JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

Australian Environment Conference Oct 20 2012


micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Latest Morgan Poll: Govt popularity falls to 30%. But half still think we need to “do something” about the climate.

L-NP (59%) HAS ITS BIGGEST RECORDED LEAD EVER OVER THE ALP (41%)
MAJORITY OF AUSTRALIANS (53%) DO NOT WANT THE CARBON TAX

The latest telephone Morgan Poll conducted over the last three nights, May 31 — June 2, 2011, shows the L-NP (59%) with its biggest winning lead over the ALP (41%) since the Morgan Poll began recording Two-Party preferred results in early 1993.

A clear majority of Australian electors (53%, down 1% since March 2011) oppose the Gillard Government’s plan to introduce a carbon tax, 37% (down 1%) support the proposed carbon tax and 10% (up 2%) can’t say.

Although most oppose the carbon tax Australians are concerned about Global Warming. When asked for their view of Global Warming most Australians (50%, down 4% since January 2010) say that ‘If we don’t act now it will be too late’ and a further 15% (up 3%) say ‘It is already too late,’ only 32% (up 1%) believe that ‘Concerns are exaggerated,’ and 3% (unchanged) can’t say.

Moreover opinion is still evenly divided on Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s promise to overturn the Gillard Government’s proposed carbon tax legislation if the Liberal Party is elected: 45% (up 1%) of electors support overturning the carbon tax legislation cf. 45% (down 1%) oppose overturning the carbon tax legislation.

Global Warming in Australia

  • A clear majority of Australian electors (67%) are aware that Australia is responsible for about 1% of the world’s total carbon dioxide emissions and a majority (64%) believes that Australia’s proposed carbon tax will make no difference to the world’s climate. However, 52% of ALP supporters and 67% of Greens supporters believe a carbon tax will make a difference to the world’s climate compared to only 15% of L-NP supporters.
  • Few Australians (14%) believe the computer projection referred to by Prime Minister Julia Gillard that sea levels will rise 1.1 metres in the next 100 years, 44% of Australian electors believe global sea levels will rise by more than 20cm but less than 1.1 metres; 32% believe global sea levels will rise by 20cm or less and 10% believe global sea levels will not rise.
  • A majority of Australian electors (54%) believe that global sea level changes are mainly due to Global Warming, 37% believe they are not mainly due to Global Warming. Interestingly, 76% of ALP supporters and 80% of Greens supporters believe sea level changes are due to Global Warming compared to only 39% of L-NP supporters.
  • Although a clear majority of Australian electors (72%) do not believe the recent floods in Queensland and bushfires in Victoria a couple of years ago are due to Global Warming compared to some 20% that believe the floods and bushfires are due to Global Warming and 8% can’t say.

Federal Voting Intention

The telephone Morgan Poll shows the L-NP primary vote is 50%, well ahead of the ALP 30%. Support for the minor parties shows the Greens 9.5% and Independents/Others 10.5%.

The latest telephone Morgan Poll conducted over the last three nights, May 31 — June 2, 2011, shows the L-NP (59%) with its biggest winning lead over the ALP (41%) since the Morgan Poll began recording Two-Party preferred results in early 1993.

A clear majority of Australian electors (53%, down 1% since March 2011) oppose the Gillard Government’s plan to introduce a carbon tax, 37% (down 1%) support the proposed carbon tax and 10% (up 2%) can’t say.

Although most oppose the carbon tax Australians are concerned about Global Warming. When asked for their view of Global Warming most Australians (50%, down 4% since January 2010) say that ‘If we don’t act now it will be too late’ and a further 15% (up 3%) say ‘It is already too late,’ only 32% (up 1%) believe that ‘Concerns are exaggerated,’ and 3% (unchanged) can’t say.

Moreover opinion is still evenly divided on Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s promise to overturn the Gillard Government’s proposed carbon tax legislation if the Liberal Party is elected: 45% (up 1%) of electors support overturning the carbon tax legislation cf. 45% (down 1%) oppose overturning the carbon tax legislation.

