Majority of red-state Americans believe climate change is real, study shows

[ScienceRocks]

Majority of red-state Americans believe climate change is real, study shows

Study suggests far-reaching acceptance of climate change in traditionally Republican states such as Texas and Oklahoma

A vast majority of red-state Americans believe climate change is real and at least two-thirds of those want the government to cut greenhouse gas emissions, new research revealed on Wednesday.

The research, by Stanford University social psychologist Jon Krosnick, confounds the conventional wisdom of climate denial as a central pillar of Republican politics, and practically an article of faith for Tea Party conservatives.

Instead, the findings suggest far-reaching acceptance that climate change is indeed occurring and is caused by human activities, even in such reliably red states as Texas and Oklahoma.

Majority of red-state Americans believe climate change is real, study shows | Environment | theguardian.com

 

[Mr. H.]

But... but... they don't believe in the science of climate change.

 

[ScienceRocks]

So this means that you want cuts in emissions?

 

[Mr. H.]

I live in the Blue state of Chicagonois. I'm a climate change "fence-sitter".
No matter, I'm for shutting down the agriculture industry for their rampant degradation of the environment and for their participation in the ethanol debacle.

 

[whitehall]

Is this the last stand for global warmists, fake data from a freaking "social psychologist"? Professor Krosnick "combined the results of the best national surveys in the past decade". What does that tell you? Krosnick went back ten years and picked only the "national surveys" he wanted to use. Apparently Professor Krosnick felt he had sufficient data from selected surveys to ESTIMATE public opinion. You have to choke on this one though, Kroskick claims that he made "statistical adjustments to account for changes of opinion". The whole thing stinks of the kind of junk science the warmers have relied on all along.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Is this the last stand for global warmists, fake data from a freaking "social psychologist"? Professor Krosnick "combined the results of the best national surveys in the past decade". What does that tell you? Krosnick went back ten years and picked only the "national surveys" he wanted to use. Apparently Professor Krosnick felt he had sufficient data from selected surveys to ESTIMATE public opinion. You have to choke on this one though, Kroskick claims that he made "statistical adjustments to account for changes of opinion". The whole thing stinks of the kind of junk science the warmers have relied on all along.

No, he did not. If he did, you would have produced incontestable evidence. What you have produced is your opinion of what he did.

 

[RGR]

Majority of red-state Americans believe climate change is real, study shows

Study suggests far-reaching acceptance of climate change in traditionally Republican states such as Texas and Oklahoma

Science isn't run by consensus. Climate change is undeniable and proven, just ask the residual ice sheet evidence on Long Island and across New England. Canada exists because of climate change…that entire country should be rejoicing.

What people think, who don't understand where the light comes from when they flick the switch on the wall, is irrelevant…just let them go back to watching reality TV and stop pestering them with surveys.

 

[whitehall]

Is this the last stand for global warmists, fake data from a freaking "social psychologist"? Professor Krosnick "combined the results of the best national surveys in the past decade". What does that tell you? Krosnick went back ten years and picked only the "national surveys" he wanted to use. Apparently Professor Krosnick felt he had sufficient data from selected surveys to ESTIMATE public opinion. You have to choke on this one though, Kroskick claims that he made "statistical adjustments to account for changes of opinion". The whole thing stinks of the kind of junk science the warmers have relied on all along.

No, he did not. If he did, you would have produced incontestable evidence. What you have produced is your opinion of what he did.

No, he did not produce incontestable evidence. According to the link it is his opinion was spun from ten years of selected "surveys" and "adjusted" for "changes of opinion". The alleged "study" is junk science at it's peak and obviously intended for low information lefties.

 

[flacaltenn]

Is this the last stand for global warmists, fake data from a freaking "social psychologist"? Professor Krosnick "combined the results of the best national surveys in the past decade". What does that tell you? Krosnick went back ten years and picked only the "national surveys" he wanted to use. Apparently Professor Krosnick felt he had sufficient data from selected surveys to ESTIMATE public opinion. You have to choke on this one though, Kroskick claims that he made "statistical adjustments to account for changes of opinion". The whole thing stinks of the kind of junk science the warmers have relied on all along.

No, he did not. If he did, you would have produced incontestable evidence. What you have produced is your opinion of what he did.

No, he did not produce incontestable evidence. According to the link it is his opinion was spun from ten years of selected "surveys" and "adjusted" for "changes of opinion". The alleged "study" is junk science at it's peak and obviously intended for low information lefties.

Obviously a leftist academic that believes red-staters will "follow the herd".. His assessment of my esteem for re-cooking leftover poll info --- was a bad calculation. Based on HIS low opinion of "red-staters". Someone should poll him on it..

 

[JakeStarkey]

whitehall and flacaltenn continue to mislabel reactionary opinion as factual evidence.

You guys go FAIL every time with this stuff.

 

[flacaltenn]

whitehall and flacaltenn continue to mislabel reactionary opinion as factual evidence.

You guys go FAIL every time with this stuff.

Answer the question --- Did this jerk produce ANY NEW polling information? What DATA were his "conclusions" based on?

Let's see how "factually aware" you are...

 

[whitehall]

whitehall and flacaltenn continue to mislabel reactionary opinion as factual evidence.

You guys go FAIL every time with this stuff.

The study is "reactionary opinion". I'm just pointing it out.