Skip to content

Climate Change Ranks Bottom Of Concerns In UN Poll

October 7, 2016

By Paul Homewood



h/t Joe Public


The UN runs a global survey, called My World, more details here.

It seems that, from the list they provide, climate change ranks bottom of people’s concerns.





When we break the figures down between rich and poor countries, there is a difference which highlights the green hypocrisy we often see in the West. (HDI is the Human Development Index, which takes into account  life expectancy, education, and income per capita.)






In the poorer countries, climate change remains a very insignificant problem, even though we are repeatedly told that it is those very countries who will suffer most. In the richer nations though, climate change rises up the list, though still a relatively unimportant issue.

I think these polls say an awful lot about the hypocrisy and selfishness of some in the West, who wish to impose their own liberal ideas and values on those living in the developing world, and in doing so ignore the very real problems they face there. 

  1. tom0mason permalink
    October 7, 2016 10:24 am

    This has not stopped Christiana Figueres today equating the hurricane in the Caribbean, heading for Miami, to be a symptom of climate change on the BBC today, as she joyously revelled in thanks from the BBC interviewer for the ratification of the Paris agreement.
    No questions from the BBC of how the such a weather event are linked to CO2 levels, nor why there has been such a long hurricane drought in the face of rising CO2 levels.

    • October 7, 2016 10:57 am

      The BBC has been broadcasting Hurricane Porn for several days now, with a background of Brexit Doom, Migrant Mania and Fracking Outrage.

      • Gerry, England permalink
        October 7, 2016 12:50 pm

        Cut their funding off. I am amazed that their coverage during the referendum was balanced. Once over though you can’t their inner Guardian down.

  2. Paul Weeks permalink
    October 7, 2016 10:28 am

    Hi Paul Love your site, I send it to anyone who is showing any signs of being a climate change sympathiser. This movement needs an opposition. Even the people in the ‘industry’ believe their own hype. I say look at the recent blackout in Adelaide to see what will happen here in the UK. Do you ever do lecturing? It would be great if you talked to the Traditional Britain group at their annual conference. Thanks Paul Weeks

    Sent from my iPhone


  3. October 7, 2016 10:30 am

    Clearly few people apart from politicians and academics are impressed by the fantasy world of climate models that can’t replicate the present, never mind the future.

  4. John Palmer permalink
    October 7, 2016 11:04 am

    Spot-on, Paul. +10.

    Also on the Beeb this AM, the nauseating Comrade H saying how wonderful and surprising it is that everyone has now signed-up to the Paris Agreement – and so very quickly too.
    He did however express concerns about anyone actually doing anything about it, so maybe even he can now see the reality of the situation.

  5. Oliver K. Manuel permalink
    October 7, 2016 12:50 pm

    Climate change only ranks high on the agenda of would be world tyrants.

    • CheshireRed permalink
      October 7, 2016 3:21 pm

      Exactly. A great device by which they can exert control, extract taxes and advance careers. Strangely the mugs paying for it aren’t quite so enamoured.

  6. Gerry, England permalink
    October 7, 2016 12:51 pm

    If Trump takes charge then it is goodbye climate change. How will they get on if the US stops the cash coming to the UNFCCC?

  7. Tom O permalink
    October 7, 2016 1:08 pm

    A US president isn’t as powerful as most people think. Trump can resist, but the hidden government will probably do pretty much as it wants. The US “ratification” of the treaty doesn’t exist since Obama’s “ceremonial signing” has nothing to do with ratifying it. It has to pass through Congress to his desk, not the other way around. since congress hasn’t ratified it, his signature is meaningless and it will be the next president’s signature that matters, should the Senate actually pass it. Of course, if it is passed between elections and the swearing in of the new president, it might have traction if Obama then signs it, might not as it will have a period of time before it could take affect.

    As for the poorest nations not considering it important, that is understandable. When you struggle to exist from day to day, you really aren’t all that concerned about next week, month, or year, much less the next generation.

    And yes, the only people interested in enforcing climate “chains” are all at the top of the “people chain.” They all know that there will be a redistribution of wealth, and it will be done “fairly” through taxation. Of course, they are basically tax exempt due to all the loop holes in the tax codes for them, so the bulk of the money raked in by the special taxes will be from the middle class and the poor since neither will be able to afford to acquire the means to “lower their carbon foot print.”

    Then these taxes will go to “foundations” that will administer the funding to assist the poor, with the ration of funds flowing through the foundations being at least 90/10 – 90% administration fees for the governing boards, and 10% to be used to assist the poor through a list of certified companies set up for that purpose. It doesn’t take much imagination to see how the money funnels from the bottom of the wealth tree to the top, really, and the “wealth redistribution” will flow perfectly in the correct direction – to those that already have most of it.

    • spetzer86 permalink
      October 7, 2016 1:40 pm

      Your point on the hidden government is correct. Unless the EPA, DoJ, USDA, and other weaponized alphabet agencies are firmly brought to heel or disbanded, countering O’s actions will be difficult.

  8. October 7, 2016 1:20 pm

    The low ranking of concern over climate extends even to the people protesting against energy projects.

  9. Reasonable Skeptic permalink
    October 7, 2016 1:48 pm

    This makes perfect sense. People in rich countries have all of the basics covered and they have resources to look beyond their family needs. They can afford to prioritize climate changes (virtue signalling??). People in developing nations do not have that same luxury. They have their priorities set in things that are going to provide more direct benefits to their situation.

  10. October 7, 2016 11:38 pm

    I had first stumbled across (an earlier version of) this survey in June 2013. At that time respondents were promised that their “priority” would be incorporated into the UN’s latest and greatest “goal setting” exercise. I checked it three times during the following year or so, and “Action taken on climate change” was always at the bottom of the priority barrel.

    But the interesting (or pathetic, depending on one’s sentiments regarding UN generated outputs) thing is that by September 2015 – for some strange reason – the powers that be decided to renege on this promise and the survey results did not even make the honourable mention grade.

    Instead they were shifted to the unseen sidelines and replaced by the “results” of a one-day 10,000 (carefully selected?!) respondent exercise. See:

    UN survey participants: one-day 10,000 trumps two-year 8 million plus

    Amazing, eh?!

  11. FloBorg permalink
    October 8, 2016 7:55 pm


    I’m normally prone to say that the current global warming is just the normal fluctuations as seen over the last 400k years (longest graph I found) and that all this represents nothing on a 4.5bio old planet.

    However I found your Australian graph to be misleading since every other graph found on the Australian govt website that you mention shows a rise in temperature over the last 20 years. Those graphs are hot days, warm days, warm nights, cold days, …. I think you hand picked this one a bit too much.

    Thank you for your blog.

    • October 8, 2016 9:49 pm

      The last 20 years?

      Do you think such a short period has any significance at all?

  12. David Brittain permalink
    October 9, 2016 2:52 pm

    When someone like Prof Brian Cox says there is irrefutable evidence that climate change is happening, why should I dismiss his views and instead believe the stuff on this CC denier website and the cranks that frequent it? That guy is a well decorate scientist with a brain the size of a planet. What credentials do you have, Paul Homewood?

    • October 9, 2016 4:25 pm

      I don’t ask anybody to “believe” me. I simply ask them to examine the evidence.

      But perhaps you might like to tell us exactly what Cox knows about climate science?

  13. October 11, 2016 10:47 pm

    As climate change is not defined, it is therefore obvious that any change of “whatever” is not something that we can address,cofirm or deny within the realms of scientific hypothesis.
    Perhaps Cox could instruct you Mr Brittain on how to play the guitar.He may have some idea of that endeavour.Have a nice day.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: