|
by Philip Patrick
November 5, 2022
from
ConservativeWoman Website
A HUGE international survey measuring public concern about the
threat of
climate change appears to indicate,
growing skepticism
across the globe...
The Gallup Risk Poll, which questioned 125,000 people in 121
countries, reported that less than half of those surveyed saw
anthropogenic climate change as a very serious threat.
There is now,
it appears, a consensus of skeptics.
The most skeptical countries in the survey were China, where only 20
per cent view climate change as a clear and present danger, the
Middle East and North Africa (27 per cent) and South East Asia (39
per cent).
At the other end of the
spectrum was the US, where 'climate change awareness' has grown,
albeit slightly, since the survey was last undertaken.
To see the results,
click on this link.
From there, go to Report 1
- A changed
world - Perceptions and experiences of risk in the Covid age.
You
will then be able to access the survey results for every country in
the report.
One of the questions on Page 1 relates to perceptions of
the risk of climate change.
The results have
been collated by region, compared with the previous report, and are
summarized in this syndicated article.
The overall survey
result represented a 1.5% drop in belief in climate change
as a very serious threat...
In a year of often hysterical headlines
and saturation coverage of devastating floods, hurricanes and
wildfires - and in the UK at least, spontaneously combusting
houses and hedgerows, all blamed squarely on humans and their wicked
fossil fuel ways - this is surely a significant outcome.
There are signs too
that growing public questioning of the orthodox narrative may be
starting to influence governments.
The survey comes
soon after the Swedish government declared it was scrapping its Environment Ministry and
throwing its weight behind nuclear energy.
Sweden is not
alone:
Japan has
fallen back in love with nuclear too after a ten-year hiatus
induced by the Fukushima earthquake crisis, as
has even Germany to some extent.
In the UK, the
government is expected to grant up to 130 new North Sea oil and
gas licenses and has, via Jacob Rees-Mogg, who has been critical
of climate alarmism in the past, initiated a review of
the whole Net Zero project.
The most
obvious cause of all this is the focusing of minds and reordering of
priorities precipitated by the war in Ukraine and ensuing energy
crisis.
With the looming
possibility of being unable to heat your home or to cook, a more
quizzical attitude quickly evolves.
Even the
faith of the usually implacable green super-elite has been shaken.
Greta Thunberg,
no less, has distanced herself from the most diehard of her fans by
acknowledging, in a 'say it ain't so' interview, that,
under present
circumstances nuclear power may have a place in the future energy
mix of Germany...
But could there be
a bit more to it than simply panicky self-interest?
Climate change
skeptical voices have been growing in confidence and becoming
organized for some time now.
In September 2019,
the European Climate Declaration (now the World Climate Declaration) was presented to challenge the
orthodox apocalyptic narrative...
It now has 1,400 signatures and is
led by Nobel Laureate Ivar Giaever.
And in Italy in January, four
leading scientists produced a major study which concluded that the
'climate crisis' was not supported by evidence.
There may also be a
spillover from the after-effects of the last two and half years of
Covid-induced fearmongering.
Growing suspicion
of the relationship between
Big Government and
Big Pharma - witness
the recently-launched official investigation into the EU's
vaccine procurement - could mirror similar disquiet of the ties
between politicians and the green economy...
And Professor
Neil Ferguson may have done climate skeptics a huge favor by
permanently discrediting the use of computer-based modeling
informing government policy, as exemplified by the UN
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)...
Inconvenient truths
have also played their part in stalling the green juggernaut,
causing great difficulty for its media outriders.
Even the avowedly
climate-orthodox BBC had
to admit, albeit at the very end of a long article, that the Sri
Lankan government's attempt to ban fertilizers had been the cause of
a calamitous economic and food crisis.
Likewise, it has
been hard to put a positive spin on the Dutch government's plan to
expropriate farms in a bid to reduce nitrogen emissions, which has
met fierce resistance.
Signs of growing
public dissent were seen when Sky's
Daily Climate Show was moved from its prime-time slot and
reduced from 30 minutes to just ten.
Sky had to admit
that according to its own research, two-thirds of Brits don't think
climate change affects them and a quarter were unwilling to change a
single habit to 'save the planet'.
Over on the BBC,
the previously untouchable David Attenborough has been
criticized for overdoing the catastrophism and for basic
factual inaccuracies in his recent wildlife documentaries.
One last factor is
simple disgust.
We may also
have reached a tipping point in our tolerance of extreme climate
activists.
The death of
two women caught up in a Just Stop Oil protest in London was
as tragic as it was wearily predictable.
The public
patience at the infantile and dangerous antics of conspicuously
privileged and ideologically possessed activists may have been
exhausted.
If one good thing
ever comes out of the last two and a half years, it is a return of
healthy skepticism in the face of a relentless monotonous
government/media barrage pushing one narrative and brooking no
dissent.
This survey appears
to show evidence of such a renaissance.
Some would say it's
not before time...
|
