Survey Finds 64% Of Brits Believe Climate Propaganda, Rather Than Facts
By Paul Homewood
http://eciu.net/press-releases/2017/survey-finds-growing-concern-about-climate-change
More propaganda from Richard Black, which is really all he is good for!
From his ECIU:
A growing majority of British adults (64%) say that climate change is happening, and that it is primarily due to human activity, a survey has found.
British people are concerned that climate change will raise flood risk. Image: alh1, creative commons licence
The ComRes survey for the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) also found that, asked about the effects of climate change, harm to wildlife and nature and an increase in flooding are key concerns for the majority of British people (80% and 73% respectively). Three in five are concerned about an increase in variation of availability and price of some foods (60%).
The understanding that climate change is real and man-made has steadily become more widespread since 2014 (57%) and 2015 (59%), when ComRes asked the same questions. Almost seven in ten (69%) believe that almost all or a majority of scientists say climate change is mainly the result of human activities, an eight-percentage point increase since 2015 and a 16 percentage-point increase since 2014.
Marylyn Haines Evans, Chair of the Public Affairs Committee at the National Federation of Women’s Institutes (NFWI) agreed that climate change is a growing concern.
“Like the rest of the British public, WI members are becoming increasingly concerned both about the impact that climate change is having now, and that it will have on our children and grandchildren,” she said.
“The loss of British wildlife and the impact on our countryside is one of their biggest worries. Increased risk of flooding, and the impact the changes to the climate can have on the cost of food, also highlight how the problem is becoming all too real to British people.”
Professor Joanna Haigh, Co-Director of the Grantham Institute at Imperial College London, welcomed the evidence that understanding of climate change is growing.
“For people who have worked on climate change for decades, the finding that people recognise the sheer weight of scientific evidence is extremely heartening,” she said.
“But as the climate system sends increasingly urgent signals of the stress it is coming under, this understanding must be turned into action to address to the problem. We have the means to avoid the very worst impacts of climate change, and create a cleaner, healthier society – all it takes is the will.”
Andrew Hawkins, chairman of ComRes, highlighted the ‘discernible shift’ in public opinion.
“Over just three years there has been a discernible shift in public opinion towards acceptance that climate change is both happening and mainly caused by human activity. Seven in ten now believe that almost all, or a majority, of climate scientists believe the same,” he said.
“The significance of this is that the public are becoming increasingly willing to see polluting energy sources phased out, to adopt alternative technologies and accept public policy changes to shift behaviour.”
ComRes interviewed 2,045 British adults online between the 1st and 2nd February 2017. Data were weighted according to age, gender, region and social grade to be nationally representative of adults aged 18+. ComRes is a member of the British Polling Council and abides by its rules. The data tables are available on request. The survey and data table can also be found at http://www.comres.co.uk, or on the ECIU website.
http://eciu.net/press-releases/2017/survey-finds-growing-concern-about-climate-change
Given the incessant brainwashing from his ex employer, the BBC, and most of the rest of the media, the only surprise is that 36% still remain unconvinced.
Perhaps if the BBC fulfilled its duty and reported all of the facts impartially, we might see a totally different set of results.
Comments are closed.
NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT 
Once upon a time 90+% of adults believed the world was flat! Did that make they were correct?
And they believed that the Earth was the centre of the solar system – and like the witch hunts against the skeptics, the Church tried to suppress the truth. Seems nothing has changed centuries later.
Of course they were correct, and the proof is all the sailors who went out & never came back, they just fell of the edge.
I suppose next you’ll suggest the moon isn’t made of cheese !
& I know my wife is a tooth fairy, this is her best side –
http://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.M1c32806332c4b727e2d1f62a68234e95H1&w=164&h=190&c=7&qlt=90&o=4&pid=1.7
The irony, is that the flat earth myth is itself a myth. There’s good evidence that it was well known the world was a sphere as far back as the Romans and Greeks.
As I remember it, the myth was created in the story of Columbus going to America. So it does not so much reflect what the ancients thought as what fairly modern people thought of the ancients.
In other words, it’s part of the myth that “we modern people are superior to the ancients” – one that is palpably untrue in many instances.
It’s totally a myth. Many Greek astronomers and philosophers explicitly refer to the Earth as a sphere. By Dante (c.1300), it was widely accepted that the Earth was a sphere, and there are numerous descriptions of such in The Divine Comedy..
