Slashdot Mirror
Record Number of Americans See Climate Change As a Current Threat (axios.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: More Americans are very worried about global warming and say the issue is personally important to them than ever before, according to a new poll released Tuesday. The polling may indicate that extreme weather events -- coupled with a series of grim scientific findings -- over the past year are starting to change peoples' minds about climate change, which could have significant implications for any significant climate legislation passing Congress. The key finding from the new survey from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication is that Americans increasingly view global warming as a present-day threat to them, rather than an issue that will affect future generations. Nearly half of Americans (46%) said they personally experienced the effects of global warming -- a 15-point spike since March 2015.
How, exactly is this touching me in my daily life?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
"Denialist pollution source owners' propaganda efforts failing, American idiots slowly pulling their collective heads out of their asses and realizing changes must be made quickly, or this is going to get much worse."
In other news, record numbers of Americans are susceptible to group think and mass indoctrination.
What implications? Since when do they give a rat's ass about anything other than their brainwashed base and their donors?
I think they have it wrong.
I remember back in the 80s when the warning came out with the predictions of what would happen.
We're living it.
I'm not interested in "Liberal" vs "Conservative" bickering or what is "fake" or not.
From everything I have seen, doing what I can to reduce human caused climate change means a better way of life for me. Less pollution. Less money being spent. Healthier lifestyle. A better way of life for my children and grandchildren. Less wars. Less migrations and the trouble that causes.
If we could just stop these bullshit wars that cause people to migrate. I cannot blame any Syrian who wants to leave. The same for every other country over-run with assholes who want to take over everything for whatever reason.
Outfits like Axios desperate for some climate change 'action.' The narrative is complete; if you want to save earth, socialism based on carbon redistribution/control. If you're against that, you're a denying Earth Hater. Did anyone notice the latest 'tipping point' narrative drop in the Times a few days ago? They've been tipping the point for twenty years over there lol.
In other news, Brazil told the cult to hold their Carbon Con 2019 somewhere else. Somehow, that's not in the news.
So how much is Soros paying BIZX, LLC to peddle this AGW crap ever other story on Slashdot?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
NEWS AT 11.
A record number of people believe the Earth is flat. So what?
Technically to tell, you'd need a world with the chemicals and one without. But that test is only half the story because the world without would be progressing more slowly technologically, causing deaths itself from this lag.
You...probably don't wanna do that analysis.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Now tell me again: how many Americans don't "believe" in the evolution of species?
When you have real living versions of cartoon anti-environmentalist villains as the ruling members of most big nations for as many years as we have - you start to worry more than compared to when the circumstances seemed more sane.
This isn't some "oh, I'm so concerned about the electrical wire waves on my kid's braces" style worrying - it's "yeah, we've had 20 rounds of studies showing that the base of our food chain won't function nearly as well in a couple of decades" kinds of stuff.
And why? Because we've tied everything together, made politics this absurd game where everyone plays to these massively overloaded crisis scenarios, basically recreating the worst crisises of late-era Roman conditions, and at the same time eliminated the same kinds of things placed in order to prevent non-violent elections from becoming justifications for revolution.
Well, all that largely to feed money and power to the already rich and powerful. And yes, I do significantly blame those that supported the Citizens United outcome.
So, nothing but the focused interests of the those with the plurality of power at the moment get anything now - and compromise is only punished with nigh-permanent reductions in power.
Is it any wonder that the very environment that allows us to live gets sacrificed consistently with that as the game we use to make crucial decisions?
We need a system where the best decisions on any given issue are made without being gummed up with these absurd and artificial ties to these games of retribution and greed.
Ryan Fenton
The insurance companies take global climate change seriously and they are planning for it - i.e. charging you more.
There is also the human health issue - your employees/co-workers will get sick more.
There is also the costs associated with agriculture. Those heat waves or harsh winters that will become more common makes your orange juice - like you have for breakfast - and the coffee - like you have for breakfast - more costly.
