Opinion Polls on Climate Change
John Oliver sure nails it here. A friend recently asked my opinion of climate change, and was surprised when I replied that I didn’t have one. When he probed further, I explained that opinions apply to subjective matters like art or cooking, not to matters of scientific fact. Climate change deniers are simply ignorant of science.
Craig,
Hmmm,…yet you delight in quoting opinion polls that suit your argument but when poll become inconvenient suddenly you claim they have no value.
The planet’s climate is continually changing throughout it’s long history for multitude of influences, no one denies that proposition.
The cause of debate hinges around the degree of those influences and the extent to which they fill affect human beings. To claim there is only one immutable theory or doctrinaire science, is not only absurd but unscientific.
Since the only part of climate change we can effectively control is the influence humans contribute that further narrows the area of debate. the fact the majority of the population reject the most extreme ranting of alarmists, in favour of debate and ongoing investigation shows a healthy respect for good scientific principles.
When I quote polls, they’re on opinions, e.g., the percentage of people who think Trump is doing a good job. That actually means something. The percentage of people who believe in the theory of evolution or relativity is meaningless. If 20% don’t believe in a certain scientific fact, what one really should say is that 20% “are ignorant” of that scientific fact.
Craig,
I think you the point, asking do you believe in “climate change”, is a loaded question. The implications of the question are not easily or satisfactorily answer with a simple yes or no.
Therefore the poll is dishonest and designed to produce a predetermined and inaccurate result.
Many polls are not designed to reflect accurately what people think, but instead carefully phrase the questions to produce a conclusion able to support propaganda or bolster a particular agenda.
This is especially true when terms like “climate change” no longer reflect a simple scientific phenomenon but has become in the public mind, identified with particular political-ideological agenda.
Neither of us knows how the question was worded.
Craig,
My observation was a description of the error of incorporating ambiguous terms and deriving a narrow or literal interpretation.
By using a term like “climate change” is likely to produce misunderstanding because the term means diferent things to different people.