Not since Eratosthenes of Cyrene.
No one actually believed the Earth was flat. Its circumference was measured as way back as the Ancient Greeks.
The flat earth idea was invented in 19th century America in order to drive a wedge between science and religion
Same is true in the US. BUT, ask people if they’ll pay higher taxes to artificially jack up the price of fuel and electricity an the poll numbers reverse.
My wife is convinced that I am a conspiracy believer because I tell her that the UK establishment has almost totally blocked-out questioning or criticism of the AGW believers. So what chance do the majority have when almost every article in the meja says that any disaster is consistent with climate change …. no longer AGW as it is not there of course!
The problem is getting them to take the time and effort to see or read something that contradicts it. As far as books go, Aircon is a good one but I would say that in trying to open people’s eyes, The Deniers takes some beating given that it is not full of science, was written by an intrigued journalist with no agenda, and is all about people. The final chapter does knife the warmist clique by showing them up as having achieved nothing of note – ignoring the invention of global warming and destruction of science of course.
You could possibly get a copy of Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear”. Reading that, and following the links at the end, shook me out of my MSM-caused CAGW fears!
“The significance of this is that the public are becoming increasingly willing to see polluting energy sources phased out, to adopt alternative technologies and accept public policy changes to shift behaviour.”
Yes, until you tell them how much it will cost them. 97% of people then change their mind at that point.
Considering the barrage of warmist propaganda being fired at them by the legacy media, I agree with Paul that the number showing sense is amazingly high. Let’s see what happens when Donald gets his team to work at NOAA, NASA et al and the fraud is shown up. I will enjoy pointing out to many people who was right in the end.
Yes, and if they are asked whether global warming is one of their main concerns, people in the US rank it very low. They may believe the world is warming, but it’s not a huge concern and many people are not willing to double their electric bill, pay way more for goods and dismantle capitalism in order to “stop” the warming.
Exactly… the NY Times conducted a poll that should those exact results. People regurgitate the climate change propaganda, but come to their sense when they are asked to pay Carbon Taxes… that’s why Clinton did not advocate Carbon Taxes. It’s political suicide
Is it not most interesting that now, almost daily, the scams and lies that have bolstered the man made climate change band wagon are being outed, the BBC makes no mention of this most salient fact ?
I have been in communication with Joanna Haigh and pointed out that some of her team’s recent observations concerning the effects of solar activity on ozone in the stratosphere are consistent with my hypothesis of a top down solar effect on climate being the primary cause of past changes in global temperature.
I have asked whether my hypothesis is inconsistent with any of her findings but have received no response.
“Climate Intelligence Unit”; an oxymoron if ever there was one.
The WI!! OH WOW……………….and I suppose they’ll ask instant expert Gary Lineker nect – where’s Lily!?………………..
So two thirds of a couple of thousand graun readers ardently believe in ley lines and wiccan prognostication?
This effort of conflation is staggeringly sh*&te, showing a picture of York flooded and in the same sentence added in to claiming that British wildlife is “under threat”…………………. what from Lions? and oh er – from climate change……………..it is specious, childlike nonsensical jiggerypokery with facts.
What is always an interesting challenge for the climate alarmunists, when people are asked to rank what is important to them, to rate their priorities, surveys usually find that the “threat of climate change” global warming – it doesn’t even figure.
Lastly if they’re so cock sure, why even feel the need to go to print with articles such as these – what could it be that they are so afraid of – that people might forget?
The following is used as teaching material on an MSc course at the University of Manchester:
The author does not allow ‘Natural Hazards’ to be considered in a critical analysis of her work contributing to the degree. A few down votes on the video would be appreciated 😉
Paul – I can provide more detail if you give me your direct email.
Yet more proof you can buy an opinion polls to get whatever answer you want.
Since Brexit and Trump, it’s been clear that something is seriously wrong with opinion polls – and that something appears to me, to be that polls are not so much a reflection of public opinion as what the pollsters want public opinion to be.
Just who do opinion polls ask the opinion of? I have never been asked my opinion for a poll of any kind and nor has any one I know. Is it the same small sample being asked again and again? If so is it any surprise that they get things such as Brexit so wrong.
What exactly was the question that was asked?
Precisely, Malcolm. I got the feeling they were asked something like: Climate change is bringing more bad weather and flooding; are you concerned about flooding and storms?
