## Friday, February 29, 2008 ... /////

### Study: AGW propaganda creates skeptics

A Texas A&M University study by Kellstedt et al. (PDF)
seems to show that the more a person knows about climate change, the less he or she thinks that it is a concern and the less he or she feels personally responsible.
Yahoo news
In other words, the skeptics are educated while the warmers are ignorant, if you allow me to be excessively polite for a while.

Also, the more a person trusts the scientists, the less personally responsible for the hypothetical global warming threat he or she feels.

If we summarize all the sign results (page 121 in the PDF file above), the U.S. people who tend to worry are (slightly) anomalously more likely to be white, male, uneducated, poor, old, non-religious, Republican (!), conservative (!), fans of new ecological values (a very strong correlation, of course), uninformed about global warming, failing to trust the media (!), distrusting experts, unconfident in science (a rather strong effect!).

Many of the correlations seem to be too weak to be significant but the result that the people who have confidence in science are less likely to be concerned about "global warming" seems rather robust.

Explanation?

In some sense, I find the main result kind of unsurprising, especially for those who know what does it mean for an evolutionary advantage to be "credible". Alternatively, the highly repetitive propaganda is only influencing those who have problems to notice, remember, and understand it for the first time they hear it and they I think that they end up in the uninformed category.

The people who are able to learn quickly and remember things are of course unaffected by repetitive comments and they always learn more things. Because the actual scientific results make it clear - especially with combination with common sense and experience of many people - that there is no reason for concern, the people who are able to learn and think eventually get it.

#### snail feedback (5) :

reader 10ksnooker said...

I find the conclusion credible.

When I first started hearing the CO2 drumbeat a few years ago, my response was "you got to be kidding me". We are carbon lifeforms afterall. Now I go to the store and when the subject comes up I ask people how do they know, and get the response "I saw it on TV" or some such. But when pressed -- How do you know, blank stares.

I then say I began my engineering career at a Rice University college lab where we were studying the solar wind and it's effects on Earth, primarily we were trying trying to understand the Aurora Borealis and the solar wind. We put our instruments on the moon with the Apollo program. This was back in the 70s.

As the drumbeat of CO2 nonsense has increased, I have become more vocal, giving more time to debunk this hoax and telling more people about it ... I am a sun believer, the energy involved is out of this world. I guess once a sun guy always a sunny guy :-)

reader L. Riofrio said...

Aloha Lubos! Have you heard about this? "More than 400 scientists, economists and experts will meet in New York on March 2-4 to challenge the claim that global warming is a crisis." Vaclav Klaus will be guest speaker, www.heartland.org. I was at the Marriott Marquis hotel in December and the views are amazing.

reader Lumo said...

Hi Louise, sure, I was also invited (visa hassle was the primary reason to say No, as usually) and I promoted the event several times here. Still plan to do so. Tx & best wishes, Lubos

reader Bruce said...

I believed the AGW hype until Jan. of '07, when I actually started looking for information on it. The impetus was anti-AGW letters to the editor I would see from time to time, which I found ridiculous (they tended to have a distinctly political bent), and which I thought could be easily rebutted. Ha! The more I looked, the more I saw that the AGW hypothesis was riddled with holes, and in fact, had no science backing it. I became a "skeptic" myself, not because I hate liberals, but because I love science. What I do hate is the lying and fear-mongering being touted as science by the AGW propaganda machine. I've been writing letters to the editor for over a year now, trying to get people to see that no, the debate is not over, and no, there is no "consensus", and no, C02 is not the enemy, and yes, it's the sun that drives our climate.

reader coop said...

Check out my blog here on the AGW propaganda. I wrote this for my masters course in propaganda. Good stuff.

http://lovethecoops.blogspot.com/2008/03/anthropogenic-global-warming-propaganda.html