And then there is the migration issue. If you are scared of the evil hoard coming across our Southern border, climate change will make that even worse - like then, they'll take raft to our shores, dig a tunnel, fly planes or whatnot into our country. Come in via Canada - NAH! If they make it to Canada they'll stay! The Canadian people are our best defense against illegal immigration from the North!
Watch the news when heat waves come and see how many old people die. They don't just roll over, They go to the emergency room and rack up a hundred Gs doing so and then die. Guess who pays.
And there is much much more. Why do I know? Because that's what I do. Sucking up all the data and running models as to what happens when climate changes.
My reasons? Wall Street.
They're gonna make BILLIONS off of global climate change if we continue the way we're going.
They don't care. They'll be on their yachts basking in the Arctic mellow climate while we roast.
Me? I'm with them. I'm gonna ride their coattails and hopefully end up better than the rest of you people. I'll be able to buy that jar of strawberry jam to put on my Soylent Green.
Suck it, peasant!
"Nearly half of Americans (46%) said they personally experienced the effects of global " - the other 1/2 are republicans -who are the wealthiest in the country, control the Senate, Oval Office, have recently taken the majority of the Supreme Court, are eviscerating environmental protections and are frantically appointing Federal Judges, where the final decisions get made....
Maybe the number shifted from a very-very small number to a very-small number. Does that make it a "record number" ?
I wonder what people will be complaining about fifty years from now when everything is fine. It will probably be something super lame, like super gay, snowflake lame.
A while ago I posted a prank comment under an article about e-mail format. The article was suggesting that all e-mail should be text only or HTML only, or whatever. I said that text only e-mail was orders of magnitude easier to process and render, and it would be interesting to measure the energy savings and their effect on the global warming. That comment was modded as insightful, with a score of 4.
Modern nations can do more than one thing at a time, and effectively.
No, they should ask, give up 10% of your standard of live, are you willing to spend 10% of your income, downsize everything in your life by 10% in order to Combat Climate change starting...now. The percentage will increase over time.
Or are you to have your 1/2 of your standard of living cut for you, 1/2 of your income cut for you, and have everything about your life downsized by 1/2 for you, as a result climate change in 10-20 years....probably. If could be less, or it could be more.
You can choose to help now, or it will be done unto you because the climate will do it...sooner or later.
1114 people over age 18 with nothing better to do responsed to this survey. That's the "record number of Americans" they are referring to.
I wonder, do any slashdotters answer their phone for unknown numbers and engage in long conversations?
No, they should ask, give up 10% of your standard of live, are you willing to spend 10% of your income,
In the US the news has many stories of people who are simply devastated because they have missed one paycheck -- which would be considerably less than 10% of their income.
Or are you to have your 1/2 of your standard of living cut for you, 1/2 of your income cut for you, and have everything about your life downsized by 1/2 for you, as a result climate change in 10-20 years....probably.
The problem with doom and gloom predictions is that the emotional impact of them wears off as deadlines are missed or pushed back. Or, put another way, "Malthus was wrong."
I think the increasing numbers in the polls can be attributed in some, perhaps large, part to the tendency of people to tell pollsters the "right" answer. This should be obvious. We've had lots of stories here on /. about polls being incorrect because of this effect, so why not for this topic, too? And that ignores the push-polling issue, where the answers depend almost solely on the way the questions are asked.
Both the DOD and insurance companies have taken climate change seriously for over 20 years now. Neither can afford to deny reality because it directly affects thier bottom line.
We should consider it with some real urgency and erring on the side of protecting our resources and the planet for future generations, rather than erring on the side of polluting every possible way that can't be directly tied to destroying the planet.
Tell a lie enough times and eventually people will believe it.
This "poll" is from the "Yale Program on Climate Change Communication" - it seeks to push the entire narrative. Now, when you actually ask people what they think is the most important problem, you find environmental issues down around 2-3%. And that's right around where it's been for a LONG time. Push polls make great headlines, and when it's mrsmash as editor - you know it's pushing a defined agenda!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
We now know why slashdot doesn't handle unicode - it's to save the Earth!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
From birth through college they have been brainwashed into believing it's "man's fault" when the real culprit is that "tiny" star about 93 million miles out in space. 10-20 years is not a "trend", HUNDREDS of years would be a trend. Look up the CME's & sun spot cycles and lay a temperature graph over it and it's almost an exact copy.
Makes sense, some of the most heavily climate-denying areas have been hit with terrible hurricanes over the last few years. You can see how someone might stop denying the reality of global warming after it knocks their house down.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Is this the same "Majority of Americans" that voted for Clinton, or is it a real poll?
Life IS chemicals, Princess. Anyone that tells you otherwise is selling something.
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Not even close to being enough. First thing that will have to go is commercial flights. Those simply cannot be tolerated. Interconnected world the way we know it today simply cannot exist. It has to end.
Next thing to go is uninterrupted electricity for everyone. That means no reliable internet either. That's the other link that makes people care to some extent about "outsiders" far away from their nations.
Finally you'll have to accept that your very culture is dysfunctional, because we're not ready to commit genocide on the level that would make Hitler, Stalin and Mao look incredibly benevolent in comparison. We will have to cull most of the population in Africa, Asia and South America, because as they will desire to increase their wealth, they will become much more polluting per capita, easily nullifying all the cuts made in the West. We'll have to be the most brutal mass murderers to have ever existed.
It's the last part that most people genuinely are afraid of addressing. It's factually true that most of the people who either deny global warming, or just don't care about it are the overwhelming majority of humanity who are living in poor countries, and who thanks to the internet now know just how wealthy of lifestyles compared to theirs we have. And they want to be like us. And their lives are being uplifted at rapid rate, as globalization has shifted wealth to developing countries at incredible rate. This will have to be severed and destroyed, alongside the masses who already got a taste of better lifestyles afforded to them by the economic growth. Because they can't afford to care about a threat that might materialize in a hundred years. They have to care about immediate threats, like medicine so their children don't die, food so their children don't end up with stunted growth, housing so they actually have a home to be at, social security of some kind so they can afford to think of more than their next meal.
It's a genuinely impossible equation. To make people care about things like global warming, you need to eliminate most of other threats in their lives - disease, food security, energy security, housing, social security, etc. And to do so worldwide, would require CO2 emissions that would make current emissions look absolutely tiny in comparison. Therefore, the only way to equalize the two would be to conduct genocide of unforeseen proportions.
Are they worried enough to change their own behaviour? Are they driving small cars (or none), travelling only when essential, and choosing to live in smaller more energy-efficient houses? Are they deliberately buying less manufactured stuff, or cutting back on beef consumption?
Or are they just worried enough to want "someone else" to pay for changes?
I choose to do nothing because the changes climate changes are making things better. Warmer winters, less snow, the fact that my energy bills are way smaller in the summer than the winter means, the hotter the earth gets the less money it costs. So I will not do a damn thing.
I like how you jump up on that soap box and deliver a very interesting screed. You did, ultimately, fail though. You couldn't be bothered to at least name 3 or 4 of these chemicals? Couldn't link or copypaste this list? C'mon man! You made the sales pitch but left the goods at the warehouse! I would definitely Like to Know More(tm).
NEWS AT 11, when ^^ this denialist shilling cornhole faggot bleats out his apologies and denials freshly anew. Rubles in the mail, comrade INCEL! Oh, but we're still going to address climate change, tell Vlad sorry for us will you bitch?
Only 46% of Americans are afraid of climate change. (page 11 section 2.2 in the actual survey report).
The link to "extreme" weather is totally bogus, totally discredited in scientific literature and the IPCC reports.
Tornadoes are down (that is extreme storms), we had a few hurricanes, but that was after a 12 year period where NONE hit hte USA, so that was caused by climate change to?
Droughts and floods? Hmm, seems contradictory. California mountain snow pack is all over >100% normal now, so no drought next year.
