Photosales
niJobfinder
niCarfinder
Home Delivery
Propertynews
Poll shows scepticism over man-made climate change
Monday, 7 December 2009
Around half of the public believe there is no proof that global warming is caused by humans, according to a new poll.
The ICM survey for The Sunday Telegraph revealed that 46% of those quizzed did not believe mankind was largely responsible for the global temperature rise.
The opinions of this relatively large group are wildly at odds with the main conclusions of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Some 39% of those questioned for the poll said climate change was not proven to be man made.
And around 7% of pollsters believed climate change was not taking place at all.
Less than a quarter (23%) said climate change was the most serious problem man faced whereas 58% described climbing global temperatures as one of a number of serious problems.
And less than a fifth (17%) of those asked, said global warming was not a very serious problem.
But a separate international poll for BBC World Service revealed that global public concern about climate change was at a high level.
Nearly two thirds of those polled said climate change was a "very serious" problem but concern has fallen in China and the USA.
Only 6% of the 24,000 people polled want their government to oppose a climate deal being reached in Denmark.
The poll also shows that, in spite of the global recession, an average of 61% support their governments making investments to address climate change, even if these investments hurt the economy.
But the poll found public opinion in the world's two largest emitters of carbon dioxide was less clear.
The Chinese are the most likely to support government investments to address climate change even if these harm the economy with 89% in favour, only 52% of Americans feel the same way.
Also, the percentage of American (45%) and Chinese citizens (57%) who see climate change as "very serious" is below the 23-country average of 64%.
The overall results revealed there was strong support for governments taking an ambitious approach to the Copenhagen negotiations.
On average, 44% and majorities in 10 of the 23 countries polled, said they wanted their government to "play a leading role in setting ambitious targets to address climate change" at Copenhagen.
A further 39% thought their government should "adopt a more moderate approach and support only gradual action".
Only 6% want their government to oppose any agreement.
Majorities in major European nations support their government playing a strong leadership role in Copenhagen - 62% in the UK, 57% in France, and 55% in Germany.
Other governments being pressed to show leadership include Canada at 61%, Australia at 57%, Japan at 57%, and Brazil at 53%.
In comparison, Chinese opinion about Copenhagen favours a "moderate approach" involving "only gradual action" over a "leadership approach".
In the United States, 36% are in favour of a "moderate approach" and 14% oppose any agreement, outweighing the 46% of Americans who want their government to show leadership.
The results are drawn from a survey of 24,071 adults in 23 countries, conducted by the international polling firm GlobeScan between 19 June and 13 October, 2009.
GlobeScan Chairman Doug Miller said: "The poll shows strong worldwide support for action on climate change, in spite of the recession.
"However, the mixed opinions in the United States and China suggest leadership in Copenhagen may need to come from others."
- Text Size
Also in this section
- Blue Flag award record for Northern Ireland's beaches
Man made climate change is a hoax and a fraud. I support Lord Monckton and his fight to expose the AGW lie.
Posted by Kris | 12.12.09, 22:21 GMT
This is by far one of the biggest scams of my generation. Everytime I hear about AGW it makes me laugh... global warming man made... hilarious! What's interesting life on this planet would not exist without CO2. And to point out another fact that blows this shim-sham out of the water is the Mesozoic Era. This was the era of the massive dinosaurs, mammals, and plant life due to the enormous amounts of CO2. I worked for Halliburton as a logging engineer and one of the requirements of training was that I had to take a 4 month course in geology. This man-made hoax is crafted and designed for one purpose; The New World Order, Bildenberg, The UN, or CFR what ever the elite calls themselves. I can't speak for the rest of americans, but it makes me uncomfortable to think if this cap and trade bill passes, the elite will control everything even your drinking water/supply. This bill compromises our rights and liberties therefore; this bill must NOT pass!
Posted by Rob Rought | 09.12.09, 06:27 GMT
Found this page while searching for global warming polls. As an American who does not believe the hype about man-made global warming, I offer this one defense: I go to the source data, wherever it is available and I make my own decisions based on the facts I find. Sometimes the facts are hard to find (they shouldn't be, should they?) and I have had to go to local teachers and contact my PhD friend in Hawaii to help me make sense of the data. My friend, who is an astro-physicist, agrees with me by the way.
A consensus, if such exists, does not make a theory a fact. However, if there is such a supposed consensus why are they(the global warming elite) so keen on slandering those scientists who disagree with them. Is that how scientific discourse is supposed to occur?
The global climate change hoax is not about the planet; it's all about money, power and control. Period.
Posted by Patrick Parkhurst | 07.12.09, 16:56 GMT
AGW is just another religion like Christianity or Islam. It is a faith based pursuit. There is no evidence, credible peer-reviewed evidence, to suggest that humans are causing the planet to heat up. I do not 'deny' that climate change happens.
The planet has been cooling since the start of the Millennium. The planet has been much warmer in the past and the ice-caps did not melt. In the 1970s certain 'scientists' told us that the world was going to freeze over, it didn't.
The planet, for billions of years, has heated up and it has cooled down. Warming and cooling cycles are natural .
When the earth gets warmer, more CO2 is released and it is then used by plants, trees, etc. AGW proponents would like us to believe that it is the other way around, i.e. when CO2 goes up, temperature goes up. Umm...no, that isn't what the evidence says. Increased CO2 does not cause the temperature to rise, increased temperature causes CO2 to rise.
Copenhagen must fail, for all our sakes.
Posted by WH | 07.12.09, 14:51 GMT
Chemicalhaggis,
Unfortunately the AGW mob do not suggest 'replacing your brake pads'. The action they suggest (controlling Co2 emisions) will be be totally ineffective if the hypothesised warming trend is part of a natural cycle (and we are still coming out of an ice age after all). To return to your metaphor Changing the upholstery in your car will not stop you hitting the wall, but the money you might have spent on reapining the car will be gone.
Posted by SteveW | 07.12.09, 11:34 GMT
the world has always changed and we are still here,climate change=government control and even more taxes that people cant afford to pay.
Posted by johnny | 07.12.09, 10:17 GMT
We do not need to have conclusive proof that global warming is a man made phenomena. I am not a climate scientist nor am I a mechanic but if a mechanic tells me that there is a risk my brakes may fail, I will pay the price of new brakes rather than wait till I hit a brick wall. The risks of inaction far outweigh the cost of action therefore the prudent course of action is to err on the safe side and cut emissions. This is simple risk management.
Posted by Chemicalhaggis | 07.12.09, 09:38 GMT
The poll is about the success of the fear-propaganda by the AGW believers and the level of confidence of the public that government can fix about any real or perceived problem.
Apparently we have to find some other brain washing technique for the USA and China before they will step up to the altar of the religion of AGW and offer their sacrifice. We do need followers that can pay tides, the rich USA, a prime candidate now, and China in the future.
Since the proclaimed 'scientific and public consensus' doesn't work with them would smearing and shaming do the trick?
Posted by Werner Strasser | 07.12.09, 06:30 GMT
Would it not be better to actually substanciate the scientific proof of what is happening if indeed it is at all befor comitting to huge expenditure and taxation and leave aside the vestided interestests like Al Gore and his bunch of publisst. There is no concensus of scientific opinion and even if there were what is needed is supstanciated provable fact not somthing akin to a religious belief. We have had all the other global cooling etc by mainly the same people that now say we have global walming!
Posted by Mike Ramsay | 07.12.09, 06:15 GMT