Of course, we’re al concerned about flooding so a ‘yes’ here will be counted as a belief in ‘Climate change’.
click the link and you can see the questions and results.
I didn’t find a question to the effect of “If we quadruple your electric bill and raise your taxes while building thousands more bird killing turbines, are you in favor of acting on climate change?” Sure, it’s biased, but so were the majority of the questions on the survey.
I have interacted with quite a few groups of people and a lot, maybe 50-60% are totally brainwashed by the continuous media bombardment.
The young ones have been brainwashed at school as well.
One common factor is that the majority of them are also anti Brexit, anti Trump & pro Renewables.
It is 1984.
ps one point is you cannot persuade them FACTS, they just will not accept them.
Very true. On topics like these, both at school and university, the young are taught what to think rather than how to think. We now have an entire generation to whom anthropogenic climate change is a given truth. The silence of most of the mainstream press is also a factor. We need a few more shocks like that published in last Sunday’s Mail about the manipulation of data in the 2015 NOAA report. Maybe we’ll get then from the US as more scientists feel able to speak out.
That’s why the emphasis is on marketing, not the science. Surveys are great tools for selling. They work for most pseudoscience ideas. They work for products—4 out of 5 dentists recommend, etc. It’s not about truth or facts at all. It’s about selling an ideology.
“The significance of this is that the public are becoming increasingly willing to see polluting energy sources phased out, to adopt alternative technologies and accept public policy changes to shift behaviour.”
I don’t think that the chairman is doing his client any favours, even if this was what they wanted to believe – and the structure of the survey suggests it was.
None of the three questions mentioned “energy sources” “alternative technologies” or “shifting behaviour” and if it becomes a voting matter the result will resemble Brexit and the US Election as Athelstan points out.
Gerry at 1.46pm nails it in one sentence.
Q2 was very nostalgic taking me back to “Juke Box Jury” where the “Jury” was not asked for what they thought, but what they thought other people (i.e. the purchasing public” would think.
Best summed up by a “Jurer”;
“Then on 4 July 1964 the five members of the Rolling Stones formed the panel, the only time there were more than four Jurors on the programme.[16] Keith Richards later wrote of this appearance: “We didn’t give a shit…. We just trashed every record they played.”‘[17]
Now that’s what I call motivated reasoning.
The BEEB was this morning full of stories about “Cyber Security” and those naughty Russians. They mentioned as part of this latest doom-mongering that “Power Stations” can be knocked out by cyber-attacks and that (Shock! Horror!) even your new shiny “Smartmeter” just might be vulnerable. (Surely not! Why, who would have thought?!?)
All the best lies, of course, have some grain of truth within them. No doubt cyber security isn’t just avoiding letting that nice Nigerian gentleman have all your bank details so he can transfer millions of pounds into your account.
But, being an old cynic, I realised that this latest shroud waving will almost certainly be in order to plant a seed in gullible minds.
Sure, inevitably, we will sooner or later have rolling blackouts thanks to all the venal con-men in the Ruinable Energy industry and to the weapons-grade gullibility of all the stupid, virtue signalling politicos. So, When Britain North of Watford Gap has ground to a halt, the narrative that the BEEB will pedal (once power is eventually restored), is that it was Vlad The Putin wot dunnit!
And most people, no doubt, will believe them!
So this is based on an online survey of 2045 people (and supposedly representative of all adults in Great Britain). Right. I dare say that it would be possible to interview a different set of people and get an entirely different result.
I’m guessing that ComRes interviewed 2045 Grauniad readers to get these results.
Spot-on.
Meanwhile, in a UN, online survey of nearly 10M people, Climate Change came a miserable last in a list of 16 major concerns people have for the future; behind internet access.
http://data.myworld2015.org/
It seems the rest of the world isn’t nearly as gullible as Brits. And there’s still time to vote.
My daughter, a very bright and intelligent graduate in psychology and philosophy,entered the world of market research. She was offered a great position to start a new office but declined and left, finding it all a little bit unreal! Same must be true of political surveys. They are SO unrepresentative of reality. That is why they get it wrong so often. We really should stop believing most of the crap we read.
The Climate Intelligence Unit has teamed up with the Grantham Institute to get an opinion poll that proves Jeremy Grantham is not wasting his money, and will therefore give them more money for next year.