The global temperature cycles (AMO and PDO for example) and solar activity point to a cooling phase, so soon (unless they keep fudging the temperate data with "adjustments" we will see a cooling or flat trend.
This survey is suspect in my mind as it contradicts many other surveys that show global warming is very low on most peoples priorities. It is top priority in AOC's mind and those that seek to destroy our energy infrastructure and technological and industrial base. You can't make microprocessors and wind turbines with expensive unreliable intermittent power.
Thoes liberals are soooo tolerant.
All these socialist control schemes require coercion and violence, so he is just showing his true stripes.
The magnetic pole shift? Or the Sun?
BS! The earth has gone through a lot of "climage change" for millions of years long before there were HUMANS on the earth. Don't give me that BS WE are causing it. It's a load of hogwash!
FOLLOW THE MONEY!
Where does all the money for your "carbon taxes" go huh? Hey Al Gore gets lots of it! This whole "climate change" change thing is all about MONEY and CONTROL! Not a DAMN thing to do with 'fixing out climate".
Let the sheep be lead to the SLAUGHTER on this thing!
The news media is very selective to not spread news contrary to the desired narrative.
The relentless drum beat of global warming propaganda...
The IPCC aren't afraid of it. I'm not. Nobody is. Deniers deny AGW however and make shit up (see your post) not through fear of AGW but terror at your political ideology (neocapitalist libertarian free market fundamentalist) failing to deal with AGW and only government being able to do anything about it by force, since the free market won't do jack shit.
Nope, no need to cut down wealthy people or make people unhealthy. Indeed your privatised healthcare does that far FAR better than government provided healthcare does (which government care is cheaper by half), and privatised industry is upping the damage to the environment which WILL make people unhealthy.
But you denier faggots just gotta bullshit. Reality scares you.
And why should government care about you? If you're so insulated from society your needs are irrelevant to government and everyone else. So feel free to piss and moan, but by not caring about other people, other people (and government represents other people, and a lot more of them than just the one of you) don't have to give one rotted rat's ringpiece about you.
We'll just pass the laws and increase the taxes and tax fossil fuels without your input. Because you don't care.
... are these unbiased sources?
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Ah yes - the religious republican science denier argument.
Tell me again o Democrats - how many genders are defined by X and Y chromosomes?
Democrats do a fine job denying science - and math for that matter. Many Democrats now advocate for social policies that cost 10 times our GDP.
A pox on both their houses.
Indoors that gets you to 4000+ppm and you cannot survive long term with more than 8 hours a day over 1100ppm.
Humans breathe out not because they need oxygen but because the CO2 causes the reflex. Whales don't have that reflex and use more of the O2 they breathe. We die at 3000ppm. Just takes time. And, no, not like natural death. Like cancer. Or chronic pain. Or drug addiction. Or alcoholism. You won't die in one day of alcoholism, nor in one year, maybe not 5 years, if you're "lucky", but your eyes will yellow as your liver packs up and you will die raving and in excruciating pain. YOU, you selfish cunt, want to take everyone with you because you can't give up the booze.
would have been 30 years ago!
Fresh water is the biggest threat. I mean next threat.
Global cooling, or the Ice Age, was the last threat.
Then Global warming, then Climate Change.
None were fixed. Weird.
then you have nothing of any use to contribute to any conversations.
This "poll" is from the "Yale Program on Climate Change Communication" - it seeks to push the entire narrative. Now, when you actually ask people what they think is the most important problem, you find environmental issues down around 2-3%. And that's right around where it's been for a LONG time. Push polls make great headlines, and when it's mrsmash as editor - you know it's pushing a defined agenda!
I for one am getting tired of msmash's global warming spam on Slashdot. No wonder the readership is down. I've lived long enough to hear that the world is going into an ice age, then it's going to fry, yada yada yada. And NO --- the science is NOT settled. We just have some high priests of the global warming faith installed at the U.N. who burp out scare documents from time to time for true believers of the faith to feed on. And we all know that anything greater than 0.04% carbon dioxide in the atmosphere spells doom for planet Earth, what with it being the least effective greenhouse gas and all. We may as well all kill ourselves tomorrow.