Global Warming in Australia

  • A clear majority of Australian electors (67%) are aware that Australia is responsible for about 1% of the world’s total carbon dioxide emissions and a majority (64%) believes that Australia’s proposed carbon tax will make no difference to the world’s climate. However, 52% of ALP supporters and 67% of Greens supporters believe a carbon tax will make a difference to the world’s climate compared to only 15% of L-NP supporters.
  • Few Australians (14%) believe the computer projection referred to by Prime Minister Julia Gillard that sea levels will rise 1.1 metres in the next 100 years, 44% of Australian electors believe global sea levels will rise by more than 20cm but less than 1.1 metres; 32% believe global sea levels will rise by 20cm or less and 10% believe global sea levels will not rise.
  • A majority of Australian electors (54%) believe that global sea level changes are mainly due to Global Warming, 37% believe they are not mainly due to Global Warming. Interestingly, 76% of ALP supporters and 80% of Greens supporters believe sea level changes are due to Global Warming compared to only 39% of L-NP supporters.
  • Although a clear majority of Australian electors (72%) do not believe the recent floods in Queensland and bushfires in Victoria a couple of years ago are due to Global Warming compared to some 20% that believe the floods and bushfires are due to Global Warming and 8% can’t say.

Federal Voting Intention

The telephone Morgan Poll shows the L-NP primary vote is 50%, well ahead of the ALP 30%. Support for the minor parties shows the Greens 9.5% and Independents/Others 10.5%.

———————————

For discussion. I’ve added bolding.

H/t Des Moore

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 5.0/10 (2 votes cast)
Latest Morgan Poll: Govt popularity falls to 30%. But half still think we need to "do something" about the climate., 5.0 out of 10 based on 2 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/3t3uvmo

38 comments to Latest Morgan Poll: Govt popularity falls to 30%. But half still think we need to “do something” about the climate.

  • #

    Confusing stats – I would love for Malcom to tell us all what was the defining evidence that convinced him of climate change – and for that matter everyone else as well – of all the research I’ve undertaken – all the recent studies have been conducted believing that the Climate Change debate is already proven.

    In fact Dr Gaunaut’s report was compiled basis Claimate Change is a given – his computer modelling and its outcome presented in a program called ‘Magicc’ – see Magicc website to download software – was based on Kyoto accepted climate change data …

    Before we have the Carbon Tax referendum – lets all demand that Politicians who support the Climate Change debate give their personal understanding and reasons for accepting the science – as opposed to throwing academicly constructured reports that you need a degree just top read let alone understand at the electorate … and conversely – those who don’t support the theory – give their reasons was well.

    To be honest – I think very few understand the data – just the outcome summaries provided by vested interests …


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    “52% of ALP supporters and 67% of Greens supporters believe a carbon tax will make a difference to the world’s climate compared to only 15% of L-NP supporters.”

    Unbelievable in 2011! With Internet access so available for people to check for themselves, I would never have believed I’d live to see the day when brainwashing promoting a hypothesis based on pseudo science and dodgy computer modelling could dumb down such a percentage of the electorate to such an extent, even given the massive funds available from governments and other vested interests to promote the scam!

    Words almost fail me!


    Report this

    10

  • #
    Dave

    Some suggestions for more polls!

    1. Would you support a CO2 Tax if you would definitely loose your job?
    2. Would you support a CO2 Tax if all manufacturing ceased in Australia?
    3. Would you support a CO2 Tax if the global temperature is really cooling?
    4. Would you support a CO2 Tax if sea levels drop and ice cover increases?
    5. Would you support a CO2 Tax even if you can’t afford to pay?
    6. Would you support a CO2 Tax even if Ross Garnaut says it will result in no steel industry?

