This is a fun one. A survey made March 12-30, 2012, by Yale and George Mason Universities asked this question:
How much do you support or oppose signing an international treaty that requires the United States to cut its emissions of carbon dioxide 90% by 2050?
They asked 1,008 people. First I'll tell you what the Center for American Progress (an ICLEI supporter and partner in UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development) reported as the 'result.'
The Center for American Progress reported that 65% of the respondents supported this REQUIRED huge reduction in US carbon dioxide by 2050.
Now I'll tell you what the data showed. Nineteen percent strongly supported this international treaty concept. The other forty six percent 'somewhat' supported it. But it was reported as 'support.'
Now I'll tell you what the title of this article is: The Death of Public Support for Global Warming Action Is Greatly Exaggerated. Interesting, right? This article is designed as spin.
Another survey question asks, in a Delphi-style way, "People disagree on whether the US should reduce greenhouse gas emissions on its own, or make reductions only if other countries do too. Which of the statements comes closest to your own point of view?" And then the question answers are ranged from the US should do it without influence by other countries or it should follow the lead of other countries. Do you see the Delphi? They set this up so that if you don't know anything about this you'll just want to see the US make 'independent decisions' not influenced by other countries and you'll 'vote' for that. And, predictably, 63% of respondents did just that when they said they wanted the US to reduce its GHG regardless of what other countries do. They didn't question the whole premise in the first place did they?
This is classic Delphi. Be aware.
How much do you support or oppose signing an international treaty that requires the United States to cut its emissions of carbon dioxide 90% by 2050?
They asked 1,008 people. First I'll tell you what the Center for American Progress (an ICLEI supporter and partner in UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development) reported as the 'result.'
The Center for American Progress reported that 65% of the respondents supported this REQUIRED huge reduction in US carbon dioxide by 2050.
Now I'll tell you what the data showed. Nineteen percent strongly supported this international treaty concept. The other forty six percent 'somewhat' supported it. But it was reported as 'support.'
Now I'll tell you what the title of this article is: The Death of Public Support for Global Warming Action Is Greatly Exaggerated. Interesting, right? This article is designed as spin.
Another survey question asks, in a Delphi-style way, "People disagree on whether the US should reduce greenhouse gas emissions on its own, or make reductions only if other countries do too. Which of the statements comes closest to your own point of view?" And then the question answers are ranged from the US should do it without influence by other countries or it should follow the lead of other countries. Do you see the Delphi? They set this up so that if you don't know anything about this you'll just want to see the US make 'independent decisions' not influenced by other countries and you'll 'vote' for that. And, predictably, 63% of respondents did just that when they said they wanted the US to reduce its GHG regardless of what other countries do. They didn't question the whole premise in the first place did they?
This is classic Delphi. Be aware.
RSS Feed