People are, in general, very short-sighted. (See also: failing to convince people of the seriousness of global climate change, etc).

It's been very cold in the Northeast and in much of the nation for the past few weeks.  These poll results may be a result of timing as much as anything else.  People do not equate unseasonably harsh winter with climate change.  People think "Global warming my a$$."

It reminds me of a statement in a Competitive Enterprise Institute (the "CO2 is Life" people) document about how they thought climate science will lose its urgency in the general public.

People are doubting scientific facts because of the war on science is working and not because the science is becoming less certain.

Hopefully this destructive trend can be reversed.

Most people are victims to GWB's and the oil companies concentrated assault on the science behind global climate change. Remember that the goal of that assault wasn't to disprove climate change per se, but to make proving it almost impossible by continually keeping the debate open to question.

So now the majority of people, whether they are for or against the science, are barely on one side of the other.

So, since it's been colder here in the Northeast than in years past - mostly due to La Nina, people are swinging toward the "it's not happening" or "it's not our fault" stance.

Remember that most people desperately want it not to be happening. It's terrifically scary and just this big monstrous thing so if there's groups that are saying "there's nothing to worry about", then those groups have a built-in audience.

It could take years before the effects of that assault wear off. Years we don't really have. Every one of us needs to become an educator (many of us on grist are!).

Yeah Alec, everytime I pick up a magnet off my refrigerator, it burns my hand!  Your wingnuts may be a bit loose around the axles, I think the wheels are falling off your skeptic wagon.

Historical context: Back in the 1890s there were novel parlor tricks and claims about electromagnetism; static electricity and sparks, magnetism, etc.  It was all very charlatan like, in retrospect.

Now, aided by scientific studies, data and methods we know about the earth's Ionosphere and magnetosphere-- about our planet's own electromagnetic field created by the rotation of the molten iron core deep inside earth-- and how it protects us from much of the harmful spectra of radiation that is flying past.

The thermal (IR) type from our sun, is able to pass through and warms our surface; it is aided by the blanketing atmosphere which maintains the temperature higher than, say, that of the moon. It's a rather fine calibration to keep our system between the melting and boiling points of water, which most life as we know it depends on.  Venus and Mars are examples of the two extremes beyond these limits...

A friend believes that average Joe's have a hard time distinguishing on a daily basis between weather and climate.  Maybe that's what explains this poll finding in the middle of the 10th coldest January on record (in my northern state, anyway).  That and how the Weather Channel axed their climate science reporting...

The warm seasons arrive statistically earlier each year.  That is a climatic signal!  USGS reports released just before the change of administrations underscore the gravity of the situation we're finding ourselves in due to human perturbations of the natural climate system.

The science is happening, despite wingnut attestations to the contrary!

Moving toward sustainability with hopefulness, one revolution at a time.

We're not a Scientocracy.

A few of us (10-12%?) are natural-born science-types.  It helps inform better decisions, by leadership.  Very important, it helps tamp down the default buffoonery of being human. (Tho, scientific buffoonery is far from unknown.)

But notice not only are we not one, but there are no Scientocracies.  We've had science long enough now, there should be several examples, in the history books and in the current international scene.  We have no incipient Vulcan or Romulan cultures.  If one does appear, it is unlikely to be stable.

We have obliged certain government agencies to use 'Best available science', instead of various (default) subjective processes, but we are not really going to set policy for our nation by scientific fiat.

Environmentalism & Co. have had great success appealing to scientific argument to win public policy contests, but it would be prudent to remember that science really only informs decisions, and does not force them.

Decisions, especially the more crucial ones, remain primarily a matter of values & principles, not logic & science.

How is it that the American public is so scientifically ignorant, and yet the best science takes place in America? I believe its because in America science is something that is understood and pursued by a small (but extremely talented) minority of "others" "geeks", and "nerds". ie not "normal" people. So as long as these guys are delivering the best computers, software, medicine, and video games, the public really doesn't care to keep informed of science, giving slimey climate deniers a chance to jump in with their pseudo-science and confuse the public.

The public lacks the specialist-skills to derive Cladistic Trees or Mendellian F1 inheritance ... but they understand the Theory of Evolution quite well (to the distress of some religious communities).

The public doesn't know specifically how to calculate neutron flux and nuclear resonance energy, but they do understand just fine that two pieces of plutonium driven rapidly together create a positive feedback radiation-increase that 'ignites' the whole mass in a nuclear explosion.

The environmentalist' & Anthropogenic Global Warming community rationale that regular people cannot grasp climate science, or that they are easily misinformed because they are "ignorant" or "unaware", is fallacious.

Sure, we find the willfully ignorant and the perversely wrong-headed among the public.  But to assume that the public as a whole is predominantly mentally incompetent, whereas we fine, properly-Green folk are their responsibly-enlightened betters ... this is a conceit, and the classic makings of one's own downfall.

The public are capable of thinking satisfactorily, and they are very familiar with a wide range of manipulative forces brought to bear upon them.  The idea that "deniers" will be able to have their way with a defenseless public runs afoul of the simple reality that average folks' lives are one continuous immersion-education in the wiles & ways of manipulators.  

Consider for a moment the breadth & depth of influences aimed at the public, conducted by the finest career professionals on Madison Avenue, in Hollywood, on Capitol Hill ... and then compare these honed armies to the relatively meager cadre of climate-skeptics.

Painting the public as rube simpletons at the utter mercy of denier-demons is a red herring.  That's not what the problem is for AGW.

(1) I'm pretty sure is wrong. Which fields has the rest of the world surpassed the US? I am in a scientific field myself (computer science), and while I can't speak for other disciplines, I can pretty much say without hesitation that the US still remains the leader in this area. This is not to imply that other countries aren't doing some excellent work. They are. But the US is still the trend-setter and primary discoverer of new ideas.

(2) I can agree with. But so long as the country can keep importing geeks, who really cares? There's still a waiting list as long as my right arm of geeks who want to immigrate here (hell, I myself did that several years ago)

Anyway, my point was really that there's a big disconnect between the general public and scientists, more so than in other countries. And i think that is ultimately bad, since it allows pseudo-science and creationist freaks to set the agenda.