Actually the climate change activists want more than half of everything, they want you dead. And they me dead. And they want every human on earth dead, except the tiny cabal of fools who follow their nonsense in cultish fashion. They care nothing about saving humanity and the earth.
what matters is that 60-80% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck (depending on what you consider "paycheck to paycheck", $400 in the bank gets you 60%, $1000 gets you 80%).
Said it before, say it again: Until we fix the economy for working class Americans all this talk of climate change is just talk. Climate change is years from now but rent's due today.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
well that was interesting. thanks for a new rabbit hole to get lost in.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
If the supposedly scared people are willing to sacrifice a CO2 belching luxury that humanity got along fine without until about 90 years ago, then they might actually be worried. If they are not willing to put up with even that trivial inconvenience, then they are not really all that worried.
Yawn, more people will say having food to eat and a roof over their heads is more important that global warming? So what? The poll tracks the number of people who think AGW is real and that it affects them. Simple questions, no push there.
Well, if a person has X and Y...they could be male...
then again...they could birth a child.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p...
-- There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy
Aspirin and salt are grandfathered. Can you name one of these chemicals that you have a problem with?
CLIMATE
Apart from 2018, the summers in the UK for the past five to ten years have been very mild (i.e. cool). There is no such thing as 'catastrophic man-made global warming', and all the predictions from the alarmists have been WRONG.
www.climatedepot.com
www.wattsupwiththat.com
There are so many people who will believe whatever "Fox News/Republican Party/Donald Trump" tells them until reality bites them on the ass.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It shows how good people can be manipulated to believe anything they are required to believe.
Actual proof is not needed by mere humans aka brainless monkeys.
They are expecting 1500 private jets to arrive in Switzerland for the Davos conference. Tell me again how these people are climate champions.
A vast number of americans believe some guy rose from the dead 2000 years ago. That tells me more about the believers than about the assertion.
Record number of yellow-vested Frenchmen burning down France to protest fallout from Climate Change/Paris Accord Policies they see as a Current Threat
...that doesn't mean people want to PAY much to somehow fix/mitigate it. Look to France to see what happens when you try to tax people.
Ferret
Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc
What is the use of getting everyone to think of Climate Change as a threat? I am sure it is useful to have an entire population scared and feeling helpless... but why should I care about of this?
Am I the person who can make laws?
Am I the person who owns infrastructure?
Why is everyone working so fucking hard to get me to be terrified and horrified about Climate Change?
I find electricity to be exceptionally useful. I don't use a lot and I definitely don't waste it, but I am not going to stop using it. I don't generate electricity. I don't have any control over how electricity is generated. Consumer electricity is not really a huge factor in all of this even if it is a factor that is messy and dirty.
Ok. So my electricity usage is not really an issue, what about the products that I buy and use? Well, again, all of those take energy and I don't generate energy nor do I have any control over those who do... but I can just not buy any products. Kind of? I don't really own anything except some clothes and a car. I think we can all agree that I should be wearing clothes, but what about the car? Well, I live across the street from where I work, so I solved the need for a car concerning getting to work. I still do need a car though. Someone smarter-than-the-rest-of-us fuckhead decided that the profits from making cars were so huge that they took some of those profits and used them to coerce municipalities into designing their cities and towns in such a way that mass transit is almost impossible to do, and is impossible to do in any sort of efficient and economical manner.
But again, I didn't have any control over how those profits were used.
The only other direct effect I can have is to stop eating meat or to stop living entirely. They are roughly equivalent to me. I will go buy guns and prevent you from forcing me to eat some protein "shake" that has all the essential amino acids that the body needs.
So explain to me why I should be all up in arms over Climate Change? What use is it for me to have lingering unresolved psychological issues related to things I can't control, change, or even influence?
Long story short, those who profited the most from this utter mess are throwing the responsibility back on the masses by saying, "you enticed me to do it! you are responsible". No mother fucker, the rapist doesn't get to say "you enticed me to rape you".
