Australia: New Poll: More Skeptics than Ever and yet the Carbon Tax is Coming

australian-flag-180By Jo Nova

The good news is that skeptics are the majority, the bad news is that we’ll all have to pay the tax anyway. The IPA commissioned a Galaxy Poll in Australia and only one third of Australians believe that man-made global warming is real. Despite the advertising, the propaganda, the Nobel Prizes, the support of major institutions, the ABC censorship of skeptical science news, and the educational indoctrination at schools, most people are unconvinced.

Despite the falling polls, today the Gillard Government committed itself to getting a “carbon price” – the nice way of saying “tax”. (Note the poll attached to that story: Do you support a carbon tax? 84% say NO.)

(see full article for poll results)

It’s a question of youth

From the full results it’s clear that belief is mostly a “young” naive thing, and that by the age of 30 people are waking up to the truth.  Half of the 18-24 year olds think that man is to blame, but only a quarter of the over 50′s do.  The old cats who’ve been there and done that are wiser to exaggerated scare campaigns. Half of the 25 -34 year old group answered that they are not sure.

Read the rest at JoNova.

  • Jerk A. Knot

    The results also correlate to the results from Pot smoking poll. Older people still smoke less pot. Of course we need to factor natural slection in. IE dumb people die sooner than smart people.

  • V

    Alcohol is more dangerous than pot in every way, why is it legal while marijuana is not? I don’t want to advocate for either as both have negative side effects and should be avoided. The question for you though, since you brought it up, is why is alcohol left to personal choice while marijuana is not?

    You hear about fatal alcohol related crashes everyday, heavy alcoholics die between 40 and 50 years of age. The dangers of alcohol outweigh those of pot ten fold, it is an absolute rarity hearing about someone dying from smoking a joint.

    I guess the lawmakers fall into that “dumb people” category, outlaw one mind altering substance while keeping a far more dangerous one perfectly legal. Brilliant.

    Maybe the focus should be placed on substance use education rather than creating laws which prohibit regular folk from selling these substances. Crime would drastically go down, the sale of narcotics would no longer be handled by violent criminals fighting for turf, the sale would be handled by liquor stores, corner stores, better yet licensed specialty shops that could regulate distribution by keeping the products out of the hands of minors (which drug dealers do not).

    Ps. Using alcohol to show correlation between stupidity and untimely death would have been a way better example than pot. 😉

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

      That is a very Libertarian additude V. I can’t say I disagree with you. But I don’t think Knot’s example is a bad one.

  • Hal Groar

    We are all aware that prohibition does not work. Not with alcohol or pot. I think removing laws on pot is a good idea. I would like to see how that goes. Other substances like Coke or Meth are a tough call and I would like to see how the pot experiment goes before making a statement on those types of drugs. (I would lean toward loosening up the laws if I had to make a choice now) The tie to this article is beginning to fade so I will leave it at that.

    I find it encouraging that Australia has their eye’s open. Too bad they are going to get slammed with the tax anyway. Hope they find a way out of it.

  • V

    The reason young people believe in climate change is propaganda. Starting in the 1990’s schools began teaching the ramifications of Industrialization. It is as simple as that. A higher percentage of young people believe in climate change because they’ve been taught it since an early age.

    The simple fact though: the runaway warming scenario is utter rubbish, an increase in heat causes an increase in the cooling mechanism ie weather. The more heat the more storms we’ll have. Storms regulate temperature.

    And Hal, Australia as a constitutional monarchy (kingdom) will in all likely hood retain the tax regardless of the vote. As a part of the commonwealth they are only partially a democratic system, it is a democracy as long as the royals agree with the people, when they don’t the power sways. I think the next step after liberating dictator run states should be the freeing of tyrant run states. Tyranny still lurks in the shadows. A wolf in sheeps clothing is still a wolf.

  • Hal Groar

    V do you think in times like these (ie Egypt, Libya, Greece, soon Saudi Arabia) the power would dare sway too far if the people decided to mobilize in Australia? I think it could work, but I am basing that on the current temperature of the world, not on Australian politics.

