worrying. But we should not encourage these polls, we don't ask people
if they think the earth is flat or the moon is made out of green
cheese. There's a serious underlying psychobabble trend that what you
believe comes true, which may work for individual self esteem but will
not stop the weather

Harriet

On 14 October 2010 04:15, Chris Keene <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> http://simpleclimate.wordpress.com/2010/10/13/seeds-of-doubt-flourish-as-climate-debate-hots-up/
>
> Seeds of doubt flourish as climate debate hots up
>
> October 13, 2010 — andyextance
>
> George Mason University's Edward Maibach
>
> Edward Maibach, director of George Mason University’s Center for Climate Change Communication, thinks that much of the US has the wrong idea on climate change. While a large majority think that global warming is happening, he points out that they are too uncertain about the underlying evidence.
>
> “The majority of the American public, our TV weathercasters, and our TV news directors have all reached an erroneous conclusion suggested by industries with a vested interest in the status quo,” Maibach told Simple Climate. “Namely, the majority believe that there is considerable disagreement among scientists about whether or not global warming is happening. A number of studies have shown that over 95 percent of the leading experts on climate science – active climate science researchers – have concluded that global warming – an increase in the global mean temperature relative to a pre-industrial era baseline – is real and that it is largely human-caused.”
>
> Maibach’s “4C” centre published its third survey of US public opinion on climate change in June and July, conducted jointly with Yale University  to get over 1000 people’s outlook. It found that twelve out of every twenty people surveyed think that global warming is happening, compared to just four out of twenty that don’t. By contrast only seven out of twenty thought scientists agreed that it is happening, while nine out of twenty thought that there was a lot of disagreement.
>
> Political influence
>
> Although most of the people asked do think that global warming is happening, the June results are still lower than the first 4C survey conducted in November 2008, when fourteen out of twenty fell into this group. However, it is a slight improvement from the second 4C survey, conducted in January, which found that just 11 of of 20 thought climate change is happening. Some of this is due to internal US politics, which Maibach explains has “a very large impact, for better and worse”.
>
> “Over the long-term, I believe that a growing proportion of the American public will come to understand that climate change is real, human-caused, and a serious threat to people here and elsewhere,” said Maibach. “That said, at present, the issue is being defined largely in political terms, and there is growing pressure on political conservatives not to accept the conclusions of the climate scientists.”
>
>
>
> The level of concern of respondents to the survey carried out by Edward Maibach and colleagues. The "disengaged" group "don't know" whether climate change is happening or not, while those to the right of the chart think it isn't and those to the left of the chart think it is. Credit: George Mason University/Yale University
>
>
>
> Weathering the doubt
>
> However, Maibach notes, there are people that the public are more likely to trust than their political leaders on climate change. One such group is weather forecasters. “In the US, the public feels the weathercasters are a credible source of information about global warming, and unlike any other professionals or organizations that are seen as credible, weathercasters have an opportunity to speak to the public frequently,” he said. “In other words, they have both access to the public and the trust of the public.”
>
> Yet, when investigating their response to last November’s “Climategate” scandal, Maibach found that weathercasters were more influenced by political beliefs than he thought they would be. “I had assumed that: (a) more credentialed weathercasters have more training in science, meteorology specifically; (b) weathercasters with more scientific training will be more likely to assess the issue through a scientific lens, rather than through a political lens; and (c) given that the vast majority of climate scientists have reached the same conclusion about climate change more credentialed weathercasters would be more likely to reach the same conclusion [as the climate scientists] than less credentialed weathercasters,” he explained. “At least one of my assumptions was clearly wrong.”
>
> So, rather than relying on other groups to explain their work for them, Maibach calls on researchers to work harder on clearing up any misunderstandings on global warming. “Climate scientists – and those of us who are working with them to share what they know with the broader public – need to do a better job of clarifying critical facts for the public,” he said. “It doesn’t serve society’s long-term interests to deny problems that are real. Hopefully, we can get beyond having unhelpful debates about what science has already shown to be real, and instead focus our passionate debates on what we choose to do about the problem.”