    Refer http://www.steelguru.com/international_news/Dr_Garnaut_admits_steel_jobs_could_be_lost_in_Australia/208149.html

    Bob Brown blaming the coal industry for the QLD floods & Cyclone Yasi and John Brooks blaming CO2 for the Swan River being too high? These guys are pollution on intelligence!

    This is not about saving the Globe – it’s about wealth distribution from Australia to everywhere else!


    Report this

    10

  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    Jo,

    After the years of propaganda and hype by scientists, environmentalists, corporations, etc. Is it a wonder that the population think the climate is in jeopardy and needs some sort of action?

    Science is still mostly uncertain or unexplored.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    JW

    If this poll is accurate then it could be even worse than it looks for labor. With still quite a few still believing in the CAGW hoax imagine once they wake uo to the scam how low labor will be!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    DavidH

    After the years of propaganda and hype by scientists, environmentalists, corporations, etc. Is it a wonder that the population think the climate is in jeopardy and needs some sort of action?

    Well said. It’s probably only 4 months that I’ve been “turned on” to the sceptic, aka true, understanding of the global warming ruse. I never really bought into the extreme predictions of catastrophe, but I always thought there had to be something true about having to reduce “carbon emissions” and the need for “doing something” to counteract the warming we were told we were causing. It was all so pervasive. Sometimes it’s still hard to believe that so many (very likely sincere) scientists are still arguing the AGW orthodoxy. (As for the politicians, not so hard to understand their motives.) Actually, I am heartened that the poll figures are as “sceptical” as are being reported. But this isn’t a battle that will be won in a decisive moment – rather a long hard slog as ever more and more people come to understand the falsity of catastrophic global warming theory and how it has so neatly played into the hands of the environmental movement, as well as (UK apparently being an exception) to socialist governments as a smokescreen to bring in new redistributive taxes on “carbon” “pollution”. CAGW doesn’t have to be true for them – it’s merely convenient that the public has generally accepted it to be so. We sceptics can but convince one more person at a time that the scares are unfounded and some of them will in their turn convince yet more people – a chain-reaction that may eventually lead to there being a mere influenceless rump of true CAGW believers left. I can live in hope.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    David H, thank you. Your comment gives me heart.

    What is amazing from this survey is that 50% of the public have not even the slightest idea that the science has become corrupted. 50% agree that “‘If we don’t act now it will be too late’ “.

    Just wait for the blow-back at the polls when they do…


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Thumbnail

    Jo, you are making history, one page at a time. Thank you.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Denier

    More than that, Jo. DavidH’s comment gives me hope. In a world that seems to be controlled by the forces of evil (I will never accept “Not evil, just wrong”!), that’s what I need.
    (BTW, I’m a whingeing Pom [wish I'd taken the gap 22 years ago - although JuLIAR makes me wonder])


    Report this

    00

  • #

    Hi DavidH,

    I used to believe in Global Warming, until Climate Gate occurred at my old uni and I started digging into the emails. In fact it wasn’t the emails as such that changed my mind initially, it was quality (or lack of) to my expert eyes in the programs and the notes around them. Then I dug deeper and had a nose into the NASA GISS code and found they were spreading anomalies over hills, mountains and ice fields without so much as an attempt to track significance over up to 1200km or adjust case by case and still think its as valid as the original data.. Then not using satellite records to create a map of adjustments to increase accuracy… Then the hockey stick graph, etc, etc I was won over – the science was being results driven and easily driven at that; find what fits the agenda and if it does not fit make it look like it does or ignore it or attempt to get it buried or stopped; very powerful as an iterative strategy if you are in the middle of things (i.e. a few people do it in a chain and you have the results you need and everybody else feeds off that, you’ve manipulated the direction of research for a whole scientific field, job done!).

    That’s not science its marketing & manipulation dressed up as science and they should be ashamed. My wife used to do agency marketing analysis, so I can say that based on experience.

