Poll: Global Warming Worries Grow

FILE - In this May 1, 2012 file photo, Thorsten Heins, president and CEO of Research In Motion, delivers the keynote speech during the BlackBerry World conference in Orlando Fla. The struggling Blackberry-maker on Tuesday, May 29, 2012 warned that it will have an operating loss in the current March-June quarter and said there will be significant layoffs this year. (AP Photo/Reinhold Matay, File) / Reinhold Matay

Americans view global warming as a serious — and growing — problem, according to a CBS News/New York Times poll.

Half want it to be a high priority for government leaders and say the government can do a lot to improve the environment. Still, the poll suggests the environment is not likely to be a major issue in the 2008 presidential campaign.

Nearly half of Americans believe global warming is having a serious impact now — up 14 points since 2001. Another third think the impact of global warming will be felt some time in the future. Few think it won't have a serious impact.

Three-quarters think the weather in the past few years has been stranger than usual, with global warming cited as the biggest cause.

IS GLOBAL WARMING HAVING AN IMPACT?

Now
Yes, now
49%
Will in the future
36%
Won't have an impact
11%

6/2001
Yes, now
35%
Will in the future
41%
Won't have an impact
17%

Both Democrats and Republicans agree that global warming is a serious problem, but Democrats are far more inclined to say it should a high priority for government.

Those who do not think global warming is having a serious impact or don't think it needs to addressed are more likely to be Republicans.

---

Click here for complete results of this poll.

---

In general, Democrats are given a big edge over Republicans on environmental issues. They're seen as the party best able to protect the environment (57-14 percent); make the U.S. less dependent on foreign oil (50-24 percent); and provide the country with enough sources of energy (45-30 percent).

SHOULD GLOBAL WARMING BE A PRIORITY FOR GOVERNMENT LEADERS?

High priority
52%
Serious problem but not high priority
37%
Not serious
8%

Just 33 percent approve of President Bush's handling of the environment, down from 43 percent in 2001. Only 27 percent approve of his handling of the energy situation, also down from 2001.

Still, for many Americans, the environment may not be a major issue in the 2008 campaign. Fifty-one percent they could still vote for a candidate who did not share their environmental views.

Respondents were asked about two policy measures aimed at reducing energy consumption and combat global warming. Requiring automakers to build more energy-efficient automobiles was extremely popular — favored by 92 percent of Americans. Increasing gasoline taxes was far less popular, favored by 38 percent and opposed by 58 percent.

Among other findings in the poll:

Most Americans would like to see the government develop new energy sources, but a majority (57 percent) oppose opening up Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and gas drilling.

Three-quarters of Americans say they'd be willing to pay more for energy if it was generated by renewable sources such as solar or wind power.

Sixty-eight percent would consider buying a hybrid car.

Slightly more Americans approve of building more nuclear power plants than disapprove, but only a third would favor building a nuclear plant in their own community.

For detailed information on how CBS News conducts public opinion surveys, click here.

This poll was conducted among a random sample of 1052 adults nationwide, interviewed by telephone April 20-24, 2007. The error due to sampling for results based on the entire sample could be plus or minus three percentage points. The error for subgroups is higher.

[frankly6]

The scientific debate about the reality of global warming has long been over. The overwhelming consensus amoung climate scientists worldwide is that:

1. Global warming is absolutely real.


2. Global warming is caused by man.


3. The consequences of global warming are catastrophic to all life on the planet.


The few reamaining dissenting voices are led by oil industry paid hacks and those that follow them in their denial of reality.

This is not and has never been a left versus right political issue. It's simply a servival issue.



For those of you who are legitamately skeptical about global warming, it's cause and it's effects the following link should prove inlightening:



http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensus.htm

[frankly6]

The Arctic is warming much more rapidly than previously known, at nearly twice the rate as the rest of the globe, and increasing greenhouse gases from human activities are projected to make it warmer still, according to an unprecedented four-year scientific study of the region conducted by an international team of 300 scientists.

[mikealford3]

The globe warming, imagine that. Much like an enclosed room in a building. The first person to enter may find it quite comfortable. However as more and more people enter the room the temperature in the room begins to increase. Though the room was comfortable to the first entrant, the adding of people and activity make the room hot. That is what we are doing to the earth. We are filling the space with people and activity and the atmosphere has no way to exhaust the heat being created.

Just think maybe by the time the sun burns out, the earth will be hot enough to sustain itself and life. LOL Probably Not! But I will not be around to know.

[co2max]

(continuation of post that appears below)
Global warming has been natural as a given trend for 10,000-12,000 years, if not longer. Human influence on that trend may be comparatively meager but is present just the same. It is probably comparable to the light but relentless push of a single finger on a heavy door. The door resists this slight added force, but eventually yields to it and movement however slight overcomes other forces that tend to prevent its movement.
It will not be easy to overcome and correct the influence of civilization on planetary processes. Until it is proved without doubt that climate change serious endangers our future, we should not be convinced to sell the farm in order to assure a meager savings.

