Poll: Americans increasingly concerned about warming.
By on Oct 20th, 2007 at 11:10 pm
Poll: Americans increasingly concerned about warming.
Fifty-five percent of Americans believe that “the phenomenon of global warming has been proven,” and is largely caused by humans … Sixty-six percent of Americans believe the United States should do what it can to reduce global warming, even if other nations ignore it. This compares with 52 percent of respondents who believed that way in 2001.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
With a majority like that, can there be any doubt that Shrub will, in fact, veto global warming?
October 20th, 2007 at 11:15 pmTP – do us ALL a favor… try this:
Poll: Americans increasingly concerned about climate change.
especially with winter on the way… mild though that may be…
in places…
but the problem IS Global Climate Change.
October 20th, 2007 at 11:20 pm.
I’m just waiting for one of the trolls to give us a link to some oil company-funded site to tell us that global warming is a great hoax a la Senator Inhoax of Oklahoma.
October 20th, 2007 at 11:31 pmIts been a warm october here, almost 90 today. Usually October, in Texas, brings the first frost. [frozen morning dew] trees, and grass, are still green and have seen an abundance of monarch butteflys the last few days.
Not only that, but I have geckos, and frogs, all about.
And just for grins:
October 20th, 2007 at 11:44 pmJames Adomian SOTU Spoof
Wait, so 55% believe in Global Warming and 62% believe we should do something about it? Does that mean that 7% don’t believe in Global Warming, but do believe we should do something about it? Can someone please explain this?
October 21st, 2007 at 2:39 am55% believe that global warming is largely caused by humans. But some people think that it’s natural.
62% believe that the atmosphere is warming and think we should do something about it, whether it’s natural or not.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:42 amWait, so 55% believe in Global Warming and 62% believe we should do something about it?
Comment by Patriot — October 21, 2007 @ 2:39 am
In every poll it seems that about 10-15% of respondents give answers that are essentially random. Some of these people might be doing it deliberately, but I think that some of them are just extremely stupid.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:44 amAnd the climate change deniers yawn, of course.
Reality has moved past them. So have the citizens of the US as well as the rest of the world. Everyone now understands how compelling the available evidence is.
It’s time for the deniers to take their rightful place in the dustbin of history, along the likes of the flat earthers, creationists, holocaust deniers, and other assorted kooks.
Good riddance to bad rubbish, is what I say.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:57 amAlternate headline:
Fewer Americans are drinking the kool-aid today than in 2001.
October 21st, 2007 at 4:38 amActually, not believing in Global Wamring, but still believing that we should do something about it is a very reasonable, consistent, entirely sane and and intelligent position to take.
Many people just aren’t sure if Global Wamring, aka Climate Change, is real or not, but feel we should err on the side of caution.
It’s a bit like driving in the fog at night; even though you can’t be absolutely certain there is a problem in the road ahead, it’s a good idea to slow down anyway.
October 21st, 2007 at 7:57 amPatriot: Fifty-five percent of Americans believe that “the phenomenon of global warming has been proven,†and is largely caused by humans
Perhaps the other 7% believe it highly likely, if not proven? Would it not be rational to try to avert global disaster that is highly likely, even if not absolutely proven?
Big oil and those who profit from oil and coal, and people who believe their propaganda, think we should not do anything about global climate change. Most reasonable people believe otherwise.
October 21st, 2007 at 8:36 amI don’t have the time to make a longer post right now, but these are some previous posts I made on the subject. Please check them out and make comments if you agree or disagree.
October 21st, 2007 at 8:52 amhttp://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/15/gray-gore/#comment-4125722
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/14/kristol-krauthammer-gore/#comment-4125755
Uh huh.
And I’ll bet that the majority of Americans are willing to begin sacrificing what it will take to reduce the carbon emmissions and its consequences.
Do you people have any idea what a reduction of 80% by 2050 looks like?
Right now (in October of 2007) we are still INCREASING our output by 2% a year.
Who exactly is doing the sacrificing if we are still going UP in output?
October 21st, 2007 at 9:20 amHow’s this for a real poll?
Comment by TCDon — October 21, 2007 @ 9:47 am
How’s that for changing the subject with something irrelevant? Wow!