    • V

      Not too far. With a little bit of gauging you get to see tolerances, just how much a person is willing to give, and the person doesn’t need to be happy about it neither. Surveys and communication act as psychological gauges of human tolerance. The test in Australia proves that although the majority of the population opposes the tax the institution of the tax, although undesirable, is tolerable by the people. This is a form of psychological populace domination.

      So no, I don’t think they would go too far, they go just far enough to remain within tolerances.

      In certain circumstances, because we’re human, we don’t act our best, this is why some governments find such strong opposition (such as Egypt, Libya, Greece, Saudi Arabia), these leaders have failed in their gauging, They pushed past the boundary of tolerance with their people. Bad leadership. It is not form of government that is fault, people work in democratic, socialist, communist, monarchist systems of governance. It is not the systems that are at fault it is bad leadership, the individual in power, the leader, that is at fault.

      Now comparison wise: system within tolerances wins over the system past tolerances any day. The question I have is why agitate at all?

  • paul wenum

    “Aussie’s” are not ignorant and they will certainly wake up soon. It is nothing compared to the Middle East.

  • Hal Groar

    So you think that a system within tolerance’s can outlast a growing undercurrent of anti-government sentiment? What in your opinion would flush out a spark to ignite a rebellion in Australia? Could a tax on carbon be that spark? I realize any onerous tax is capable to set off a firestorm but could a carbon tax? I guess it would depend on the size.

    Paul you are right, the Middle East isn’t so backwards when it comes to AGW, they ignore it, laugh at it even. I respect that! It is the rest of the “busy body” world that insist something must be done.

    I have always wanted to visit Australia, anyone on here ever been there?

  • paul wenum

    Fishing the Great Barrier Reef is on my bucket list. My wife said it is fantastic.

  • Sylvia

    I like this place.
    Writing an essay for english about AGW and its effects on human society… glad I stumbled across this site.
    Its sad that my generation (In HS right now) is so guilible… at least I convinced my friends that it wasn’t true 🙂

  • paul wenum

    Sylvia, climate change is a natural ocurrance. Suggest that you thoroughly investigate both sides, not one, before you make your decision know. The case is not, nor ever will be closed on this issue. Especially with people that have serious money invested in it being allegedly true. Good luck in your investigation and please let us on this site know your findings going forward. We are always interested in both sides.

  • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

    Check out this op-ed from Bob Carter. It’s a good read.

    http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2011/02/gillard-ignores-the-science
    “Choreographed over the years by green lobby groups, politicians and commentators alike now participate like puppets-on-strings in an entirely faux public gigue involving words or phrases like “carbon” (when they mean carbon dioxide), “pollution” (when they are referring to an environmentally beneficial trace gas), “settled science” (when the science is hotly contested, and the onus of proof of danger still rests, unattained, with the climate alarmists of a discredited IPCC), “climate change” (when they mean dangerous global warming), “energy efficiency” (in the same breath that they rule out the environmentally friendly baseload energy source represented by nuclear power) and “international good citizen” (at a time when international action on climate policy has never been less certain).”

  • Hal Groar

    Someone has introduced the dreaded smiley face on to our unwashed screens…ouch!

    Sylvia remember one thing and one thing only! Rob N Hood [personal comment deleted] will try to make you stray from the real issue! Don’t let him!

    • Jerk A. Knot

      Cocur,

      Rob never posts anything original or supported by referenced facts… Most of us will produce our references when asked Rob will just call you a name and post something from a totally unrelated site that someone else wrote.

  • paul wenum

    Thanks Neil, Sylvia will probably need that going forward. Hal, as to the smiley face? Looks better than RBH doesn’t it?

    • Hal Groar

      Yes Paul, it is better then the Hood.

  • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

    If she wants to use a smiley face, or other emoticons, I don’t have a problem with it. She said she’s in high school, she’s just a pup! Let her have some fun with it I say. And don’t assume that, because she is young, she can’t figure Rob out on her own. She figured out global warming is a hoax!!! I have a Neice that is 13 that is way smarter than I ever was so, youth is really only a small consideration. I would be more concerned about experience.
    Speaking of Mr. Hood, I have not seen a post from him in a while. I think he is trying to make good on his promise to stop posting here. But I know he’ll be back. he can’t help himself. I’m sure he’s following along with our posts, and he will get to a point where he can no longer stand watching us blind little mice flailing about in the dark, and will have to show us the light of his wisdom once again. Have no fear of it.

  • Hal Groar

    I was shocked to see my comment edited! It was made in jest…I have noticed a lack of irrational nonsensical posts here, now that you mention it. I will just leave it at that. I loved your mice comparison though. I guess if you guys don’t have issues with the emoticons I will also let them slide, but if I ever have to write a post as to why Beiber is better then Jonas, then it is over!

    Sylvia join us and bring your quirks and foibles! We discuss and learn and also joke around. Throw in your two cents! Eager to hear it!

    • Dan McGrath

      Rulz is rulz. I try to be consistent. BTW, I suspect Mr. Hood bailed because we found out he might be a managed “internet persona.” 😉 Winkey face! Number one rule of thumb: Blank is a blank (or variations) is not allowed.

      • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

        A MIP you think? It is totally possible, I suppose. I suspected. I mean, I always thought there was something about him that just wasn’t kosher, but I could never quite put my finger on it. Maybe that was it!

        • Rob N. Hood

          You got me, yep, I’m a humanitarian/Liberal/lover of logic and reason…. guilty as charged! Paranoia will destroya….

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

      I have no idea who Beiber, or Jonas is. Really. I go through the checkout at the grocery store and 9 times out of 10 I will look at the cover of those tabloid magazines and I will say to myself: “who???” I stopped paying attention to who the famous people were many years ago. I bet you I’m like the only person in America who a “famous person” could walk up to and not be recognized. All the people I liked are dying off. One of my favorite guitar players in the world, Gary Moore, just died last month.

      • Dan McGrath

        Alas, I know who Beiber is. Despite that unfortunate fact, I am also woefully ignorant about pop culture these days. I’ve just gotten bored with it and realized much more important things are happening that nobody’s paying attention to.

        Last weekend some friends were over and Anne Hathaway came up. I said, “who?” And jaws dropped.

        I said, “show me a picture.” My friend brought it up on his smart phone. “Oh!” I said, “I’ve seen her.”

        I’m with you.

        • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

          Yeah, Ann Hathaway is a name I’ve heard but I couldn’t tell you what she does, be it singing, acting, or even voice overs, I have no idea.

    • By the by, if the conversation turns to Beiber v. Jonas, I might have to shutter the site,

      • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

        There is no danger of that from me!!!

  • paul wenum

    Talking about whats his name, Beiber? I assume, based upon what I read about Australia the politicians know more about this Beiber fellow than reality. Man, “times are a changin.”

    • NEIL F. AGWD/BSD

      Well you know I think that’s part of the problem. People are so wrapped up in entertainment that they have no clue what reality is. “Save the whales”, “free Tibett”, “stop global warming”…… they’re all the same kind of catch phrases uttered by the entertainment, and media elite. If someone you idolize says stop global warming, then you are going to believe that AGW is happening because your hero says so.

  • Hal Groar

    I have to admit that I know who these “famous” people are due to the fact that I have a 10 year old daughter and a 7 year old son. I keep an eye on what they are watching on the tube and am always on guard for subtle propaganda. I would rather rip out my finger nails then sit through a Hanna Montana song, but I can tell you who she is and why she should be banned from TV. I have been somewhat surprised that there isn’t more preachy “themes” on the show’s my children choose. I think they are giving up on the AGW line and are moving to corporate pollution.

