A swing of opinion on Global Warming in America?

[Skybird]

With 70 percent of Americans now agreeing that global warming is affecting weather in the U.S., the public is showing increasing support for measures that would tackle the problem of climate change, according to a new survey. Conducted by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, the survey showed that 60 percent of Americans would be more likely to vote for a candidate who supports legislation that would reduce the federal income tax and make up for that decrease in revenue by increasing taxes on fossil fuels. The ongoing survey — which divides the U.S. public into six categories on global warming, from the alarmed to the dismissive — showed that an overwhelming majority of people who identified themselves as alarmed, concerned, or cautious about global warming say that if people with their views worked together, they could influence politicians’ views on global warming. The people in these three groups, as well as people who described themselves as disengaged on the issue of global warming, said by a wide margin that they trusted President Obama more than Mitt Romney as a source of information on climate change. Only people who described themselves as dismissive of human-caused climate change said they trusted Romney more than Obama on the issue, the Yale survey showed.

http://e360.yale.edu/digest/increase...e_change/3552/

http://environment.yale.edu/climate/...as-March-2012/

Original paper, full length, graphs and tables:
http://environment.yale.edu/climate/...March-2012.pdf

[August]

Yet again Skybird wants to tell us what we are thinking.

[troopie]

Wow, there's a bit of an enviro theme going on tonite. Almost makes you think there's a glint of hope out there!

On the first of July '12 our (Australian) Government committed political suicide and took the brave move of introducing a 'carbon tax'. They most likely won't be returned to office at the next election and the victorious opposing party will no doubt repeal the tax.

Regardless of this, I can't help but feel a sense of patriotic pride and a fleeting glimpse of a previously unkown level of trust in the Government.

To be amongst the leading countries prepared to take a first step in tackling this issue is incredible. No, the tax will not be perfect and yes there will be major setbacks. Fair chance some demographics will be worse off and (heaven forbid) some big companies may even loose out.

It may fall in a big steaming heap, and be a total failure, but you can't learn if you don't make mistakes! Someone has to give it a go!

That we had the kegs to do it, and make some sacrifices, which will provide a reference point for other countries to learn from in the future makes me really feel proud.

It's only a very small step, but in the scheme of things, it may have a big flow on effect.

[AVGWarhawk]

What I don't understand is Al Gore who was leading the charge has seemingly disappeared from the face of global warming.

[Ducimus]

With 70 percent of Americans now agreeing

You lost me there. I have a hard time believing that 70% of us could agree on anything that touch's on economy or politics, which global warming certainly does. The only time we'd have that high a percentage on an issue like that, is when pigs fly, angels sing, and the apocolypse has come.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

You lost me there. I have a hard time believing that 70% of us could agree on anything that touch's on economy or politics, which global warming certainly does. The only time we'd have that high a percentage on an issue like that, is when pigs fly, angels sing, and the apocolypse has come.

I have lost neither you nor anyone else, because I did not claim anything.

The important part is the third link, the original document, in full length.

And from that, page 66ff: methodology.

Methodology

These results come from nationally representative surveys of American adults, aged 18 and older. The samples were weighted to correspond
with U.S. Census Bureau parameters for the United States.
The surveys were designed by Anthony Leiserowitz, Nicholas Smith and Jay Hmielowski of Yale University, and by Edward Maibach and Connie
Roser-Renouf of George Mason University, and were conducted by Knowledge Networks, using an online research panel of American adults.
June 2010: Fielded May 14 through June 1 with 1,024 American adults.
January 2010: Fielded December 24, 2009 through January 3, 2010 with 1,001 American adults.
May 2011: Fielded April 23rd through May 12th with 981 American adults.
March 2012: Fielded March 12th through March 30th with 1,008 American adults.
The six audience segments were first identified in analyses of the 2008 data set. Latent Class Analysis was used to segment respondents, based
on 36 variables representing four distinct constructs: global warming beliefs, issue involvement, policy preferences and behaviors. Discriminant
functions derived from the latent class analysis were used with the 2012, 2011 and 2010 data sets to replicate the earlier analysis and identify
changes in the groups.
The survey results from March 2012 and November 2011 have been combined in this report, rather than released separately at the time the data

were gathered, due to circumstances beyond our control that slowed the segmentation analysis of the November data.

You have better information on the lacking representative value of their data pool? I'm listening. They say they made sure their samples are representative for the demographic structure of American population, such procedures are academic standards to ensure the sample taken indeed is representative for the whole population that gets described by the sample. Show that theis claim is wrong.

Next step: go thorugh the document and show why and where their reported answer patterns are wrong, and erratically listed.

Or do you mean the whole thing is just forged and faked? You then can file a charge at or against two of your universities: Yale, and George Mason. If they are serious with their reputation they will be glad to get evidence for people working in their name and in their institutes compromising their name and reputation by forging results and data sets. To what degree this is also a criminal offence under legal penalty in the US, I donot know. In Germany, such betrayal can serve you high financial penalties.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

What I don't understand is Al Gore who was leading the charge has seemingly disappeared from the face of global warming.

Perhaps he melted?

You lost me there. I have a hard time believing that 70% of us could agree on anything that touch's on economy or politics, which global warming certainly does.

It is such a broad range of different categories and different opinions all bundled into one its pretty easy to string out the numbers 70%

As for the swing to 70%??????
4 years ago they had the 70% the new survey gives 69%, doesn't that mean that the swing isn't much of a swing at all and the increase is actually a decrease.

Then again I did read that a survey is empirical evidence and is not open to interpretation as it only can mean one thing

[August]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

What I don't understand is Al Gore who was leading the charge has seemingly disappeared from the face of global warming.

It became known that he had a financial interest in carbon trading companies and that he used more electricity at his house than most small towns so rather than continue to be seen as a hypocrite he stepped out of the limelight.

[nikimcbee]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

What I don't understand is Al Gore who was leading the charge has seemingly disappeared from the face of global warming.

And that's a bad thing? I don't miss that windbag at all.