October 21st, 2007 at 9:52 amDid anyone notice this article from Saturday?
Rising seas threaten 21 mega-cities
By The Associated Press Sat. Oct 20, 2:27 PM ET
Cities around the world are facing the danger of rising seas and other disasters related to climate change.
Of the 33 cities predicted to have at least 8 million people by 2015, at least 21 are highly vulnerable, says the Worldwatch Institute.
They include Dhaka in Bangladesh; Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro; Shanghai and Tianjin in China; Alexandria and Cairo in Egypt; Mumbai and Kolkata in India; Jakarta in Indonesia; Tokyo and Osaka-Kobe in Japan; Lagos in Nigeria; Karachi in Pakistan; Bangkok in Thailand, and New York and Los Angeles in the United States, according to studies by the United Nations and others.
More than one-tenth of the world’s population, or 643 million people, live in low-lying areas at risk from climate change, say U.S. and European experts. Most imperiled, in descending order, are China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, Egypt, the U.S., Thailand and the Philippines.
Maybe it’s time the US and others start paying attention and start doing something.
October 21st, 2007 at 10:04 amRep. Diane Watson has stated ON TAPE, on Oct. 14th 2007, Pelosi’s real reasons for not pressing forward on impeachment! She says they (the other democrats in the House) have the evidence to support impeachment and the desire to do so, but that their “leader†has a different plan!
“Now, our leader has looked at this issue, and her strategy is, our speaker, is be sure we take the White House and that we win 60 (more) seatsâ€
At best this is the politicizing of the impeachment proceedings and at worst it is her own desire to remain Speaker of the House! As our soldiers place their very lives on the line in an illegal war, and as this administration beats the drums for another war with Syria or Iran, Pelosi is content to let it all happen, so they can regain control of the House in 2008 and she can retain the Speakership!
Watch for yourself and please get the video out to as many people as possible. Pelosi must be removed!
watch it HERE!
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/ 2007/ 10/ 21/ watson-lays-out-pelosis-reason-to-suppress-impeachment/
October 21st, 2007 at 11:03 amthe effects of warming in california are all too obvious. the Chem trails hovering above all the agriculture is a dead give away
http://youtube.com/watch?v=gZGKECp-rb0
October 21st, 2007 at 11:30 am62% believe that the atmosphere is warming and think we should do something about it, whether it’s natural or not.
Comment by vordabois
Well, if it is natural, there really isn’t anything we can do about it. If it is because of the billions of pounds of pollutants we pump into our atmosphere every day, then there is something we can do about it.
That’s what I say to every global warming skeptic I run into. I ask them “Do you really think that pumping massive amounts of pollutants into our atmosphere is not having any negative affect on our planet?”
That usually shuts them up.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:37 amwatch it HERE!
http://willyloman.wordpress.com/ 2007/ 10/ 21/ watson-lays-out-pelosis-reason-to-suppress-impeachment/
Comment by willyloman
I just sent Nancy Pelosi your excellent post plus my opinions about what she is doing. Good work willy!
October 21st, 2007 at 11:40 amThe frostiest of winters? How can that be when the sky is falling and the planet is melting?
Comment by TCDon
Do yourself a favor Loon, read up on Global Warming (i.e. climate change). It does not mean the whole planet will warm at the same time, it means that all areas are going to have severe climate change. In some places it will be much warmer and in some places it will be much cooler.
The earth is terribly out of balance and we have caused it. Our mother earth can’t take care of us if we destroy her ability to do so.
Fortunately a vast majority of the people on mother earth recognize that we are doing her harm and hopefully this will cause all nations to start working on reversing the harm we have already done.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:44 amI don’t have the time to make a longer post right now, but these are some previous posts I made on the subject. Please check them out and make comments if you agree or disagree.
Comment by Patriot
Why should we bother commenting on your inane posts. When you start a post with “Global warming is a lie”, that tells us that your steel trap mind has slammed shut and no amount of evidence to the contrary is going to change your mind. Fortunately a majority of people in this country and in other countries recognize the threat that is facing us. As soon as we get rid of the insane person who is sitting in the Whitehouse, this country can start making its contributions towards reversing the harm that we have all done to the planet.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:47 amRep. Bobby Jindal (R) became the nation’s youngest governor. Jindal, the Republican 36-year-old son of Indian immigrants.