    So this is not just about the global warming/climate change/whatever its called this month – its also a fight for more ‘real science’ and direct accountability in the field.

    Keep up the fight! BTW join the Stop the Carbon Tax page on Facebook and join in the discussion – see my link.

    Keith


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    From childhood we are taught to defer to the “authority”: teacher, parent, adult… The habit doesn’t die easily for many. And unfortunately the appearance of authority is as good as real authority for a lot of people.

    Critical thinking is the antidote but we don’t teach critical thinking in far too many places. Look at how many bought into Obama’s fairy tales as he campaigned for office.

    DavidH, we have a high hurdle to jump in all the developed nations of this world.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    incoherent rambler

    What is amazing from this survey is that 50% of the public have not even the slightest idea that the science has become corrupted. 50% agree that “‘If we don’t act now it will be too late’ “.

    Just wait for the blow-back at the polls when they do…

    Yes. It is one explanation for the slowly eroding numbers of govt. It will mean political devastion, no question. The upcoming phase is for ALP MPs to start defecting from the AGW cause.

    When the AGW scam collapses, the side effect is that is will take decades for public trust in “scientists” to be restored.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    john of sunbury

    Thanks David H, great to hear from a recent convert, very heartening. In fact you have prompted me to get more active with family and friends discussing AGW beliefs. It’s something I have wanted to do for a while but worry about alienating people. It’s odd that we mostly avoid discussing the things that really matter.


    Report this

    10

  • #
    Llew Jones

    This excerpt, below, from today’s The Australian’s editorial is saying what has become obvious about Gillard. As Australians become increasingly aware of Gillard’s deep seated Leftist radicalism, evident in her climate alarmist rhetoric, expect the ALP’s support to be further eroded. She has until now been able to mask that radicalism but under the stress of the opposition to her Carbon Tax the real Gillard is being unmasked:

    “Ms Gillard started her politics at university and was heavily involved in the Socialist Forum, a group that included former communists and favoured death duties, wealth redistribution and shutting down US bases. She plays down this leftist background but whether she’s discussing asylum-seekers, climate change or mining taxes, it is the rhetoric of the Left, and the language of the Greens and GetUp, that falls most naturally from her tongue and to which she reverts in heated discussions.”


    Report this

    00

  • #
  • #

    Roy Hogue@10

    From childhood we are taught to defer to the “authority”

    Therein lies the difference, one for which my parents and grandparents will have my eternal gratitude. They taught me to respect authority, but to never defer to it. To always question things to gain the fullest understanding and having done so only then make a decision and/or take a side in an argument/debate.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Dave

    Very O/T

    With these reports of the bacteria breakout in Europe (coming from Germany) see http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/breaking-news/killer-bacteria-hits-12-countries-who/story-e6freonf-1226068961373

    Is it possible that it is related to Biogas residuses being used as fertilizer in Hamburg? Refer Jo earlier article http://joannenova.com.au/2011/05/could-green-biogas-ferment-botulism/

    This is from a Biogas Hamburg based company http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/2009-en-franck-biogasplant-hamburg.pdf and the stuff that goes in and out doesn’t look to healthy.

    The only thing in common between lettuce, cucumber and tomatoes is fertilizer? Any experts that can shed light on this?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    John Brookes

    In ten years, there won’t be climate blogs, so there won’t be any easy way for you guys to admit that you were wrong, will there?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    connolly

    These really are dreadful numbers for Gillard. The Libs have a 20% lead which is unprecedented. Gillard and the Greens have taken Federal Labor into NSW Labor electoral annihilation territory. And Garnaut’s latest report is electorally suicidal for Labor in their manufacturing and mining electorates. So big problem. The “solution” will be Gillard’s removal before the next election. They have about a three month window of opportunity to put her into history’s great big dumpster. Julia should have remembered Sir Humphrey Appelby’s advice to Jim Hacker – “Things don’t happen just because Prime Ministers are keen on them. Neville Chamberlain was keen on peace.”


