The last post is a complete report of the full survey results. The following are some of the graphs I started preparing before I realised that it was not a task I could do on my own.
The response to the survey by time
The following graph shows how the total number of survey responses changes with time as a percentage of total reponses to the question do you agree “CO2 will cause catastrophic global warming”. This shows how its announcement of various blogs resulted in “blips”.
Views on climate change
This is a summary of the views of respondents to various statements about the climate. Overwhelmingly, the respondents assert that climate changes, that there has been 20th century warming, that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and that man-made sources have increased CO2. So, it is just dishonest to describe “sceptics” as “denying” any of these.
However, they overwhelmingly disagree with the non-science about rising CO2 causing catastrophic global warming.
Public sector versus private
One of the strongest predictors of whether someone is a sceptic appears to be whether they are public or private sector. Of all respondents only 23% worked in the public sector.
Below, I split the participants based on whether they agree CO2 will cause catastrophic warming and also whether they came from the public sector, large private or small private. This shows a very strong relationship between views on climate and both public v. private and the size of the enterprise. This shows that scepticism is strongly linked to the type of organisation in which a person work(ed).
Area of work
Results of the in depth questions
I was hoping that sceptics would reveal themselves as being “autonomous” as opposed to group-consensus-seeking. I hoped that some of the following questions would distinguish between sceptics and alarmists in some way. However, I don’t think they revealed much and I needed to repeat the survey with a control group and with academics.
However, now the cat is out the bag it will be almost impossible to get an unbiased response from academics. So here is one half of the comparison, without the necessary data from the comparative group.