters see that organization as an ally of the United States, while 15% regard it as an enemy. For 47%, the UN falls somewhere in between.
The real problem is the lack of reporting of the CRU e-mails by the media as compared with the investigation by those who access the Internet. That is a cedibility gap that Nick Smith simply fails to realize.
Posted by: KimW | December 04, 2009 at 11:44 AM
KimW - Reposted from Kiwiblog:
“Climategate” has a Media Interest Index* of 0.22
“Copenhagen Summit” has a Media Interest Index* of 5.96
*The MMI (Media Interest Index) is then 1,000 times the number of news matches divided by the number of web matches. The result is 1 for equal interest between the media and the public. A value of 2 would mean the news media are “twice” as interested as the public. A value of 0.5 would mean that the media are only half as interested as the public. Hat tip: Dr Roy Spencer
Posted by: getstaffed | December 07, 2009 at 01:30 PM