I am sure none of them would dare tell Jeremy Grantham the truth, but that is a reflection of honesty levels in Climate Science, where an incredible drop in credibility, is almost unbelievable to Climate Scientists given the amount of other people’s money they have already been encouraged to squander.
Meanwhile just outside Basingstoke a ComRes pollster for the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) ensure the results fit the customer’s expectations —
¯
¯
Comres poll says 97%
Want climate action now, believe it causes weird weather, think solar, wind are magic
And unicorns are real.
Such polls can be used to attempt to influence policy makers.
But reality is no one believes them cos they can see the public don’t vote for Climate policies.
…. And cos they’ve seen the Yes Minister opinion poll sketch
Said a lad from down Avon way.
The grinning remoaners, the shining dials and unquenchable optimism of the remain camp/bbc/sky was too much to bear and at about 01.00 hrs I retired to bedfordshire in a slough made of a great despond.
On the morn’ of June 24th 2016, I awoke blinking and somewhat out of sorts, a working week and even though it was only water, juice or tea the night before, it was as if I had been attacking the grog. Alack, to waking feeling very unrefreshed and in a discombobulation of total ignorance about – the EU referedum result.
I broke my fast but maintained a strict radio and TV silence, I couldn’t bear to find out………………
The heady, delicious drifting aroma of coffee mingling with prepared toast, milk and cereal and suddenly, the appetite singing, the invisible hand on my heart suddenly released, the blood begins to flow!
Hope springs does it not?
Aye, something stirred, instinctively…………………. and I’d be shown up to be a liar would I not? Evidently, did I not, constantly bang on “we’re going to vanquish the slave Empire!” – and I said to myself……. put your money where your mouth is SONNY!
YES, I said it, time and again that, “we” would produce the correct result despite the blizzard of lies emanating out of the mouths of the cultural Marxist filth – Richard Black and all! I based my hopes on something of an intangible – a feeling, on, a long shot of incomprehensible optimism but with such unerring conviction I felt it so infrangibly to thus; relying on the good sense, on the good offices of my fellows, my countrymen, my Land! Land of my father and his forefathers!
I switched the radio on.
I was not disappointed.
Though my elation of that gorgeous June morning has been somewhat tempered, it will never be forgotten!
YES! 17.4 million souls in this country voted together and came up with the correct answer, I chastise not, my fellow Brits who voted to remain – for you were lied to and though it does seem to be patronizing to say that you were fooled – you were and be not afraid the right decision was arrived at, for Britain must be free again and sovereign.
*****************************************************************************************************************
Surveys advertised by Richard Black are but as a drip of piss in the great ocean of life. Be not worried though Richard – we are coming for you and your ilk, you’ve not been forgotten, so best run away now lad while you’ve still got time, we will have our revolution and the old ways will be cast down.
Er, there’s only 3 bloody questions! All were loaded with obvious biases.
Q.1 Which of these views about climate change is closest to your own?
This implied man made contributions were either ‘mainly’ or ‘not mainly’ caused by humans. Note how there isn’t a ‘zero human cause’ or ‘completely natural’ option? Subtle but EXACTLY in-keeping with how these people mislead.
Q.2 What proportion of climate scientists do you think believe that climate change is mainly the result of human activities?
Who cares what the public think about the percentage of scientists that think something? The complaint that ‘you’re not a climate scientist so can’t hold an opinion’ is legendary, yet now public consensus is being touted as justification for science!
Q.3 To what extent, if at all, are you concerned about each of the following forecasted effects of climate change in the UK?
They ask if people are ‘concerned’ and then load up the rhetoric with assumptions based on modelled projections….presumably the same models that’ve been completely rubbish about accurately projecting the future!
Conclusion: all they wanted was the headline which is now parroted from the rooftops as if carved on a tablet of stone by bloody Moses.
“Q.1 Which of these views about climate change is closest to your own?”
Climate seems especially stable at the moment, hurricanes down, temps going nowhere.
“Q.2 What proportion of climate scientists do you think believe that climate change is mainly the result of human activities?”
Has to be close to 100%.. you can’t be a “climate scientist™” unless you “believe”
“Q.3 To what extent, if at all, are you concerned about each of the following forecasted effects of climate change in the UK?”
forecasted by who? meaningless… MET can’t even get it right one or two days out !!
