Survey indicates people are dummies, scientists confirm
|
A post by "S-Dott " To see more posts click here |
I read an article today indicating that there is a large gap between the opinions of scientists and those of average Americans. Despite that the fact that about 66% of Americans highly respect the intellects of scientists and engineers, about 33% of “ordinary” Americans believe that human beings never evolved while 98% of scientists say we have. Similarly, about 50% of the public believes that mankind is not responsible for global warming while an astounding 11% believe the whole thing is just a big myth (compared to “almost all of the scientists surveyed” who accepted that human activity, specifically the burning of fossil fuels, is the primary impetus behind global warming).
So are these ordinary folks wrong because they have been misinformed, or simply delusional? I’m inclined to believe in the latter, since about a third of Americans believe there is a serious debate on both evolution and global warming, despite the absence of any scientific evidence disproving the science community’s stance on either.
I say we run our own poll, just to see how well the Pew Research Group’s numbers hold up. Feel free to answer either or both these questions in the comments section below (if you’re an actual scientist or engineer, please be sure to include that bit of information in your response):
-
Do you believe that Man has existed, in his present form, on Earth since the beginning of time?
-
Do you believe that Global Warming is a Myth? And if not, is Man at least partly responsible for it?
udothedishes . . .
Related posts:
- Gay People are Awesome
- The Black TV Show is Dwindling, People
- “I’ve never seen so many white people…”
- 10 Most Talentless People In Movies
- Review: Funny People
- It’s not the economy it’s the people controlling the money…
- Rich People Don’t Ride Metro
- Preview: Public Enemies & Funny People
- Righteous Kill: “Most people respect the badge. Everyone respects the gun.”
- Energy Policy: Armed with the Facts
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
![[Valid RSS]](valid-rss-rogers.png "Validate my RSS feed")
There IS reliable science to support the theory of evolution. There is no reliable science to support the theory that humans adding CO2 to the atmosphere is causing the negligible increase in global temperatures. THAT is a belief manufactured by people with a political agenda used to manipulate “enlightened” people into doing their bidding. If i don’t like capitalism and want to take it down I can’t do it on the merits of differeing economic theories…but if I say the Earth is dying and it just happens to be as result of evil greedy corporations polluting Gaia…all the little lemmings do my bidding with nothing but the best intentions.
That’s not to say that conservation is bad in any way. BUT…stupid, economy crushing multi-billion dollar enviro taxes aimed at destroying our nation’s power infrastructure based on shaky, irresponsible science is stupid.
Not believing a scientist because you’re a skeptic does not make you dillusional or stupid. But believing them without actually thinking about their motivations and looking at their qualifications does. I’m constantly amazed by “smart” people making fun of peoples’ conviction in things religious while they have conviction in things “scientific” with no more basis in fact.
I say thumbs down based on based on arrogance. NEXT!
“There is no reliable science to support the theory that humans adding CO2 to the atmosphere is causing the negligible increase in global temperatures”
Thanks for your comment.
Everyone should read this research paper. It gives a lot of insight into the climate change topic.
http://www.manhattan-institute.org/energymyths/myth11.htm
I do think that humans contribute to carbon emissions, but I agree with the above statement that there isn’t a whole lot of evidence on how much our contribution is impacting the overall temperature, compared to what occurs naturally.
As shown in the related post on energy policy on this site, humans account for less than 4% of total carbon emissions.
This 4% could have a very large impact, but at this point, there just is not enough data to show the correlation.
Instead of mandating energy policy and cap and trade ideas, I think that more research needs to be done.
I’ve stated before, doing things that are good for the environment is a noble cause, when done by the people. Let’s all try to clean up our rivers and streams, drive less, eat local foods, and impact the environment as consumers. When the government dictates policy based on limited facts and scare tactics, that is when unintended consequences screw everyone.
Like the fact that of our imported oil, on 17% comes from mid-east countries. But many people believe that all of it comes from there.
Policy like corn ethanol which seemed like a great idea, end up doing things like, raising the cost of food worldwide, and in the end it was shown that the amount of space clearing for planting the extra corn actually added a net gain of carbon emission to the atmosphere.
Energy Policies need to be dealt with in a very delicate manner and after much careful research and debate. Not just at the whim of scare tactics and media hype.
In the end do i think that humans are having a negative impact on our environment? Yes, but we don’t know the full extent of exactly what is happening, so until then I say let’s do more research and make sure our decisions don’t end up screwing everyone in the end.
Just for the record, this survey had nothing to do on policy. It’s based on an interpretation of facts by research scientists and the general public.
In reference to what John alluded to, I happen to agree that a punitive approach using vehicles like cap and trade is ineffective since it appears to financially strain the same energy companies that are supposed to be investing in greener technologies. You get more flies with honey than vinegar, so rather than taxing these businesses, why not just provide a large tax break for the energy companies that successfully venture out in green energy? It seems like it would make sense since a) newer companies would be predisposed to venturing towards the green sector for tax purposes and b) the money saved would make energy from green grids less costly, and therefore, more competitive.
I agree 100%. Tax breaks allow for quality investment from the private sector, which creates jobs, instead of taxing which forces business to pass on the cost and or cut jobs to maintain growth. ( or they just move their jobs over to China where they don’t give a shit_)
I agree. That would be the logical route if you were actually trying to save the environment AND the economy. but I don’t think we’re talking about people who care very much about either right now.
Stacks is always telling me how close minded you guys are at your secret blogger meetings…I don’t see that at all
No seriously, I am really getting to like this more and more