    Report this

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    John

    It will probably take more than ten years to cover “the Wilderness Years II”. ( & another 50 years for the political aspirants to get their party brownie points writing Arts/Law theses aboutit).


    Report this

    00

  • #
    memoryvault

    John Brookes @ 18

    Finished your Plan B John?
    You know, just on the offchance that you are wrong and millions are going to die as a consequence.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    John @ 18 – you may be right. But, on the off-chance that you’re wrong, I’ve just done a screen capture of your comment.
    See you in 2021!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    Dave @ 17.

    I wondered exactly the same thing after hearing a German medical expert this morning saying the strain of e-coli was bound to have a causal link from animals. The fertiliser/vegetable growing connection you cite would definitely seem to warrant close investigation!

    As I am unaware of any Australian MSM mention of the story of the deadly botulism arising from use of waste products in the biogas process and being widely covered in Germany, you have reminded me I must pass on the link to the Supervising Producer of Lateline for their promised item in the next few weeks on the pros and cons of renewable energy.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    KeithH

    Silly me Dave @ 17.

    I’ve just checked your first link to Qld Courier Mail! Things are looking up in the MSM!

    I’m still going to make Lateline aware of it though and ask questions if it doesn’t get a mention!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    lmwd

    OT but kinda related as to why people still uncritically swallow the AGW scare. Good article written by Frank Furedi at Spiked titled ‘Nuclear vs climate change: the clash of the alarmists”: How Germany’s hysterical decision to shut down all its nuclear power plants exposes the dangers of competitive fearmongering.

    http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/10567/

    Similar article published in the Australian today by Furedi. I like that he’s looking at this phenomenon from a socio-psychological viewpoint. According to him we’ve been conditioned to be frightened…of almost everything, which he calls the “culture of fear”, and hence people simply believe something needs to be done about climate change.

    This is interesting when you look at the figures with 72% not seeing recent climatic events as evidence of climate change. Is it because the media here were forced for provide historical context? That is, how did recent flooding compare with 1974 or 1893?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Foryourinfo

    Every Australian voter should remember this in 2013, when there’s the next scheduled election (presumably when the Carbon tax is in and some in the media and Labor would be trying to get everyone to forget about this inconvenient truth of Gillard’s):

    No doubt the lack of conviction on climate change contributed to Labor losing its majority at the election, but ruling out a carbon tax probably helped it hang on to some seats. Yet Ms Gillard announced in February that she was trashing that promise and moving ahead with the Greens to impose a carbon tax. All the evidence suggests the Prime Minister doesn’t quite understand the insult of that broken pledge — she pocketed people’s votes and then disregarded the very basis upon which they were cast. Nor does she comprehend how it leaves the nation looking at her and wondering just what it is that motivates her.
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/after-almost-a-year-the-real-julia-is-a-mystery/story-e6frg71x-1226068953828


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Terry

    What John @ 18 means is that if the eco-fascists get their way, then dissenting voices will be banned and only extreme-left blogs will be allowed and sold as mainstream views.

    At least everyone will “agree” with the “consensus” then.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    thRealUniverse

    OOOOOOOOPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS! Sorry humans!
    from ICECAP
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Solar Cycles Cause Global Warming & Cooling
    By Nick Anthony Fiorenza

    Planetary warming has also been observed on Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, and on Neptune’s largest moon Triton during the decades following the peak of the “Solar Grand Maximum” – wonder why – there are no humans there! And Pluto is moving further from the sun in its orbit, thus it should be cooling, but instead it is warming. This is but one blatant indicator that suggests that the climate change on Earth is due to solar changes and our intersellar environment rather than mere human antics.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    PaulM @16,

    You are among the fortunate that you have the teaching you received. Many are not so fortunate, including me. And I’ve had to learn many things the hard way. My parents were not negligent, they were loving and caring. But they simply had no example to follow. Teachers were always authoritarian to me and I suspect to very many children. Again, when you have no better example to follow…

    Life usually makes sheep out of the ill prepared. I was lucky.


