Why is global warming such a partisan issue?

Question

Last night and today I asked the same poll question on YA to determine the political affiliation, knowledge, and education of people on both sides of the global warming issue.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ahj_9Ts6XCPlEPR8x0ZiSSPsy6IX?qid=20070620093306AAiroBM
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=As51esLbobIHNR73Q9Efqv_sy6IX?qid=20070619214425AA4ugqF

I got 32 useable answers, pretty well spread along the political spectrum. Breakdown:

Every single person who did not believe humans are the primary cuase of the current global warming (non-believers=NBs) were right-leaning to conservative. Those who believed humans are the primary cause (believers=Bs) ranged from moderate to one socialist, mainly liberals.

Bs got their information from much better sources on average. Many NBs cited common sense.

Bs had better education, basically averaging a BS in science while NBs averaged a BS in a non-science.

Why is global warming such a partisan issue?

Regarding the education correlation - of course I put more weight on a science degree. A person with a science degree is more likely to be able to understand a scientific issue than a person with an English degree. Who would you trust more, a climatologist or Rush Limbaugh? If you answer Rush, you've got a problem.

Regardless, that was just a side-note correlation. I was mostly interested in political and knowledge source breakdown. Bs had far, far better sources of information and included both moderates and liberals. The two best correlations were that a NB is almost certainly a conservative and likely poorly informed.

Answer 1

Probably due to a variety of reasons. One is that today's conservatism seems to call for a denial that Americans could ever possibly do anything wrong. This is not to say that Americans are always, or even often, wrong, or even that Americans are the main contributors to the situation. It is simply that the insinuation that our actions could be having a negative result is something they don't want to hear.

Another reason is the large amount of contributions republicans receive from companies with an interest in weakening, rather than strengthening, environmental protections. These companies, such as the oil industry, fund many of the studies that allege that climate change is not due to human action. These studies are then trumpeted by conservatives on radio and in columns, along with the occasional member of congress, with obvious results.

Answer 2

I believe that Global Warming is real and that humans are one of the biggest contributors to this disaster (we cut down trees, pave over nature, we pollute the Earth on a daily basis not just by cars but also our industrious nature). As for political persusion, I am a registered Democrat (that does not mean that I like them, but I like them better than Conservatives). As for education I have a BS in Political Science and an AA in Paralegal Studies. I am an Eagle Scout and I have written numerious reports on preserving our Environment from everything to recycling to Shark Conservation. I have read books on climate change, been on the internet and I have asked actual scientists on Global Warming. What I find amazing is that most scientists believes in Global Warming is a true belief, except for those that works for Exxon. Heck we even had a political expert of the Bush administration that creativly changed a few words on an official report to say that Global Warming is crap. He now works for Exxon. We even have George Bush saying that we need to curb global climate change (global climate change, global warming whats the dif). I think that it is a partisan issue because according to conservatives the Bible says that humans control the Earth, while liberals try to find a balance between our needs and the needs of the Earth. Conservatives believes that a strong economy is paramount while liberals believes that a strong environment should be paramount (humanity has lived without an economy, I don't think we can live without an environement).

Answer 3

Because look at the consequences.

IF humans are the primary cause - who will fix it? The Government.

Liberals love the government to come and save them, while conservatives want the government to stay out of our lives.

Personally, I think we need to have hard numbers showing us EXACTLY how much of the current warming is attributable to man (the rising CO2 levels).

Also, I would like to point out that a degree in the sciences does not make you an authority figure on gobal climatology. Personally, I prefer to listen to the experts, and I have yet to see a definitive study that can link EXACTLY how much of the current warming trend is caused by man.

If any of you have such evidence, I am open to reviewing it. because I believe that IF we are in fact the primary cause of global warming, then we should fix it.

However until we are sure, we should probably hold off on throwing our tax dollars or passing legislation on it.

Also, a lot of people have been saying things like: "It is indisputable that CO2 levels are increasing heavily, this proves global warming is our fault".

I understand that we are polluting, and that CO2 levels are rising. I just want hard data about how much these CO2 levels are affecting current global warming.

Is that too much to ask?

Answer 4

I think your more educated people are getting information as I'm sure you've heard before Garbage in garbage out. What appears on the surface to be well thought out documented, studied, proven and more ends up being fluff n stuff.

