Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Adriana on May 26, 2012 at 1:57pm

I think Razib is spot-on with this observation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Allen J. Thoma on May 28, 2012 at 6:42pm

I agree with you Razib is spot-on.  My problem is how do I know that I'm not doing the same (although I have a hell of a lot of cognitive dissonance with my upper-middle class peers - all those god fearing republicans (and democrats))?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adriana on May 28, 2012 at 6:50pm

It's a good bet that all of us engage and tolerate a certain amount of cognitive dissonance. The only way to minimize is to constantly question what we believe. Critical thinking is a habit, after a while, it comes natural.

What I meant to say when I said he was spot-on is that once something becomes accepted in the social milieu, social changes can happen very quickly because it easy to believe what most people believe. This is the case with marriage equality, for example. In a few years it will be a non-issue, just like interracial marriage is now. People who changed their minds will rationalize why they changed their minds. In the end there is nothing wrong with the whole process, except when something really awful becomes morally acceptable by the majority, such as the persecution of Jews in Germany or Germany-occupied Europe during WWII.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Allen J. Thoma on May 28, 2012 at 7:22pm

I agree that the only way to minimize cognitive dissonance is to constantly critically question our beliefs, to test that they are rational, ethical and based (as much as possible) on rigorous scientific results (i.e. as empirical as possible).

That said, I also agree that the milieu changes but I wonder if it is changing because people change their mind or are replaced?

David Roberts (a blogger on GRIST http://grist.org/) has put forward the notion that the only way we will replace the global warming deniers (who are mostly male, white and over 60) is that we have to wait for them to die and be replaced by younger people who overwhelmingly are concerned about the environment.  So, the milieu is changing but is it because of people actually changing their mind or being replaced over time?

I wonder if the "Jewish problem" that the Nazi's invented was also maybe just a change over time in the social milieu of Germany of the replacement type.  There had for at least century's been anti-Semiticism in Europe, but it would appear that the most virulent Nazi's were younger rather than older. So, did the old, only anti-Semitic Germans die out in the 1920s and 1930s to be replaced by the younger virulent anti-Semites of the late 1930s?      Or, did the mass of Germany slowly change their mind?  

I agree that the marriage equality debate will be a non-issue in the future.  My kids think it is a non-issue now.  My recently deceased 85 year old father was a virulent homophobe.

So are opinions changing? or just old opinionated people dying out?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adriana on May 31, 2012 at 3:10pm

Good point. I think it's probably a combination of both. But the rapid change in opinion with respect to marriage equality seems to be happening mostly because of a shift in public opinion. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by doone on June 2, 2012 at 2:17pm

Here is a counter example

Poll: 46% Of Americans Are Creationists

DOUG MATACONIS   ·   FRIDAY, JUNE 1, 2012   ·   18 COMMENTS

According to a new Gallup poll, 46% of American adults hold what can basically be called creationist views of the origin of man:

PRINCETON, NJ — Forty-six percent of Americans believe in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years. The prevalence of this creationist view of the origin of humans is essentially unchanged from 30 years ago, when Gallup first asked the question. About a third of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God’s guidance; 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process.

Gallup has asked Americans to choose among these three explanations for the origin and development of human beings 11 times since 1982. Although the percentages choosing each view have varied from survey to survey, the 46% who today choose the creationist explanation is virtually the same as the 45% average over that period — and very similar to the 44% who chose that explanation in 1982. The 32% who choose the “theistic evolution” view that humans evolved under God’s guidance is slightly below the 30-year average of 37%, while the 15% choosing the secular evolution view is slightly higher (12%).

Indeed, as this graph shows, the support for the idea of what Gallup calls “theistic evolution” has declined in recent years:

Not surprisingly, of course, the poll finds that one’s opinion on this issue is heavily influenced by the extent of one’s religious beliefs:

Two-thirds of Americans who attend religious services weekly choose the creationist alternative, compared with 25% of those who say they seldom or never attend church. The views of Americans who attend almost every week or monthly fall in between those of the other two groups. Still, those who seldom or never attend church are more likely to believe that God guided the evolutionary process than to believe that humans evolved with no input from God.

And I don’t think any of OTB’s regular readers will be surprised by how this breaks down on political lines:

And, there’s a high correlation between education and one’s opinion on evolution:

This is why, as I noted the other day, I am skeptical of the argument advanced by Richard Leakey that increased discoveries in the field of anthropology would lead to an end to the evolution debate in the near future. The creationist position has little to do with evidence, and everything to do with faith and culture. It’s not going away any time soon, at least not in this country.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Marianne on June 15, 2012 at 11:55pm

Doone, I can't see the graphs...

