Pirate's Cove

Two interesting polls on global warming. First,

CHICAGO – A survey on climate change conducted in more than a dozen countries found that a majority of people in nations including South Korea, Australia, Iran and Mexico — but not the United States — view global warming as a critical threat.

In the U.S., about 46 percent of those questioned said global warming is critical, while four in 10 labeled it "an important but not critical threat," in the survey conducted by The Chicago Council on Global Affairs and WorldPublicOpinion.org, in cooperation with other polling organizations.

The polling was conducted last year, with field periods varying from June to December. More than 20,000 people were polled. The margin of error ranged between 3 and 4 percent.

Iran? Mexico? Two coutries that are generally hot as it is. How can one tell the difference?

Let me jump to the second story

NEW YORK A new Gallup Poll reveals an "inconvenient truth" for advocates of taking a strong immediate position to halt global warming: Most of the American public is in no rush. While they are concerned, they see the problems a long way off — and few place global warming near the top of environmental priorities.

Gallup asked respondents to rate how much they worry about seven different possible effects of global warming, and now relates: "Generally speaking, not much more than one-third of Americans are 'very worried' about any of the seven effects of global warming measured in the survey; however, a solid majority are at least 'somewhat worried' about nearly all of them."

At the bottom of the list: 2 out of 3 are not very worried that human life will cease.

A solid majority of Democrats say they are very, or somewhat, worried about all seven items. At least half of independents worry about six of the seven. No more than 49% of Republicans are worried about ANY of them.

The national poll of 1,018 adults was carried out in late February.

While it would be easy to pick out the relevant information in each study, one which supports my position, and one that doesn't, let me point out whether people are worried or not in some degree doesn't make global warming real or false, nor does it deduce what effect, if any, Mankind has. And certainly not when only 20K of over 6 billion people are surveyed around the world, and slightly over a thousand here in the USA.

Science is science. It is facts and figures. It involves research, not feelings and politics.

That said, both studies do show that the majority of those surveyed in the U.S.A. aren't all that concerned. As far as the questions for the world wide survey, there were two parts. The first is Views of Global Warming

• Until we are sure that it is really a problem, we should not take any steps that would have economic costs
• should be addressed, but its effects will be gradual, so we can deal with the problem gradually by taking steps that are low in cost
• a serious and pressing problem. We should begin taking steps now even if that involves significant cost.

Notice that two of the three assume that there is a problem, and the first is meant to influence. Where was the question "there is no problem, so stop wasting my time and infringing on my liberty"?

The second set of questions is Threat Assessment: Global Warming

• not an important threat at all
• an important but not critical threat
• a critical threat

Where was the question along the lines of "kinda important, but nature does Her thing"?

In the USA, 39% found that it was important, but not critical. 13% said not an important threat at all. Hey, I think it is important, but not critical, in this context. Not much we can do about the Sun nor Earth forces, such as volcano's in the mid Atlantic Ridge. We can certainly do our best not to pollute the atmosphere, and avoid release of too much methane. We can keep the land and waters clean. Chill out on clear cutting, and have cleaner burning passenger conveyences. Not much we can do about urban areas, whose temperatures are higher then the surrounding countryside, unless we want to tear them down. And we can use more alternative energy methods, such as nuclear power plants, which are all the rage in Europe, and windfarms. Of course, uber-liberals like Ted Kennedy are against windfarms, if they cause problems in the family boating areas.

What I am saying is, don't forget the individual trees of the environment through the dark forest of global warming, especially as global warming is simply a method to destroy industrialized countries by socialists and business haters.

Tell you what: if you believe in global warming as caused by Man, YOU change your lifestyle. No playing with pretend carbon credits, ala Al Gore. Go Green. If you won't live the lifestyle, why should anyone listen to you?

Me, I'm going to live my life the way I want. I will continue to make my contributions to a cleaner world, but, I will not play all the little games and waste my money on silliness.

Trackposted to Perri Nelson's Website, The Virtuous Republic, http://morewhat.com/wordpress/?p=1134, The Random Yak, Maggie's Notebook, basil's blog, Stuck On Stupid, Cao's Blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Pursuing Holiness, Conservative Thoughts, Allie Is Wired, third world county, stikNstein… has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Overtaken by Events, The Pink Flamingo, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.