By Jo Nova
It could be the most rigged survey I’ve ever seen
The Lancet “Planetary Health” poll of young Americans looks as contrived as anything in our fake academic and media world.
The survey, funded by AVAAZ (a $20 million dollar political activist “NGO“) is clearly an industrial scale psychological mining operation to find Politically Useful Statistics. It is amazing the survey passed ethical approval, because some 15,793 people aged 16 to 24 were allegedly subjected to a relentless series of unhinged and unbalanced suggestions. The sheer repetition of doom mongering is a form of abuse. It’s works like hypnosis — imagine being asked, “How much, if at all, does climate change make you feel the following? Then being offered 10 shades of pain: Anxious, Powerless, Afraid, Sad, Angry, Despair, Ashamed, Grief, Depressed, Guilty, and finally Indifferent, or Optimistic.
Not only was there no chance to say climate change made you feel Bored, Lectured, Cajoled, Hen-pecked, Conned, and Scammed, but the response list itself was like a hypnotic suggestion, do you beat your wife, how often do you beat your wife, and how do you feel when you beat your wife?
The hapless victims of this interrogation couldn’t escape by picking just one of these words — for every single word on the long list they had to answer on a scale of agreement: “Not at all, A little, Moderately, Very much, Extremely”. It’s a loaded scale. There’s no option to “disagree, moderately, very much or extremely.” It was like saying “Do you agree a bit or a lot”?
It must have been clear from the start to every participant that the researchers wanted to hear how bad things were. It would have taken some wherewithal to reply “Not at all” to 26 versions of “Do you see the doom”? And there really were 26 versions — after the first question the second was “How much, if at all, does climate change make you feel the following?” To which the options included “Humanity is doomed” “I question whether the work I put into my career, job, or vocation, will matter” and Climate change will threaten my life”. After 15 (fifteen!) questions of malcontent and fear, there was the option to be hesitant about children, and finally “climate change will make my life better”.
All of these horror-show questions were listed in the supplementary file with data. (Links below).
Just imagine how many millions of dollars were wasted asking 15,000 people loaded questions?
Tellingly, there is no soul searching despite the supposedly dire results. If two thirds of young adults and teens felt the species was doomed, and half truly didn’t want children, it’s a crisis that can’t wait til 2050. But the whole Lancet “Planetary Health” poll is reported on like just another reason to build wind towers (which was probably the point of the paper). There’s no call for a more balanced education, for a more rational discussion or reminders that compared to the last 100,000 years, we all won lotto. Here we are on Planet Earth with more people, living longer than ever, with more food than we can eat, and we get to sit in machines that go zoom. But no, the only solution here is to cool the planet.
Discussion:
This emotional response represents a substantial burden on wellbeing and might also increase the risk of mental health problems. Youth can benefit from opportunities to share their distress and to act in response to climate change, including in their families, schools and universities, and communities, and through participation in policy development. The findings indicated that the young people in our sample were dissatisfied with the current actions of those in positions of power, in government and in business, and wanted these stakeholders to act to address climate change. In addition, individuals endorsed plans to respond to climate change with their votes and choices about their purchases, lifestyle, and career. These findings reinforce a theme identified in other research that climate change-related distress will continue to increase while climate change remains insufficiently addressed.67 Accordingly, the response to address this distress must be for industries, governments, and policy makers to act at the necessary scale.
It almost has a flavour of hostage negotiation — build the wind towers schmuck, or the kids get suicidal, right?
Ironically, the lead researcher was a Lewandowski (but not that Lewandowsky), and this must be the first, zeroth, volume of the all new Lancet Planetary Health Journal. Straight out the mill, it’s a machine for deceit and political propaganda. Welcome to modern “science”. Just a tool for political activists to score points off opponents and get reckless headlines out of the Guardian, while exploiting some young and naive teens and adults who probably do have some mental health issues. Shameless “The Lancet”.
Science has become a paper mill that serves people with lots of money.
REFERENCE
Lewandowski et al (2024) Climate emotions, thoughts, and plans among US adolescents and young adults: a cross-sectional descriptive survey and analysis by political party identification and self-reported exposure to severe weather events, The Lancet, Planetary Health, Volume 0, Issue 0. PDF (560.58 KB)
The people choosing not to have kids in Australia, brainwashing is highly effective.
‘According to a survey of 10,000 young people published in The Lancet, 39 per cent of global respondents were hesitant to have children due to climate change. Within Australia, that increased to 43.2 per cent, the 2021 study found.’ (AFR)
50
When I was young the people who so lacked confidence in themselves blamed The Bomb.
30
yep was going to say that… still here we are.
20
In those days the government encouraged citizens to populate or perish.
10
Because of the loaded questions…doesn’t this prove the opposite? Because of the propaganda assault our kids believe the world is going to end?
90
https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=yes+minister+national+service&mid=CBDCCCFD8EEF2596896DCBDCCCFD8EEF2596896D&FORM=VIRE
10
This is the number one issue for our society.
