Here’s my responses to your Q…
● 1. Please describe your political beliefs or views in 5 words or less (eg "moderate Democrat", "Libertarian-leaning independent")
? Slightly right of centre
● 2. What is the highest level of education, general and scientific, you have achieved? If you are still in school, what is the highest level you intend to achieve? If you have or intend to get any scientific education, please specify the discipline/branch. (eg "Bachelor's in a non-science subject", "Masters in physics", "In high school, but intend to get a PhD in biology")
? PhD Science (Climatology). MSc’s and BSc’s in science and non science, BArch in science (etymologically speaking it’s a science)
● 3. Which of these is closest to your view of or beliefs about evolution
? B. Evolution is a robust theory, that is supported by all available evidence, and is adequate to explain the diversity of life on Earth today (assuming a progenitor, arrived at by abiogenesis or other means.)
● 4. Which of these is closest to your view of or beliefs about global warming?
? For some people: b. AGW is real, and likely to be moderately to very problematic for humanity and/or the ecosystem.
? For other people: c. AGW is real, but likely to be minor and/or harmless.
? I’d also add that for some people: f. AGW is real and likely to be beneficial.
1. Political agnostic. There are only good policies or bad policies
2. Masters chemistry
3. A - we see evolution every day (eg inheritable glyphosate resistance in weeds is evolution). Even if we were to find and dog fossil in the Cambrian , we still see evolution every day
4 B - it is not going to kill us all.
This is a very US centred question - for most of the world , political affiliation and belief in evolution/climate change are not linked
EDIT : I would define evolution as something like " any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next." - which is an indisputable fact.
With your definition, its not the sole mechanism (not did even Darwin think that way) and by itself its not the primary mechanism. I think your definition is not particularly robust
1. other - the 2 party system is nothing but trouble.
2. Masters in engineering
3. a
4. c. Throughout the Earths history there have been several ice ages as well as several temperate/tropical ages in repeating cycles. There is absolutely no reason to believe that the earth would simply stop the cycles. Our own activity could only speed up or slow down the process slightly. Mother nature is still far beyond our control.
1. Moderate social conservative.
2.. B. Sc. in Chemical Engineering
3. C. Evolution is the only viable scientific theory. I'm not so sure that it answers all questions, such as how is it possible for organisms descended from a common ancestor to have different numbers of chromosomes. Nevertheless, if anyone has a better theory, Young Earth Creationists, who see any scientific theory as contradictory to Goddidit, won't like it either. And the evidence is overwhelming that Earth is billions of years old.
4. B. Not just "skeptics" but also skeptics point out that uncertainties in climate is high. Not being absolutely certain as to how serious our act of dumping massive amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is all the more reason not to mess with it.
No
but i will say; i've liked science since the 4th grade. I'm 50 now, have read many science books, often have good conversations with friends who are also fans of science.
Genetics has proved Evolution and pollution definitely has damaged Earth's atmosphere.
It's ridiculous to attempt to claim there's a huge conspiracy going on in the Scientific Community.
http://ncse.com/
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap090421.html
1. "Live and let live" party.
2. B.A. in English Literature (minor in Avian sciences).
3. C
4. b
I have struggled with religion/evolution issues often, I still do.
I accept AGW, but also acknowledge that humans are very short-sighted and will ultimately push the problem "down the road" as they have with so much other unpleasantness.
High school at 15yrs of age, although later on I did a two year engineering course
Why does politics have to be right or left, I would support a party that makes decisions based on common sense, not party doctrine.
Somewhere between A and B
C minor/harmless/beneficial
1. Thelemic Nihilist
2. BS Biochemistry
3. B.
4. B.
1 ) Libertarian; classical liberal in the UK sense of the word. Starting to get a bit green in my old age!
2 ) Bachelors degree in Civil Engineering.
3 ) Tentatively, A.
4 ) Not so tentatively, B.
I accept that logically, I shouldn't be that sure of 3A, but as far as I can see, there is no other explanation. Evolution is the only game in town.
I always find questions like these interesting; hope you get enough answers to be able to make some sort of simple analysis.
1. Liberal-leaning independent, I guess?
2. In college, intend to get a Masters in Civil Engineering
3. C
4. B
Interesting questions. I hope you get good results!
I'm curious about how people's education levels, and views on politics, evolution, and global warming relate to one another.
1. Please describe your political beliefs or views in 5 words or less (eg "moderate Democrat", "Libertarian-leaning independent")
2. What is the highest level of education, general and scientific, you have achieved? If you are still in school, what is the highest level you intend to achieve? If you have or intend to get any scientific education, please specify the discipline/branch. (eg "Bachelor's in a non-science subject", "Masters in physics", "In high school, but intend to get a PhD in biology")
3. Which of these is closest to your view of or beliefs about evolution
A. There is no possibility that evolution is in any way false.
B. Evolution is a robust theory, that is supported by all available evidence, and is adequate to explain the diversity of life on Earth today (assuming a progenitor, arrived at by abiogenesis or other means.)
C. Evolution may be more or less true, but something else (such as intelligent design) is necessary to fully explain the diversity of life on Earth today.
D. Evolution is largely false, though microevolution is real.
E. Evolution is completely false.
4. Which of these is closest to your view of or beliefs about global warming?
a. Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is real, and likely to kill us all.
b. AGW is real, and likely to be moderately to very problematic for humanity and/or the ecosystem.
c. AGW is real, but likely to be minor and/or harmless.
d. AGW is false or mostly false, but there is natural warming.
e. There has been no 20th/21st century warming, and AGW is completely and utterly false.
Also, any *brief* concluding thoughts?
(I am posting the same poll in 2 sections, please only answer it once)
1. Independent.
2. Received bachelors in environmental engineering, minor in physics.
3. B.
4. B.
I have found that belief in global warming is generally not correlated to intelligence nor knowledge but rather to certain personality traits.
Liberal, Masters engineering and math, 3c, 4c
AGW stands for anthropogenic global warming, then you include option for natural warming. Are you Peter Gleick talking about anti-climate people?
The comparison of global warming and evolution skeptics makes me more likely to accept that there is something funny about evolutionary science. Care to include tobacco as well in your next poll?
1 Fiscal constitutional conservative (because it actually works every time it is tried)
2 BS in Geological Engineering, some post grad
3 B I could say A but it isn't proper to pretend to know something that is a theory even if it is proved in several different ways
4 I suspect C
1. Nil (they all sucks)
2. Commerce Graduate
3. B
4. A
Why would you need all that info about people? You either prejudice person, or trying collect information about people on the internet. Neither is good.
There you go...
1. Independent
2. Graduate level, university
3. B
4. B
One wonders what new insights this poll might yield, above and beyond the results of the countless similar ones you've already put out here. Actually, it would be a good question: what are the overall conclusions of your many polls? Are they archived, or aggregated somewhere?
Double D
global worming is fake .never was happening ,Obama did not wave his hands and stop it like most would think .This was a get rich scam ,and many have been busted ,
