Concern about climate change continues to fall across many polled territories around the world. Interestingly, it is often the young, who have been subject to relentless fear mongering all their lives, who have started to lose interest in a narrative informing them that the scientific process is ‘settled’ in the interests of the Net Zero collectivisation. Poll after poll is pointing to falling concern. The latest from New Jersey-based Monmouth University shows a dramatic fall over three years from among those aged 18-34 who believe climate change – generally understood as human-caused climate change – is a “very serious problem”. An even bigger fall is reported in the same age group of those who support Government climate change action.
As the graph below shows, the percentage in the age group 18-34 who think climate change is a very serious problem has fallen from 67% to 50% since 2021. Significant falls are also reported across all age groups. The overall proportion of Americans who believe climate change is a very serious problem has fallen below half for the first time since 2018. The fall in support for Government action, at a time when the Biden Administration is forcing future generations to pay for a deficit-busting green boondoggle, is also dropping sharply, and is down among the young from an 82% high in 2018 to 62% today.
Other polls have pointed to declining support for the notion that humans control the climate and burning hydrocarbons is leading to Thermogeddon. Last year a poll conducted by a group within the University of Chicago found that belief in humans causing all or most climate change had slumped in America to 49% from the 60% level recorded just five years ago. Similar falls have been recorded elsewhere, with a December 2022 IPSOS survey covering two thirds of the world’s population revealing that nearly four people in every 10 believed climate change was mainly due to natural causes.
All these polls will be alarming alarmists with a suspicion that constant wolf-calling is starting to lose effect among the jaded young. Climate change is becoming so last Tuesday. The world has many problems to be solved, but bad weather is just a fact of life. It doesn’t take massive intelligence to see that none of the predictions over the last 40 years of impending climate collapse have come to pass. The fear is that the young see Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, claiming the world is “boiling”, and far from being scared witless and not having babies, they wonder how such a plonker rose so high in international politics.
In America, the issue of climate change is divided along party lines. Nearly all Democrats (92%) believe climate change is happening, while only 51% of Republicans “accept climate change as a reality”, claims the Monmouth team. The wording here can be questioned since in the interests of simplicity it seems to ascribe climate change to just one human cause. As a result, it suggests that for 49% of Republicans, climate change is not real, seemingly ignoring the fact that climate change is real and caused by natural variation. A later question found 31% of those polled thought climate change was caused equally by humans and natural variation. This is also too simplistic to mean very much. Nevertheless, it was found that over the last three years, the support for the notion that climate change was “very serious” fell from 85% to 77% among Democrats, from 21% to just 13% among Republicans, and from 56% to 43% among Independents.
What can be deduced from this and other polling evidence is that Republicans are much more sceptical about the unsubstantiated claim that humans control the climate thermostat and that as a result some great catastrophe is looming. The Chicago survey asked a similar question on climate change but allowed for a number of options around human and natural causes. When it added the ‘mostly’ or ‘entirely’ caused by humans replies together, it found lower levels of support than the Monmouth results. Overall support since 2018 has fallen away from 61% in 2018 to 49%. Republican support has remained stable at its low level of 33%, while Democrat support is down 12 points to 60%.
The real concern in green circles around the world is that if the Republican Donald Trump wins the November U.S. presidential election, Net Zero, on a federal level at least, is dead in the water for the next four years. And if it is dead in the water in the U.S., while China, India and Russia continue paying mere lip service to the project, it is dead in the water, full stop.
Chris Morrison is the Daily Sceptic’s Environment Editor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
So, in summary, regarding climate change, around 90% of Democrats are morons, as are 50% of Republicans. I’d wager that goes for any other topic you care to mention. No need for a poll.
The annoying thing about the way the Monmouth results are shared is that really, 100% of people should believe in ‘climate change’, that is the fact our climate is not constant and never has been since the planet formed.
The question is phrased in such a squidgy, woolly way that either shows towering ignorance by the questioner or an intent to confuse in order to get the desired outcome.
At least some of the other polls try to gauge opinions on whether man is causing the changes, for which my view is it’s highly unlikely and certainly not proven.
Most analyses begin from the 19th century, which is misleading bunkum. Crop any graph and the story can be altered – we saw this during the coof. When the numbers were really low, they zoomed right in and agonised about a tiny uptick. In my view this was intended to deliberately mislead.
