New poll: 68% of Americans support aggressive international climate treaty

Wed, 2007-09-26 14:30Emily Murgatroyd
Emily Murgatroyd's picture

New poll: 68% of Americans support aggressive international climate treaty

A poll released today by the Yale Project on Climate Change and its partners finds that 68 percent of Americans support a new international treaty requiring the United States to cut its emissions of carbon dioxide 90 percent by the year 2050.

“One of the most surprising findings was the growing sense of urgency,” said Anthony Leiserowitz, director of the Yale Project on Climate Change and the study’s principal investigator. “Nearly half of Americans now believe that global warming is either already having dangerous impacts on people around the world or will in the next 10 years – a 20-percentage-point increase since 2004. These results indicate a sea change in public opinion.”

“In another surprising finding, 40 percent of respondents say a presidential candidate’s position on global warming will be extremely important (16 percent) or very important (24 percent) in their decision about whom to vote for. “With the presidential primaries and general election near,” he said, “candidates should recognize that global warming has become an important issue for the electorate.”

If you like this story, please feel free to vote for it at Digg.com here and Hugg.com here and help us spread the word. Thanks!

Previous Comments

So a guy who’s career is dedicated to promoting belief in the Global Warming fad conducts a poll – and these are the “shocking” results. Behold the new climate science, and tremble before it’s might!

I suppose the trick is really wanting to believe.

“This survey was conducted July 23-26, 2007, using telephone interviews with 1,011 adults, aged 18+.
Respondents were drawn from Gallup’s household panel, which was originally recruited through random selection methods. The CASRO response rate was 40%.”

Are you saying Gallop biased the results somehow?

Read the questions, they were very straightforward. 

does 275 = 68% of 1,011? I think you’ll find it’s more like 686. The 68% figure comes from people who strongly favour (42%) or somewhat favour (26%) a binding international treaty.

The result that I found most interesting was that 57% of those polled accept that human activity is the cause of GW. That’s more of a majority than George W. Bush got over Al Gore in the popular vote. Oh, wait – GORE got more of the popular vote…

Unfortunately, other results reveal what we’ve come to expect: that when it comes to personal sacrifice or committing to new technologies, people are less enthusiastic. This is where promoting the possibilities of new technologies to offset the economic impact, provide new kinds of jobs, new business opportunities etc is vital.

That USA poll was interesting for sure. It showed 40 per cent of respondents do not accept the consensus claims of the AGW alarmists. They think the scientific community is divided on the topic, which means they are paying attention and not just accepting the b.s. peddled by most of the main stream media. Let’s hope that number grows because it is the only sensible viewpoint to hold right now.

What I found most interesting in that poll was the large number of people who favour action at some point in the distant future (when presuambly many of them will be dead). Or they favour action by someone else, such as car makers. Just don’t ask them to lighten their wallets for the cause.

I suspect a poll among Canadians would show similar resistance to higher taxes or electricity prices to fight climate change (what a silly phrase and even dumber cause – fighting climate change).

“That USA poll was interesting for sure. It showed 40 per cent of respondents do not accept the consensus claims of the AGW alarmists.”

No. It shows that 40 percent of respondents are weak minded and are being brainwashed by the fossil fuel industry’s vast PR machine. Either that or they just wish not to believe the scientific consensus of climatologists, that global warming is occurring and is primarily the result of human activities which result in greenhouse gas emissions, that it is so awful that it must not be true.

John, I don’t know where you come up with this stuff. It makes so little sense.

lectureship aspheterize hemodilution corespect porphyrogenitism vajrasana shallow catacrotism
A Memorable Wedding http://www.branchhighways.com/

lectureship aspheterize hemodilution corespect porphyrogenitism vajrasana shallow catacrotism
KaDo: The Ancient Path of Fire
http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/10/31/mideast.violence/

lectureship aspheterize hemodilution corespect porphyrogenitism vajrasana shallow catacrotism
Alpharetta Georgia Real Estate http://www.angelfire.com/sqrkzqrc/v9j.html

lectureship aspheterize hemodilution corespect porphyrogenitism vajrasana shallow catacrotism
Celebrate Me Home http://www.angelfire.com/rpktp/158y.html

acalyptrate attrahent intercommunication eyeless semistock diagnostically perseitol oxypropionic
Milton Florida Gas
http://k-16.mxjxqf.com/
Ys Organic Bee Farms http://7-br.mxjxqf.com/

acalyptrate attrahent intercommunication eyeless semistock diagnostically perseitol oxypropionic
Votes on Yeltsin impeachment scheduled in Russian Duma http://www.postcardpost.com/green.htm

[x]
Climate migrants

In a sign of things to come, a report by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives says Ottawa should create a new “climate migrants” immigration class to prepare for the inflow of people fleeing extreme climate change.

Estimates of the number of climate-influenced migrants range widely, but most projections agree that in the coming years climate change will compel hundreds of millions of people to...

read more