Comment by TCDon
And your point is? I don’t find it surprising. Other than New Orleans, Louisiana is a very red state. I am not at all surprised to hear that a Republican won. But, it isn’t that big a win since he only garnered 53% of the vote.
I’m sure the point you are trying to make is that the Republicans aren’t down for the count. I think you are wrong. Having a Republican governor doesn’t make that much of a dent in the grand scheme, as having a Republican president does. Bush has destroyed the Republican party on a national level for a very long time. People are smart enough to recognize that we really can’t afford any more years of Republican rule.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:54 ambilbobaggins at 25: My mind is very open to new ideas. As soon as Al Gore gives some proof of Global Warming, and he answers the questions raised about Global Warming, then I will take it into account. As of yet, Al Gore’s “Proof” is just guesses and faulty experiments.
October 21st, 2007 at 2:58 pmAbout climate change opposed to Global Warming, Global Warming is a theory about climate change. (I use theory not in the scientific form meaning “Corroborated evidence from multiple scientists” but in the connotative form meaning “A guess or specultaion”) If you talk about Global Climate Change, then you are talking about Global Warming, Al Gore’s theory, (see above parenthesis) Global Cooling, the theory from the 70’s, and natural climate change that occurs over time. That is a very broad topic, so it is often better to narrow it down to the theory (Once again, see above parenthesis) that is relevent to and discussed most often today.
Tiadays local includes climate change as part of the explaination for the decline in the brillance of our NE fall foliage. I can’t say whether that is true or not but I can say others which claim climate change to be a “lie” are dumbasses as they feel they can.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:53 pmComment by Patriot — October 21, 2007 @ 2:58 pm
Your comment shows how badly uninformed you are about the subject.
Global Warming is not Gore’s “guess or speculation”. I repeat: It. is. not. his. speculation. More accurately, it is not speculation.
The rest of your babble is not worth rebutting, let alone correcting.
October 21st, 2007 at 3:54 pmdbadass, maybe I jumped the gun in calling Global Warming a lie. I just have never been presented with any reliable information or hard data supporting it. If there is proof of MANMADE Global Warming, as espoused by Al Gore, please show me.
October 21st, 2007 at 5:19 pmGregor Samsa, if Global Warming isn’t Al Gore’s theory, then whose is it? My babble? What babble are you referring to? Just give me links and post numbers.
lmjp1, I’m not smoking anything. If I was, I wouldn’t be taking this viewpoint.
Patriot:
October 21st, 2007 at 5:39 pmOther than what seems like a negative fixation on Al Gore, I find that a reasoned and measured response. If data driven objectivity is what you seek, try to not prejudge any data you do see.
best-
My babble? What babble are you referring to? Just give me links and post numbers.
Comment by Patriot — October 21, 2007 @ 5:19 pm
What babble? This one, for starters:
Gregor Samsa, if Global Warming isn’t Al Gore’s theory, then whose is it?
It is not Gore’s theory. He is not a scientist. He didn’t come up with it. He does not have the background to do so.
You just showed, once again, you have no idea what you are talking about, i..e., you are babbling.
Here is a good place to get the basics on global warming.
October 21st, 2007 at 6:21 pmIf you are looking for 100% certain proof that global warming is real, and caused by human actions, it doesn’t exist.
In order to create such proof, one would have to construct two identical Earths, and on one introduce human generated greenhouses gases and all the other various things that human produce, and keep the other one free of human influence and observe what happens for a few thousand years. This experiment is simply not feasible.
Instead, what can be acheived is similar to a murder trial, where the defendent can be shown “beyond a reasonable doubt” to be guilty. Since the definition of reasonable is subjective, not everyone will agree. We have reached a point where a strong majority of scientists, and a somewhat weaker majority of laymen are in agreement that the proof has been shown to be suficiently reasonable.
Imagine that you are standing in the street, and you see a man, let’s call him John, point a gun at another man named Bill. You hear a loud bang and see Bill fall to the ground. You may conclude that John shot Bill, but you haven’t proved it. Maybe the loud bang was a truck backfiring, and Bill collapsed from a heart attack.
