• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Over 70% Americans support federal limits on carbon dioxide emissions

The_Penguin

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
808
Reaction score
205
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
-snip-

But a closer look at these polls and a new survey by my Political Psychology Research Group show just the opposite: huge majorities of Americans still believe the earth has been gradually warming as the result of human activity and want the government to institute regulations to stop it.

In our survey, which was financed by a grant to Stanford from the National Science Foundation, 1,000 randomly selected American adults were interviewed by phone between June 1 and Monday. When respondents were asked if they thought that the earth’s temperature probably had been heating up over the last 100 years, 74 percent answered affirmatively. And 75 percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred.

For many issues, any such consensus about the existence of a problem quickly falls apart when the conversation turns to carrying out specific solutions that will be costly. But not so here.

Fully 86 percent of our respondents said they wanted the federal government to limit the amount of air pollution that businesses emit, and 76 percent favored government limiting business’s emissions of greenhouse gases in particular. Not a majority of 55 or 60 percent — but 76 percent.

-snip-
Op-Ed Contributor - The Climate Majority - NYTimes.com

I hate regulation unless it's absolutely necessary, in this case, I agree with the majority of the people that this is one of those necessary evils.

If you read the article, you'll see links going to other sources as well.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
"When respondents were asked if they thought that the earth’s temperature probably had been heating up over the last 100 years, 74 percent answered affirmatively. And 75 percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred."

So 74% of people think the earth has probably been warming, but 75% think that the warming was caused by people? This didn't sound right, so I went to the actual study. Imagine my surprise when I found out that the guy is disingenuous.

Here's what the survey actually showed:

(Assuming it’s happening) Do you think a rise in the world’s temperature is being (would be) caused mostly by things people do, mostly by natural causes, or about equally by things people do and by natural causes?

Things people do - 30%
Natural causes - 25%
Both equally - 45%
How on earth do you look at that result and say "75 percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred"? Seems to me like "mostly by things people do" is a much better proxy for "substantially responsible" than "mostly things people do" + "both equally." Of course, that's only true if you're trying to get an actual answer, as opposed to trying to get an oped published in the times.

The rest of the poll/article are just as ridiculous.

Some people believe that the United States government should limit the amount of air pollution that U.S. businesses can produce. Other people believe that the government should not limit air pollution from U.S. businesses. What about you? Do you think the government should or should not limit air pollution from U.S. businesses?
:lol: Push poll much?

The rest of the poll goes on like that, setting up questions where there's only one obvious choice. None of the other results are particularly surprising or enlightening - vast majorities of people are opposed to "pollution," but equivalent majorities oppose policies that would actually reduce pollution (e.g. increased taxes or additional spending).
 

The_Penguin

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 26, 2009
Messages
808
Reaction score
205
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
"When respondents were asked if they thought that the earth’s temperature probably had been heating up over the last 100 years, 74 percent answered affirmatively. And 75 percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred."

So 74% of people think the earth has probably been warming, but 75% think that the warming was caused by people? This didn't sound right, so I went to the actual study. Imagine my surprise when I found out that the guy is disingenuous.

Here's what the survey actually showed:



How on earth do you look at that result and say "75 percent of respondents said that human behavior was substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred"? Seems to me like "mostly by things people do" is a much better proxy for "substantially responsible" than "mostly things people do" + "both equally." Of course, that's only true if you're trying to get an actual answer, as opposed to trying to get an oped published in the times.

The rest of the poll/article are just as ridiculous.



:lol: Push poll much?

The rest of the poll goes on like that, setting up questions where there's only one obvious choice. None of the other results are particularly surprising or enlightening - vast majorities of people are opposed to "pollution," but equivalent majorities oppose policies that would actually reduce pollution (e.g. increased taxes or additional spending).
The feeling is mutual :) .

Now gimme a link that leads to these number :) .
 

jujuman13

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 1, 2006
Messages
4,075
Reaction score
579
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I wonder how many tons of CO would be saved if we did as is proposed by a European nation, namely Advance our time by 1 hour in the Winter and by 2 Hours in the summer?
 

pragmatic

"Pawn in game of life"
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
2,220
Reaction score
1,031
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Op-Ed Contributor - The Climate Majority - NYTimes.com

I hate regulation unless it's absolutely necessary, in this case, I agree with the majority of the people that this is one of those necessary evils.

If you read the article, you'll see links going to other sources as well.
A poll of 1000 people on a technical question that many/all have no clue about does not seem to have a lot of value.

For any arguments. By anyone....




.
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,893
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Keep reading. Just under it, the study itself shows a flaw that the researchers made how they ordered the wording.
I'm not sure how that addresses the fact that the author is being disingenuous in his characterization of the response. When you ask a question about something that a person doesn't understand, if you include two extreme answers and then a compromise position, people who don't have strong beliefs will tend toward the compromise position. To then add that in with one of the extreme positions and call it the percentage of people who "substantially" believe in the extreme position is a bit ridiculous.

Think about it this way - using those same results and that same logic, you could say "70 percent of respondents said that natural causes were substantially responsible for any warming that has occurred." Does that fit with his narrative? Of course not.
 
Top Bottom