Yes, but they’re responding to the UNFCCC and IPCC definitions of “climate change”; for the most part unrelated to real climate change which, as you say, is always happening, and has been for a very very very long time.
It’s also how TPTB were able to label the COVID jab as a ‘vaccine’: they just changed the official definition.
If they don’t fall for the marketing, time to ramp up the weather machines. More floods and clouds incoming me thinks
No. Just more news about ordinary weather hyped up as catastrophe.
Not one or other but both. Weather modification is real and very well documented. https://climateviewer.com/interactive-timeline/
Great news, this is thanks to ppl like Patrick Moore, Happer and Dick Lindzen. God bless them and also hard working foot soldiers like Chris Morrison here on the DS. I concur with navigators point regarding democrats. What makes me so delighted here is so many young ppl are waking up.
Michael Shellenberger.
A shout out to Anthony Watts and his blog Wattsupwiththat.
Also thanks to the (anthropogenic) climate change shills. The more and more shrill they become, the more and more people will realise what is going on.
I’ll give it another decade, by which time the population will have grown weary of the immiseration caused by Great Climate Swindle and the majority will continue to reject the policy. However, by that time, the US Democratic Party will have invented another Mencken Imaginary Hobgoblin. I don’t know what it will be. Perhaps it’s time for a desperate party to resurrect the fear of Mutually Assured Annihilation in order to retain political and financial control?
Back in the UK, are there any hints about an attempt by traditional conservatives to regain power in 2040? Perhaps there will be some sort of Project Phoenix, possibly riding the wave of similar electorate dissatisfaction with the living under an authoritarian regime of high taxes, high cost of living, negative personal assets, frequent power blackouts and sanctions against dissidents?
The climate scare though is the perfect tool for the world government progressives. CO2 is the dream gas that enables them to put in place all manner of socialist polices they previously could only dream off. ——Realists who can see the climate scam as the jumble of evidence free pronouncements it is, all based on the output from unvalidated climate models masquerading as science must keep their foot on the throats of the charlatans. They must be challenged everywhere they exist. They cannot be given free platforms to spout their eco socialism. TV news programs like GB news must bring in experts with the appropriate knowledge to dismantle the arguments of the climate activists like Jim Dale. The public deserve nothing less if it is truth they are to be presented with. Science is not a dictatorship that can go unchallenged. In science you challenge everything. The public must be given the opportunity to decide for themselves if something is true or not true and they can only do that by being presented with facts, not with propaganda.
If I remember my primary school religious study lessons correctly, Joseph deceived Pharoah by repeatedly hinting that various unpleasant natural phenomena were the result of Pharoah’s decisions, and would continue until there was a change of government policy. Although the old eclipse trick doesn’t work these days, and infant mortality and famines are negligible, the pestilence trick and BSE tricks still work their magic.
Moses.
Joseph started all the Gender Theory nonsense with that bloody coat of many colours. It was in plain sight all the time, but how many of us saw it…?
You don’t remember your religious study lessons correctly. Or your teacher was incompetent.
Ultimately the choice of CO2 as the evil gas was a terrible one (for them). It is present in such tiny amounts as a trace gas (420 ppm) and only accounts for around 5% of all greenhouse gases, it takes quite specialised equipment to even measure it accurately – assuming they actually can!
If they could prove easily its the cause of moderate (1.5C in 150 years) warming they would have no reason to shut down debate, sensor and cancel people and declare a consensus – which is political not scientific speech.
If instead, they had chosen water vapour and clouds as the climate bogeyman, we could be in a whole heap of trouble trying to counter it. The UK has been blanketed in clouds for about 4 months straight this year, but I’ve not noticed any increase in CO2.
Of course, the other reason it was a bad choice is because its food for plants and an integral constituent of photosynthesis. People who want to reduce CO2 in the atmosphere are plant haters and plant killers.
Oh so I see 2 red thumbs down on my comment. ——This means that they disagree that we must question and challenge everything in science, and that all relevant facts have to be presented so people have all the information they need to make informed decisions about what is true. ———Why would anyone not want all relevant facts made available? ——-Because it isn’t really about science for these people. It is all about politics, and I think many of them don’t even realise that, so entrenched in group think they have become.