I would tend to believe that people always follow the main trends of thoughts and especially of those vehiculated by the one surrounding them since people don't look outside for explanations and like to be spoon-fed; also, so often they are either not informed or underinformed or informed in such a bias way it's unreal...  So I'm not very surprised by these findings... It's always easier to find the easy way than to question yourself or to find out more with others who are more informed or know (with facts to back them up) more about a topic.  I guess creationists band together.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by doone on June 13, 2012 at 2:32pm

Public Understanding Of Climate Science Rebounds, 72% of Independen...

By Joe Romm on Jun 13, 2012 at 12:25 pm

Brookings has released a new survey that confirms other recent polls: Public understanding of climate science is rebounding, and the recent record-smashing extreme weather events are playing a key role.

As you can see, the biggest jump is from independents, demonstrating once again that global warming has become a major wedge issue. Many other recent polls have made that clear (see “Gallup poll: Public understanding of global warming gains” and “Independents, Other Republicans Split With Tea-Party Extremists on ...”). Now if progressive politicians would only seize on this winning issue.

Perhaps even more remarkable than this rebound in understanding is the record rise in the public’s confidence in their accurate understanding of climate science that the National Survey of American Public Opinion on Climate Change [NSAPOCC] found:

Just under two thirds of those who believe global warming is occurring stated that they were very confident of this position. This 63 percent confidence level is 14 percentage points higher than in the fall of 2011 and marks the highest level since the NSAPOCC began in 2008.

Why would confidence be growing, especially when the media and key opinion-makers have all but stopped talking about climate change?

Brookings had previously found that Americans’ Understanding of Climate Change Is Increasing With More .... Certainly the American public is seeing for themselves the off-the-chart heat waves and other extreme weather that climate scientists have long said would become more common as we pour more heat-trapping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (see NOAA Chief: U.S. Record of a Dozen Billion-Dollar Weather Disasters...). That was especially true in March (see “March Came In Like A Lamb, Went Out Like A Globally Warmed Lion On ...“).

The new survey added further evidence that “the growth in the percentage of Americans who see evidence of global warming appears to be related to individual perceptions of weather conditions and events.”:

During the cold and snowy winters of 2010 and 2011 the percentage of respondents who indicated that their experiences with milder winters had a very large effect on their views about global warming was relatively low with 19 percent and 17 percent of respondents selecting this response. Conversely,about twice as many respondents in the latest NSAPOCC reported that the mild winter had a large effect on their view that planetary temperatures are rising.

The effect of the milder winter conditions were also evident in many of the openended comments that respondents provided to the question regarding the primary factor behind their belief that global warming was occurring. For example, a middle-aged male from Connecticut stated that “there was no winter this year,” and a young woman in Maryland noted that “the seasons are abnormal with no snow and cold.” When asked to provide the key factor behind her view that global warming was occurring a middle-aged woman in Wisconsin said that her “garden was already growing in March.”

Even though extreme weather events are increasing in frequency and intensity, the close relationship between weather and beliefs about global warming can potentially make public opinion fickle over the short term — particularly since the continental United States comprises only a tiny fraction of the world and thus its weather is even more erratic than the Earth’s climate as a whole.

But that may be less of a concern if meteorologist Dr. Jeff Masters is correct that “The climate has shifted to a new state capable of delivering rare & unprecedented weather events.”

People are starting to connect the dots. Now if only policymakers can start doing the same.

Related Story:

• Democrats Taking “Green” Positions on Climate Change “Won Much More...
• Poll: Large Majority Of Americans Understand Global Warming Made Se...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by doone on June 14, 2012 at 8:14am

Belief in Climate Change Is On the Way Back Up

—By Kevin Drum

| Wed Jun. 13, 2012 9:47 PM PDT

Climate Progress points us to some good news today. The latest Brookings poll on climate change shows thatbelief in global warming has continued to rebound from its recent l... Acceptance of climate change still isn't as high as its post-Inconvenient Truthpeak, but at least progress is being made. Broken down by party affiliation, both Democrats and Independents are stronger believers than in 2010, while Republicans remain mired at the same low levels as always.

But the rest of the news isn't so good. It would be nice to think that people are being swayed by the increasing torrent of scientific evidence about climate change, but it ain't so. As the table below shows, only 11% of respondents say that scientific research is the main reason for belief in climate change. The most popular reason by far is personal observations of weather and warmer temperatures. And in a followup question, 68% of respondents said recent mild winters have had a large effect on their views.

Conclusion: liberals need to stop nattering on about the latest research. It may gall us to do it, but anecdotal evidence (mild winters, big hurricanes, wildfires, etc.) is probably our best bet. We should milk it for everything it's worth.

• ▶ Reply