|
0 members (),
6
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,128
Posts314,540
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,004 Likes: 133
Pooh-Bah
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,004 Likes: 133 |
The following is a report on a study at Yale identifying characteristics of people relative to their beliefs about climate change issues. It does not appear to be disingenuous.  http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/SixAmericasMay2011.pdfFor the gluttons and addicts: http://ruralclimate.wordpress.com/
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 293
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 293 |
This report extends and updates an ongoing program of research analyzing Americans’
interpretations of and responses to climate change. The research segments the American public
into six audiences that range along a spectrum of concern and issue engagement from the
Alarmed, who are convinced of
[***the reality and danger of climate change***],
and who are highly supportive of personal and political actions to
[***mitigate the threat****],
to the Dismissive, who are equally convinced that climate change is not occurring and that no response should be made. Interesting use of language. "The reality and danger", and "actions to mitigate the threat" - this rather than to say "actions to 'mitigate' the perceived threat". *** and [] added by me
Last edited by Perfect Fit; 07/12/11 04:46 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 7,626
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 7,626 |
OK.
Last edited by 2wins; 07/12/11 05:14 PM.
sure, you can talk to god, but if you don't listen then what's the use? so, onward through the fog!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,430 Likes: 373
Member CHB-OG
|
|
Member CHB-OG
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 47,430 Likes: 373 |
2wins Reader Rant guidelines state that we must be respectful of other posters. Please edit your post accordingly. Respect One Another's Beliefs
Everyone is expected to treat each other with dignity and respect. Address the issues pertaining to the topic of the thread. Feel free to question, discuss & debate those issues. Feel free to speak your mind regarding the issues. Give others' opinions the same consideration you would like yours to receive. Thank you. california rick moderator
Contrarian, extraordinaire
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,004 Likes: 133
Pooh-Bah
|
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,004 Likes: 133 |
This report extends and updates an ongoing program of research analyzing Americans’
interpretations of and responses to climate change. The research segments the American public
into six audiences that range along a spectrum of concern and issue engagement from the
Alarmed, who are convinced of
[***the reality and danger of climate change***],
and who are highly supportive of personal and political actions to
[***mitigate the threat****],
to the Dismissive, who are equally convinced that climate change is not occurring and that no response should be made. Interesting use of language. "The reality and danger", and "actions to mitigate the threat" - this rather than to say "actions to 'mitigate' the perceived threat". *** and [] added by me The Yale study made no assumptions or offered any conclusions. It defined six belief sets and acquired social, political, and other data that relate to the six belief categories. I am not sensing the nuanced meaning of your comments about this data report. My guess is that you belong to one of the particular belief categories and would like the report to be written differently to support your beliefs. I don't think that is the purpose of the report.
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134
Administrator Bionic Scribe
|
|
Administrator Bionic Scribe
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 21,134 |
Very interesting report and study. Certainly matches the discussions here.
Life is a banquet -- and most poor suckers are starving to death -- Auntie Mame
You are born naked and everything else is drag - RuPaul
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 293
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 293 |
...The research segments the American public into six audiences that range along a spectrum of concern and issue engagement from the Alarmed, who are convinced of
[***the reality and danger of climate change***],
and who are highly supportive of personal and political actions to
[***mitigate the threat****],
to the Dismissive, who are equally convinced that climate change is not occurring and that no response should be made. Interesting use of language. "The reality and danger", and "actions to mitigate the threat" - this rather than to say "actions to 'mitigate' the perceived threat". ... My guess is that you belong to one of the particular belief categories Most people could be fitted into one or more categories. So what have you really said here ? Nothing much. and would like the report to be written differently to support your beliefs. Wrong again. I noted that the language being used in the introduction wrongly implied the existence of "the threat", instead of correctly implying perceived existence, or perhaps "the threat of the threat". It's a first observation of possibilities for understanding the approach taken, or possible bias expressed. It doesn't mean that they did something wrong inside the actual study work.
Last edited by Perfect Fit; 07/12/11 06:25 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 7,626
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 7,626 |
so then while the study, in the context of the "possible bias expressed," is agreeable, you hold contention with the alleged bias that exists in the first place?
sure, you can talk to god, but if you don't listen then what's the use? so, onward through the fog!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 293
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 293 |
so then while the study, in the context of the "possible bias expressed," is agreeable, you hold contention with the alleged bias that exists in the first place? no, I haven't looked at the study yet, just that bit of language - and it sticks out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,004 Likes: 133
Pooh-Bah
|
|
OP
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,004 Likes: 133 |
so then while the study, in the context of the "possible bias expressed," is agreeable, you hold contention with the alleged bias that exists in the first place? no, I haven't looked at the study yet, just that bit of language - and it sticks out. Well, so much for your credibility in critiquing scientific reports. The language that you are stuck on, yet have managed to ding the researchers for WITHOUT HAVING READ THE DOCUMENT, is part of the description of one of the bias groups that the study looked at. It is biased because it represents a bias group. Other bias groups are represented by different bias language. Good grief!
You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes the old model obsolete.
R. Buckminster Fuller
|
|
|
|
|