    Report this

    00

  • #

    The survey suggests that a lot of people want ‘something’ done, but can’t explain what.
    I don’t think that’s a position exclusive to climate change. If the question is asked, ‘There is a problem, do you want to see something done about it?’ most people unless informed on the subject will say yes. Because wanting to do something is the proper response when you think of yourself as a nice person. Saying no implies you don’t care. We don’t want anyone thinking that of us, not even a survey taker.
    Two years ago when the ETS was still an abstract possibility it was easy to support. Today we are much nearer the pointy end of the business. The citizens have seen Copenhagen collapse in farce. The government has also made a lasting impression with its clumsiness and breathtaking hypocrisy. A survey in a year’s time would probably find 10-20% still supporting the tax. Outside of this, the rusted-on demographic, support will inevitably decline.


    Report this

    00

  • #
  • #
    rjm385

    My problem with the Gillard government is that they didn’t win the electon. It was a back room deal between several Independant members and the Greens. How does it give them any mandate to introdce shoncky and an ill advised Carbon Tax. There is only one answer that I can see and in a word the UN.

    I believe this country has been hijacked by the incompetent decisions of our previous so called leaders knuckling down under presseure from the UN. We must stand long and strong against this and never, ever let it happen again. Politicians need to very carefully consider any proposition put to them by outside forces. Instead of being coerced into some agreement that eliminates any Sovereign right.

    Our leaders should have the honour, stamina and fortitude to send the UN the message that’s needed, “your wasting your breath. We won’t be giving you any more money for Climate Change.” but all we have is a face saving hypocracy.

    This is Democracy in the worst Totalitarian way.

    Say goodbye Julia, your gone !!


    Report this

    00

  • #
    janama

    Nick @ 31

    the article also states “The survey was carried out in June and July last year, with the results released today.”

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/climate-change-sceptics-endangered-study-20110603-1fjo0.html#ixzz1OMZvO26z

    That’s damn deceptive journalism IMO.


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Outrider

    So when is Jo and Australia’s three best sceptic scientists going to challenge 4 Australian climate scientists to a debate on the science on national TV. 90 minutes.
    Surely Aunty would love it?


    Report this

    00

  • #
    rjm385

    Hey Guys , I wanted to share this with you.

    I’m not much on analyses but I can’t descern from the eye much of a trend here.

    There was some hot years in the 2000′s but not as the reports keep saying the hottest on record.

    I wanted to select a country area in Australia with a reasonable degree of accuracy so I selected Gayndah in QLD as the range extends from the 1890′s.

    I’ll leave it in your capable hands http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_display_type=dataGraph&p_stn_num=039039&p_nccObsCode=36&p_month=13

    Regards Bob


    Report this

    00

  • #
    scott

    I also have been unplugged from the matrix for only the past 5-6 months.

    It is amazing that now that I am, i read all I can on the different blogs and sites.

    I also spend a lot of time debating the facts with friends etc. Most are amazed at the reality, rather than whats in the mass media.
    One person at a time this debate will be won

    thanks for the hard work Jo


    Report this

    00

  • #
    Popeye

    rjm395 @ 35

    Have also ran a couple of others and guess what?

    Alice Springs

    and

    Broken Hill

    Both show similar results – and why aren’t they warning of an impending Ice Age now like they did in the seventies – LIARS!!!

    Cheers,


    Report this

    00

  • #
    incoherent rambler

    rjm385 @ 35:

    So that spike at the start was 1897?

    I have it from now deceased rural Victorian people (first hand) what thermometers they had, broke in 1897. Furthermore that it was the hottest year in their and their parents memory. The key measure was the number of dead animals. Interesting.


    Report this

    00

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>