You then observe Bill’s body and see a bullet hole, with blood flowing out of it. You still haven’t proved that John shot Bill; maybe Bill was shot by someone else out of your view, and not by John.
You also observe smoke coming from John’s gun, and a shell casing from John’s gun lying on the ground nearby. You still don’t have 100% proof, maybe John did fire his gun, but not at Bill.
Eventually, you can collect enough evidence that, even though you are not 100% certain, you can safely conclude that John shot Bill, because the alternative explaination is just so remotely improbable.
That is just about where we stand on human caused global warming. We don’t have 100% proof, but the other possible explainations of what is going on are so improbable, that we can consider it, for all practical purposes, proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
I suggest you read the IPCC report.
October 21st, 2007 at 7:43 pmhttp://www.ipcc.ch/pub/online.htm
35 Errors in Al Gore’s Film.
LOL
October 21st, 2007 at 9:56 pmGregor Samsa, you still did not answer my question. If Global Warming is not Al Gore’s theory, then whose is it? I just assumed it was Al Gore’s theory because he is the only one trying to raise awareness about it. E.G. Inconvenient Truth, book and movie.
BlackbirdHighway, what about the theory that it is Earth’s natural cycle. That Earth heats up, then goes into an ice age afterward. If it is naturally occuring, then it is not Manmade Global Warming, so there can be no policy about it.
October 21st, 2007 at 9:56 pmIf Global Warming is not Al Gore’s theory, then whose is it?
Comment by Patriot — October 21, 2007 @ 9:56 pm
Do you really think a scientific theory must be “owned” by an individual, somehow?
The scientific consensus over global climate change has grown over the years, regardless of what Gore says and many years before his movie was even produced.
Had you bothered clicking on the link, you would know that by now.
I just assumed it was Al Gore’s theory because he is the only one trying to raise awareness about it. E.G. Inconvenient Truth, book and movie.
He is not the only one, but he is probably the one person who is best known in the US.
There are already efforts in the US, at the regional level, to do something about global climate change. Again, regardless of what Gore says.
If it is naturally occuring, then it is not Manmade Global Warming, so there can be no policy about it.
Had you bothered to follow the link to the wikipedia, you would know that the scientific consensus over the human impact on this climate change is strong.
Don’t be so obtuse. Follow the link to the wikipedia and get started.
October 21st, 2007 at 11:02 pm“Do you really think that pumping massive amounts of pollutants into our atmosphere is not having any negative affect on our planet?â€
Yes. It makes the air dirty. That’s why we should build more nuclear power plants and decommission the coal-fired power plants.
But all the libs want to do to fight global warming is to increase the gas tax and get rid of the mortgage deduction on your taxes. It’s just a money grab for the and his ilk.
October 22nd, 2007 at 12:21 amWhy do the 24% percenters continue to come here to blather inanely?
October 22nd, 2007 at 8:55 amBut all the libs want to do to fight global warming is to increase the gas tax and get rid of the mortgage deduction on your taxes. It’s just a money grab for the and his ilk.
Comment by muckdog — October 22, 2007 @ 12:21 am
If you actually did any reading on the subject beyond rightwing newsletters and the fossil fuel company-funded sites you favor, you might have learned that scientists and technicians, for one, concerned about global warming have been researching all sorts of sustainable and recycable alternatives. Portland, Oregon, a city which has been undertaking innovations to cut back on pollutants and fuel emissions on its own, is, in fact, prospering. The USA used to be about technological innovation and advances, but now lazy conservatives like yourself and your president are leaving such ingenuity to Japan, Europe, etc.
October 23rd, 2007 at 1:38 amFinally, your last sentence makes no sense.
Lora, I agree. We should use cleaner energy and cut back on carbon. I say we replace all power plants with nuclear power plants and all cars with Hydrogen powered ones. In order to reduce carbon emission from cars, everyone should buy a BMW. Unfortunately, every time I propose this, someone says, “Nuclear power is bad” or “We should use bio-diesel,†No body can agree on how to change in order to stop Global Warming (if it can be stopped by humans). I personally believe that Global Warming is caused by Earth’s natural cycle, so we can’t stop it, but Nuclear power and Hydrogen power are more efficient than what we use now, so I support them.
October 24th, 2007 at 6:10 am