And yet some of you continue blithely along trying to get everyone all worked up over this shit. Stop it. rsilvergun and AmiMoJo, you are working directly for the people that you most despise. You are helping to remove the issue of direct accountability by helping those who profited to push the blame onto us, where we are expected to walk to work and eat protein shakes to help "save the environment" while mother fuckers Mary T. Barra assist their masters in continuing to do more damage to the environment than any random group of 7 billion people would by themselves.
Please stop posting articles about Climate Change here. There is no good coming out of it. I don't normally hate people, but god damn, it is REALLY hard not to have intense burning hatred for the useful fools like AmiMoJo and rsilvergun.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Clear eyed logic, but there is more. Imagine this scenario: we just flat-ass don't do shit. Zero. Nothing. Okay... thought experiment. If we didn't do shit there is some non-zero chance that the world absolutely becomes uninhabitable. That's the extreme side of the rhetoric. Now, alternatively maybe little or nothing happens due to either overestimation of current projections or that we find a way to mitigate so that CO2 comes way down. So, I'm just trying to follow your logic a little further.... wouldn't another option would be to simply let technology take as long as it wants to solve the problem (or run out of fuel to burn Mad Max style) ? The reason being that if the only alternative is certain genocide, then damn near anything is better (or perhaps they are simply the same option with two names?) Damn fatalistic, thinking, but logical... very logical. We'll survive ... or not.
There's just one problem. It most certainly isn't the only alternative, just like global warming is a fairly small reduction in world GDP over next hundred years (a tiny portion of growth that will happen with far greater certainty over the same period of time) rather than a genocide event it was supposed to be right now if you believed the best models and scientific consensus from the 90s. Most people forget, but best models back then predicted mass starvation to be occurring today. Exact opposite actually happened, we're on the very edge of beating starvation due to non-political (i.e. warfare) issues. World hunger is at all times low, beating even the most optimistic projections from a decade ago by organisations that aimed to fight it back then.
The thing to take away from this is that we are really, REALLY bad at modelling the future beyond few years. So to suggest apocalyptic scenario a hundred years in the future based on "best scientific consensus" is as just much of a folly as to try to claim that we're experiencing a mass starvation event world wide right now. Which I stress, was indeed the best scientific consensus modelled projection for ~2020 about 30 years ago.
We as species are extremely good at adapting to slowly changing environment. That is literally why we are the alpha predator on the planet. We have a brain capable of abstraction on levels no other species on the planet can come even close, which allows us as species to adapt in ways no other species has. So the current trend of finding ways to generate energy with lower CO2 emissions at low cost is critical at slowing the speed of global warming. We don't need to halt it. We just need to make sure it stays slow enough that we can adapt to changes it brings at cost that is less than benefits we derive from cheap energy. Human extinction because of global warming is simply not on the cards. There would need to be something far more catastrophic than that to overcome our adaptability.
So things like switch from coal to natgas where possible is an excellent option. About half of the CO2 emitted per energy generated. Nuclear is great if we can ensure political stability and sufficient lack of corruption wind and solar should be used whenever they are viable. Coal should be avoided if possible. Keep emissions low enough so that global warming stays within "easily adaptable" range it is in right now, rather than it would go into "averagely adaptable", or even "adaptable to with some difficulty" levels. That should be the priority. Doomsaying so common today appears to be mainly a PR effort to get democratic majority behind efforts to this end rather than anything based in actual observable reality. Like any such efforts, they tend to overshoot their targets and cause some problems, but they're likely necessary for the purpose.
Problem is that coal is too cheap, too reliable, and just too accessible compared to everything else when it comes to corrupt, low tech societies that exist in developing countries. It's simply the best option for them. That's why Paris agreement was essentially developing countries attempting to pay off developing countries' aristocracy to not build up coal. It didn't actually work out which is very clear now, but it was a good first attempt at adapting to that particular problem. More refined efforts toward this goal should be the next phase.