The weather is a cycle with its hots, colds, wets and droughts. But in the 1970's which is conviently forgotten about the very same Polutions were causing us to head rappidly into Global Cooling. Yet today hardly a word is ever mentioned.

Answer 5

Maybe to distract people from thinking about being raped by Big Oil. How many representatives are talking about that?
MLB Steroids,
Immigration Reform,
Global Warming,
Alberto Gonzales,
Stem Cell Research,
And on and on.....


Some Simple Facts:
Yes, there is Global Warming. It has happened before and it will happen again. Example: Middle ages, the global warming was obviously caused by man then also.

The Ice caps have melted, on average, an insignificant amount, causing the sea level to rise an insignificant amount. I have heard claims that 40% of the ice caps are already gone. If that were true, the sea level would have risen 3 feet. Serious misinformation.

Man contributes only minimally to global warming. I have heard claims that 90% of Climate scientists say man outright caused the global warming. That is an outright lie. The figure is more like 10%. Maybe 90% percent believe that Man CONTRIBUTES BUT NOT CAUSES global warming. Misinformation.

Global warming is a political tool used to divert attention from Big Oils raping of America. It is the latest in a line of intentional distractions by politicians. As others have said the “flavor of the month”. What has your politician done about Big Oil. Probably nothing or misinformation.

Global warming is real but used by Alarmists by horrific exaggerations and careful misinformation. These Alarmists spout various facts and figures with little or no truth while denouncing anything that contradicts their views. I often think their actions remind me of psycho sports fans who freak out if you dare to say anything is wrong with their team.

There is good in the global warming debate. It will reduce pollution and increase energy efficiency. I don’t need lies and misinformation to get me to believe that.

Answer 6

It makes just another 'wedge' issue for everybody to argue about, as the Earth burns ! Smart vs.Stupid !
Most of the folks that are non believers of the facts of "Global Climate Change", can can easily be convinced by their type of logic, that the Sun indeed does go around the Earth ! After all, it's obvious to even the dumbest folks that 's the case !You're getting close to the truth in the reason that G.C.C. is going over their heads ! THEY'RE IGNORANT BY CHOICE...
The next criteria of your investigation should be the role Creationists play in the dis-beleif of the science of G.C.C. !

Answer 7

1) It's not a question of belief, it's a question of proof. Conservative/Libertarians think that before the government can be used to shut down or sharply limit otherwise free activity, those who assert that it causes some harm should have to prove their assertions. That's because we believe that you should be free to do what you want limited only in that it does not limit another (which causing harm would do) - and the burden of proof would practically have to be put on those marking the assertion, otherwise you could just make up anything you want and thereby place limits on otherwise free activity.

2) You define education to mean education in your view of things. Finance people don't agree with you.

Answer 8

Dems and Reps have kind of adopted positions on it, and filter it down to party loyals. Environmentalists will tell you it's all man's fault, capitalists will say it's not even happening.

In actuality, global warming IS happening, the real issue is how much of it is our fault and how much is just another of earth's cycles effected by the changing energy put out by the sun. Last study I heard said humans effect was about 5-6% of the global warming effect, the rest was natural effected by the sun and earth's climate reactions to it. We won't really know until decades down the road who is really right or what is going on.

Answer 9

Primarily because Al Gore is championing the cause

Had it been Rush Limbaugh that was on that side, of the arguement, Bush would have declared it a National Emergency, and all his followers would be driving electric cars and stoning to death all democrats that didn't

Answer 10

most of the partisanship comes from how strongly people feel about property rights.

any kind of ecologically minded public policy will have to affect property rights. either what you can produce, what you can sell, or what you can own.

consider gas mileage. an increase in gas mileage will mean that you have to alter something on your car. most people don't like the idea of someone telling them what to do with their stuff.

the opposite side of the coin can still use property rights to its advantage. if i live next to a field now and my neighbor decides to sell his land, so far i have no objections. but if someone builds a factory on that land? suddenly, the smoke stacks will make the paint on my house turn black. it will severely decrease my living quality by having worse air, and loud noise. they've clearly done harm to me and to the rest of the world.

so it depends on how strongly you feel about the government telling you what you can do with your stuff.