In reality they don’t need the scare to persist. The transformations in laws, bureaucracy and behaviour are all practically cemented and now virtually impossible to dislodge.
Take the post 9/11 panic as an example. For a period of about 5 to 8 years people were absolutely on edge regarding the fear of terrorist attacks from crazed jihadis. Now I don’t think people give it much thought. BUT, all the infrastructure is firmly in place and no going away: biometric passports, automatic data exchange between airlines and security services, online surveillance, the Patriot Act in the US and similar “anti-terrorist” laws in the UK and other countries, in the US the Department of Homeland Security, a post 9/11 creation and now one of the most powerful departments in government etc.. etc..
The same will be with climate change, the same with covid, and of course the same with whatever they confect next.
They only need a few years to get what they need and then we’re stuck with it for ever. Because, of course, we never learn. We always get drawn into the next panic, the next emergency.
By ‘we’ I assume you mean ‘ordinary people’. Not us clever types.
Whether you or I believe their hype, ‘we’ are caught in the same web.
“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled” —Mark Twain. —————-This is always the problem that realists like Chris Morrison, subscribers to the DS, myself included have. For many years it has been easy to fool people on climate. They switch on their TV news and they are told time and time again there is this “climate crisis”. It will usually be accompanied with images beamed from all corners of the globe of extreme weather events, and this helps to convince (fool) people that there is indeed a crisis and that the UN knows exactly how all of these storms and floods can be fixed. Except there is actually no increase in the frequency or intensity of any type of weather event anywhere in the world, but if you tell people that they are very reluctant to accept that they must have been fooled. Just as Mark Twain pointed out. It is embarrassing to people and makes them feel silly that they could have been fooled so easily. ——–But I say to people —When the facts change please change your mind, do not do what the climate establishment do and simply change the facts. It is much better to realise you have been fooled as quick as possible before Net Zero devours your prosperity and freedom than keep trying to protect your pride.
Once you start paying the energy and fuel bills yourself you realise that the ‘green energy’ is more expensive than the ‘not green energy.
If you are really switched on (!) you will know that high energy costs cause other prices to rise and these prices cannot fall until energy prices fall.
Hardly talked about is our ‘reward’ for using less domestic energy to ‘save the planet’, which is the fast increasing daily standing charges plus 5% VAT.
The impatience of youth, and the rather slow ability of the majority of people to think critically and rationally, is, for one, a bonus. Those of us who were around in 1972 may well remember being told we would be frozen forever in ice. The same may well remember also being told they would far more resemble burnt Walkers Crisps than people (or in most cases Past Their Best Potatoes). Apparently this all happened over 30 years ago, happily I was probably at a Magnum gig somewhere.
The basic fact is that the liars, at some point, have to start delivering to keep people behind the idea. When you have 7 months of grey sky and rain, as we have had in the UK, it is pretty difficult to accept lies about the fact you are, in fact, frying. My prediction is that it will all have quietly been kicked into the long grass come 2028/29 when an election is due.
A blindingly obvious thought just occurred to me: the replacement Gremlin is the resurrection of the Cold War but involving China as well this time round. Watch out for the “Russia and China are the most immediate threat and we will have to divert some Green funding …”
When it comes to putting a great big dent in all the climate nonsense I believe EV’s are proving to be a huge asset. I know lots of people now who have developed a strong sceptical bent as a result of the dreadful publicity these ridiculous inventions are generating. And the distrust with the fake narrative is developing in some a questioning attitude to all forms of officialdom.
EV’s have been an absolute boon to the Sceptic cause and across all areas of public policy. There are still many who refuse to admit they have been had such as the seemingly highly educated intelligent stupid mob but for average – apologies that sounds very condescending – people the mask is starting to slip. Once the mask comes off it doesn’t go back on
But as always it’s a dumb loaded question designed to make anyone who says no to look like they also don’t believe the world is round. They may as well be asking “do you believe in potatoes?”.
‘…….they wonder how such a plonker rose so high in international politics.’
If anybody has an answer to that I’m all-ears! His reported comments that I’ve seen have always seemed to be fairly disconnected from any sort of intelligence.
Good news. Let’s hope the Enemy doesn’t see this. The US is the Stalingrad in this war.