[co2max]

Clearly, ranting and raving and repeatedly posting proclamations (ala frankly6) just causes those in opposition to entrench themselves in their own views. I too am most glad to hae reasoned discussion here. We don't necessarily need to agree, but as long as we remain civil we may all learn from each other. This is a good thing.
It has to be admitted that humans do play some role to some degree in influencing climatic behavior. On the surface, in view of the amounts of carbon dioxide we produce, it seems almost obvious that we are adding to the planetary greenhouse which should therefore result in increasing temperatures. This is climate science seen at the surface. Deeper investigation is needed to be sure we understand it all and act correctly in response.
At the same time, some of our "polluting" activity counteracts that greenhouse pumping with added aerosols that provide a subtle cooling effect. Clean-air legislation has reduced the output of many of these aerosols which is probably why this warming-supressant influence has eased in recent years to allow the overall warming to resume its progress.

[gaye5]

rheola it is a beautiful area that you live in..
We would have water if our left winged state government under Mr. Rudd, Mr. Goss and Mr. Beatie, hadnt told the greenies and the likes that they would get rid of the land that the right winged coalition had brought for a dam 12 years ago...
This dam was in a high rainfall area, and the one proposed by our left wing Labor is very wide, which will evaporate at the rate of at least one and a half meters a year, and that will not include obsorption, and it can only go to 5 meters deep, now how is that for common sense for a gobvernment and Mr Rudd wants to be our Prime Minister, ekkkekkk...The dam is about 2 to 3 hrs north of Brisbane and there are some very easy other ways of getting water that is already there in lake Baroon in Maleny and so much cheaper...

[rheola-2009]

Gaye5

Welcome to the world of Rupert Murdoch.

With reference to my statement of the rain not penetrating further than 20 miles inland, this has been the common situation throughout New South Wales for some time now, the recent falls from the victorian border if not further south, through to the cental coast, were as such, as I have stated, this has been the situation for at least the last 12 months, an example, coastal suburb of Sydney, Rose bay, 100+ ml this past week, Parramatta, a western suburb 12-15 mls, Warragamba catchment further west 5-10 mls.

I have aquaintances, and family in areas, from Adelaide and Melbourne, through to Townsville in the north, and they say exactly the same.

I realise fully, that Sth East QLD is on level 5 restrictions, and that Brisbane, like Melbourne, Adelaide and Sydney all have a common problem, their major water storageand catchment area's are inland of where the rain is falling. so in each case their storage levels continue to fall.
However, we here in the Central Tablelands NSW, have had about 25 mls this past 24 hours, and the band stretches right down through Victoria, so a little good news,at least for us, unfortunately you have again missed out as far as I can seAm off out tonight for dinner, may not catch up until tomorrow.

Enjoy your evening.

[gaye5]

frankly6 with so many scientists and learned men saying that humans are not the ONLY reason for global warming, the scientific debate is NOT over, I think you need to read further, as I have said before, how stupid we would be if we only took notice of one area when we do not prepare ourselves for other areas, it means that your grandchildren will suffer greatly because of our stupidity.

and gidday rheola, I live in Queensland, and you said... "with respect to Australia, the recent and heavy rain along the East Coast...", I really dont know what you mean as you should see our lawn, or lack of lawn.. at least we can at the moment bucket water to plants but we are going onto level 5 water restrictions soon..
you said they have rarely encroached more than 20 miles inland,.... what were you meaning by this sentence... you also said ...I also use my own evaluation of the situation existing, as much as I can.
rheola, with all the lies and manipulations out there, this is all we can all do, and use our own intellect... old timers here in Queensland have said that they have seen it far worse than this in their childhood..
I have often said that if you want to control the world dont become the president, just own all the media and you control the thinking of the world...

[gaye5]

frankly6 you say....The National Academy of Sciences studied every peer reviewed,,,,,Every single one of them agreed on three fundamental facts:....

Frank they might all have agreed, the same as may scientists believe that we came from nothing, (and I am not opening a can of worms here so please dont reply to that one)just as there are also just as many scientists who done believe that we came from nothing...
There are many scientists who do not believe that man is the only cause of the earth heating up. we have to realise that it is only in the 1970's that the very same scientists who say we have global warming were saying that we were going into an ice age... now they cant have it both ways especially as some say that we could calculate things back 160 years ago...

[gaye5]

CO2Max, I hadn't realised that we have reforested so much of the land... It is something that I haven't investigated, I have only gone by what I have seen and read as too how many acres of forests are being destroyed each year, putting all hype down to the propaganda of the greens or tree huggers..
But I feel that we have to reforest trees faster than is presently being planted to make up for 160 years of cutting down trees for land to cultivate or for live stock for our use... Having said that, I realise that these cultivated lands are important to our survival so that is why I suggested planting in areas which are of no use like deserts...
And by the way, I am thrilled at the level of discussion here... no nastiness, not that I have had the time to read back a few pages, but thanks guys, it all helps one to learn... nastiness only makes the other person stick adamantly to their views...