Shub has an excellent take on Climate Alarmism:
https://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2017/02/09/trump-climate-part-two/
“Climate alarmism is a barely-coherent tissue of half-baked concoctions that ‘make sense’ only if you are a committed activist or an unengaged citizen trying to ignore stuff like climate and get on with your life. In many instances the claims are carefully strung up ramshackle talking-points that fall apart unless you ignore all distracting questions.”
Surveys. Pffft.
More nonsense from Dr Jordan:
This is like the TV ads for soap powder…64% of people said blah blah.
64% of which people exactly? Give us a break.
Climate changes. Nothing to do with people.
ComRes telephone BREXIT poll, published on May 19 for the Daily Mail newspaper and ITV television, gave the “In” camp a lead of 11 points.
http://www.comresglobal.com/polls/itv-news-daily-mail-eu-referendum-poll-may-2016/
Thanks @Tomo Good info
You can fool most of the people some of the time…..
But not all of the people all of the time.
AGW is a dead man walking.
Mark my words.
Amen.
The poll was from too small a sample, biased in its questions and probably unrepresentative but even so the result is depressing. We all beat up on the BBC, rightly so, but they are not the only ones. The UK news media is dominated by the BBC, Sky and Channel 4 and they ALL follow the same propaganda lines – pro AGW, anti Brexit, anti Trump etc. And my feeling is that all of us of the other persuasion, including Dellers, should be cautious about putting too much trust in Trump to bring about change. His government is in chaos and the forces of liberalism are pushing forcefully against him and his “team”. Despite all the recent and past setbacks to the AGW movement I have a horrible feeling that at the moment we are losing.
AGW policy worldwide is off-the-scale stupid so of course we’re losing. What Trump can do is shine a light on the ‘science’ of ‘climate change’ like no-one before him, and if he does that in the manner he’s suggested, then AGW theory should be in the bin faster than an out of date chicken.
The data has been manipulated and is rigged.
Climate sensitivity is closer to 0C than 3C.
The models have repeatedly failed.
There is no catastrophe.
Nothing unusual is happening.
The single most direct way Trump can undermine AGW theory is by showing how the data was rigged and manipulated by supposedly impartial custodians of truth. Once he does that their credibility is entirely undermined. One final point; the US system of plea-bargaining isn’t without its flaws but by God it’s good at getting people to talk. Get someone of senior climate influence in the dock and facing a loooong jail sentence, or a much shorter one if they play ball, and you’re in business.
“The ComRes survey for the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU)”
mmm ComRes seem to be the “go to people” when anything connected to so called Climate Change is involved, even to the extent of commissioning a survey which was referred to in the Inspector’s decision for the Bishopthorpe Wind farm appeal: @ Para 146
146. “The Secretary of State has on several occasions overturned the recommendation of professional, independent, appointed persons. That might seem to signal a change of policy towards onshore wind. With regard to local opinion the report of the Planning Officer to committee records local support and objection. A substantial number of letters of support were received during the application process and a further 370 of letters of support during the appeal process. The mapping produced by the Appellant 31 shows that many letters were signed by people living near to the development (in Humberston and Tetney) as well as further letters signed by those living within the wider, but still local, area”.
The rebuttal evidence of the Appellant is commended. *This drew out points from the recent report from ComRes which focussed on the impact that political parties’ views on onshore wind would be likely to have on voting amongst the electorate. Contrary to the apparent perceptions of a number of Government Ministers this survey records a high level of support for onshore wind, while a total of 75% of those surveyed either said that they would vote for a local election candidate that would support wind farms or that the issue of wind farms would make no difference to their voting habits”.
The advocate for the developer argued based on ComRes findings that voters would vote for candidates at the last Election who where in favour of wind farms:
Well guys this survey was proved to be spectacularly wrong as number ONE Climate Change LOON Ed Davey SOS at DECC lost his seat along with a whole host of green Luvvie Lib DUMS..
So “pay the piper to play the tune” and end up with even more dodgy surveys..
Note also that the Inspector was giving more credence to the developer’s case than the local communities & recommended that planning permission be granted & it was…
Is this a first? Slightly off-topic but the page on the BBC Website titled ‘Weather experts say new El Niño possible later this year’ actually reports the impact El Nino has on raising world temperatures – something some nitwit of a scientist denied late last year when the ‘Hottest Year Evah’ story broke. But also, no mention of man-made climate change – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38993063