  • B

    V said:

    “And Hal, Australia as a constitutional monarchy (kingdom) will in all likely hood retain the tax regardless of the vote. As a part of the commonwealth they are only partially a democratic system, it is a democracy as long as the royals agree with the people, when they don’t the power sways. I think the next step after liberating dictator run states should be the freeing of tyrant run states. Tyranny still lurks in the shadows. A wolf in sheeps clothing is still a wolf”

    You are pretty ignorant V. Australia is a full and total democracy and the English Queen (not king as you stated) and monachy have absolutely no control over government decisions in Australia. Our symbolic head of state is the Governor General who is the queens symbolic representative only, All power lies with the Prime Minister, not the governor general. To say that Australia is a democracy as long as the Royals agree is one of the most rediculous things I have ever heard. Think you may still be stuck in the 17th century, mate.

    Regardless, I am an Aussie and I am totally opposed to the Climate Tax.

    • V

      Are you aware that when you make a purchase a portion of the taxes you pay go directly into the pockets of the royals? Have you seen the queens humble abode? The queen is just a ceremonial figurehead? Lol, yeah right.

      I’m well aware of the publicized system in Australia – constitutional monarchy/federal parliamentary democracy – but what I’m also aware of is the expensive lifestyles that your tax dollars afford. Are you?

      You call it what you like, I’ll call it as I see it.

    • V

      What you are told, and what is, are not always one and the same. There is NO such thing as a true democracy ANYWHERE in the world. To better understand this read “The Republic” by Plato, he does a great job explaining the inequalities of man.

      • Dan McGrath

        With good reason. a “true” or “pure” democracy would be a complete and utter disaster that wouldn’t last more than 2-3 years at best.

        • V

          I agree.

          • Rob N. Hood

            What a load… the elites have spoken…

      • V

        Most democratic countries have appointed “representatives”, they are the people we appoint to make decisions for us, democracy is nothing but a rouse, a smokescreen. There are a handful of countries that identify themselves as direct democracies but even they are subject to turn out, just because people have a vote does not mean they’ll use it. Every country in the world has leaders who make the decisions.

        True democracy is non existent. Hierarchy is always established. All votes are not equal, but they are portrayed to be.

        Now you can look for definitions on democracy and find something which opposes what I say, it’s a smokescreen, to understand this a little better read “The Republic”, all modern societies are modeled on the philosophies there entailed. You can live oblivious to the truth dependent on words of others, or you can think for your self.

  • paul wenum

    And what do you suggest as the ultimate alternative to democracy? Argentina, China, Russia, Greece, et al? Tell us. I’m interested.

  • paul wenum

    Question to V. Did you vote? If not, you have at least answered my question and your post is not taken seriously by me and I speak only for myself period with no others behind me. In my opinion, he/she does not vote their convictions I do not take seriously. All blather and dither.

  • It’s easy to be depressed about the future – not because of the climate scare mongering, but because of the stupidity of youth! But we can rest assured that the anti-swindle movement in Australia is getting stronger by the day. Traffic to my anti-climate-swindle site has gone through the roof in the past few days and with enough people getting angry the government just has to listen. http://www.no-carbon-tax.org.

  • paul wenum

    Marven,

    We are on the same page. Follow the money. That is the answer. It is not about climate change it is about your children’s attitude change. Very simple. Why is Gore as well as Obama targeting the grade schools/high schools? Think that answers the question. Get their brains locked in when they are subject to propaganda not knowing by researching what is before them. Similiar to 1938?

  • Chris

    I suppose I’m one of the older Australians. I believe Bin Laden is dead, and alas, Elvis as well. I also do not see anything hysterical about the global warming issue. I see science and theories which are based on science, and I see questioning of these theories based on healthy skepticism.

    If there is scientific fact backing theories, I tend to knuckle under. I won’t skydive without a parachute since the theory of gravity seems pretty much supported by various apples and climbing accidents.

    The two sides of the argument on global warming both claim to have supportive scientific research and facts backing their POVs. I’m all for weighing things up and reaching conclusions, but when the consequences are those facing a gravity skeptic exiting an airplane, I have a survival instinct telling me to rather pay for a parachute on the off chance that apples do fall because of gravity.

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.