Yet the MSM does precious little to discuss the factors that are promoting depopulation.
Futile sexuality is being promulgated by “Progressives”. It reeks of the “Problem Reaction Solution”
formula. Imagine a leader promoting fecundity without resort to massive immigration.
Imagine giving a mortgage forgiveness of 1/4 for each child a heterosexual couple produce.
Imagine giving a mother of four children tax forgiveness for life.
Oh, the mortgage one has been tried but it didn’t turn out so well…
40
How do polls skewed to achieve a biased result make you feel?
a) Mildly upset
b) Extremely angry
c) So infuriated you want destroy your computer or device
100
d) Makes me want to drink more and more.
20
I’m a bit mixed about that result. Horrific to torture kids, but at least the gullible ones are not having children……
80
I could understand people being hesitant to have children because of AI and robots rendering humans much less useful, creating mass unemployment. Or fear of overcrowding in mega cities and human isolation from that (cities can be very lonely isolating places). Not saying that will happen but I can understand the fear, there’s a certain logic to it. Or fear of economic struggle or pursuit of hedonistic lifestyle.
But because of bad weather? Pure insanity and victims of henny penny town criers. But I doubt many people genuinely react to this and other factors are at play.
Though I did personally know some people who sold beach front property in 2007 because of rising sea level. Oops!
100
Those pesky rising sea levels… which have somehow managed to avoid the beach where I’m parked this morning (and for the last 50+ years I’ve been coming here) as families set up picnics on the sand, couples stroll hand-in-hand along the shore, dogs chase sticks and children squeal with delight.
Admittedly the tide was a little higher today, with the full moon in perigee and a comet and assorted cosmic debris hurtling through the heavens, yet otherwise, it’s the most average I’ve seen all my life. However, 12,000ya would’ve been a vastly different scenario: this ‘beach’ would be a tree-filled gully on the side of a hill overlooking an extensive river valley system that reached beyond the horizon, to where a volcanic chain is now a series of offshore islands, because the Pacific Ocean was 100 metres or so below what it is now.
‘Youth’ is sooooo wasted on young people.
80
And what caused the Pacific Ocean to drop 100 metres 12,000 years ago? And what caused all those Ice Ages? And why was it so hot/warm when the Dinosaurs were around?
All these questions for those ancient times well before the Industrial Revolution started.
Does anyone today know the answers?
Meanwhile, the Climate Alarmists seem to know everything about today and the future and the last 200 years or so. Funny that.
90
Yet another Adélie penguin has swum ashore, this time in the capital’s harbour (not a great decision as the city’s sewage pipes keep bursting & leaking into the sea thanks to a series of Green mayors spending money on cycle-paths & rainbow crossings).
Wellington Zoo’s senior vet, let’s call her Kirsten, on being asked what an Adélie would be doing 4,000 km from home, replied: “There’re a couple of theories, but I think the most credible one is the climate crisis has caused warming waters and habitat disruption all around Antarctica”, via RadioNZ.
Even if ‘Kirsten’ was the last vet in the country, no pet of mine would be allowed anywhere near someone holding such ****ed views.
40
Something happened in the mindset of Australians around 2012, was it a change in the weather or more convincing propaganda?
https://poll.lowyinstitute.org/report/2024/climate-change-and-energy/
40
Clearly a spike in temperature spooked everyone.
‘The global surface temperature ranked among the top 10 warmest years on record. Over land and ocean combined, 2012 was between 0.14° and 0.17° Celsius (0.25°and 0.31° Fahrenheit) above the 1981–2010 average, depending on the analysis.’ (NOAA)
00
Lewandowski??
Without citing it, one of the ‘et al’ would be John Cook…yes?
Nothing to see here, just more confirmation bias being memorialized as a “science” paper, never to be replicated.
50
The placard the young lad is holding exemplifies the inanity and stupidity of recent generations. Maybe his teachers helped him with his project. I agree, don’t have children.
40
Having children would require a commitment… well to most people.
And would limit the life style options unless beneficiary of a largish trust fund.. Thank you (gr)(gr)grandparents/rich aunt/uncle
But then again WW III might alter life style options…
Too many suburban/big city residents never had to live with long drop toilets.
40
Or without electricity!
50
Modern “The Science”.
First chose your policy,then manufacture the evidence.
As for these surveys and all polling..Who hangs around long enough to finish such annoying exercises?
Most all working people refuse to participate..
So who gets surveyed?
40
“do you beat your wife, how often do you beat your wife, and how do you feel when you beat your wife?”
That reminds me of an old one –
“Are you still beating your wife?” “NO.” “So, you were beating your wife.”
It’s all in the way that the questions are asked. Surveys are notorious for this.
80
Child abuse …. ’nuff said.
20
“Science serves people with lots of money” and those that depend on government largess to accumulate more. I refer to the State of Victoria that eventually will require a Federal bailout!
30
No bailout for Sicktoria. The voters and taxpayers can wallow in their folly. Meanwhile the
Pollies’ get away with it once more.
10