Bogus survey from Ipsos MORI / Deloitte
There’s a new survey out today, The State of the State, by Ipsos MORI in conjunction with Deloitte and a think tank called Reform.
Ben Page, head of Ipsos MORI, claims that the survey shows “Massive support for #ClimateEmergency action”:
The blurb in the Deloitte report makes similar claims:
“Our survey also found remarkably strong public demand for action on climate change. We asked whether the government should press ahead with a range of measures to protect the environment and each measure was supported by at least 80 per cent of the public – as shown in the green elements of the chart. Some 65 per cent said that the government should be doing more to ban environmentally harmful products and 58 per cent want to see higher taxes on them.”
But does the survey show massive support for action on climate change, as claimed by Ben Page and Deloitte? Take a look at the questions in his tweet or in the full report. It seems that only these five questions were asked (after an initial question about whether people expect the environment to get better or worse in the years ahead). Notice also the softening-up language used in the introduction that precedes the questions:
“I’d now like you to think about the different ways government can be involved in encouraging people to protect the environment.”
The first two questions are about taxing or banning things that are environmentally-unfriendly. But notice the example that is used to prompt the poor survey-taker to tick the ‘correct’ answer: leaded petrol. Leaded petrol was banned 20 years ago, because it’s poisonous. At the risk of stating the obvious, most people will support this, and furthermore, this has absolutely nothing to do with “action on climate change”.
The next questions are whether people would like to be provided with information about how to live in an environmentally-friendly way, and encouraged to take public transport or insulate their homes. Again, most people will be happy to be provided with information, and ‘encouraged’ – presumably by subsidies – to take a train or get double-glazing.
Is this the kind of emergency action that Extinction Rebellion are demanding, as implied by Ben Page’s tweets? Are they climbing on top of trains, blocking roads and gluing themselves to buildings while shouting “WE DEMAND TO BE PROVIDED WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HOW TO INSULATE OUR HOMES!!”?
I wonder why Ipsos MORI didn’t ask the public what they thought of XR’s demand to reduce emissions to net zero by 2025?
More honest polling on how the public feels about climate action has been carried out by YouGov. They found that 37% support the recent action in London, while 53% oppose it. Only 13% sympathise with the protesters who disrupted Canning St. tube station.
Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge relied on similar surveys I bet.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Can’t speak for Pol Pot but the wind power scam in Scotland was relying heavily on, er, questionable questions as long ago as 2005 as analysed here:
Click to access Who_Surveys_the_Surveyors.PDF
Loaded? Some questions had a higher Load Factor than any damn turbine . . .
The 37% support for Extinction Rebellion found by YouGov seems surprisingly high, and it hasn’t dipped since October 7th before the demonstrations, when informants were asked what they thought about XR’s plans to “disrupt roads and pubic transport, aiming to ‘shut down London’.” I suppose even blocking Oxford Street inconveniences relatively few people, but still.. I wouldn’t have expected dressing up in red dervish robes and gluing yourself to buses to be so popular.
Policing the demo has cost £37 million so far, apparently – that’s about £30,000 per arrest.
Who will survey the surveyors?
Qui custodiet ipsos mori?
“I am master of all I survey.”
Ipsos MORI et big AL.
Oh how Juvenal Brad
LikeLiked by 2 people
Times have changed. yikes!
‘Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock, tra la,
Plymouth Rock would land on you!
So Po-Mo –
Well, Mr Page’s # is wrong unless there are more than one c in extinction.
Perhaps he should have asked his correspondents whether they approve of making all new cars battery-powered (I note that all-electric cars are now a mere waypoint on our journey back to the 18th century), whether they approve of having their granny’s gas central heating removed “with a leaflet provided about how she can get a rogue trader to nail a few sheets of celotex up around the sitting room”, & maybe a discount on a 30 grand 7kW electric heat exchanger on offer, & set limits on how much energy companies can use, so that the last winey dregs of manufacturing left in Blighty get tipped away.
Or perhaps he should have asked if they would like to ban polychlorinated biphenyls, chlorofluorocarbons in fridges, cinnabar in make-up & open sewers, & see what scores he got for that.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jit, they followed the old adage – “never ask a question to which you don’t know the answer”, modifying it subtly to – “never ask a question to which you don’t want to know the answer”.
In another tweet, Ben Page from Ipsos MORI claims to be able to see into the future and know what people will think in 2020
LikeLiked by 1 person
Does Ben from Mori stand up to challengers on Twitter
..or does he run away by BLOCKING them ?
Well he blocked Paul
And if you compare Ben to metrolibera XR protester standing on top of tube train, lording it over the plebs.. you also get blocked
You know what pollution I am most concerned about ?
That of the dirty dirty PR tricksters from the GreenBlob
All green news items, these days are Public Relations items
Here’s an opinion poll no-one can accuse of being boring:
After climategate revealed the sham of manipulated data and suppression of skeptics, the believers spent what I and many others ridiculed as a waste of time on “communicating” AGW/climate change. We missed the point, assuming incorrectly that “communication” meant a “rational honest exchange of ideas’. As everything from the 97% scam to Mann suing skeptics, to phony polling, to deceptive data adjustments to Greta and XR demonstrates, “climate communications” is actually a synonym for “deception” in the world of climate hype.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hunterson, here’s the latest exercise in “communication”: The Daily Mirror is launching a climate campaign with a panel of “experts” that includes people from GreenPeace, Friends of the Earth, Extinction Rebellion and a BBC TV presenter. Plus Tamsin Edwards, who appears to be being used (again) as a useful idiot to give these people scientific legitimacy.
almost 24/7 MSM news (vids & docs) of weather from Hurricanes/Typhoo’s/Flooding/Fires from around the world must be relevant/influencing these “polls”
people affected by these natural disasters sadly know how to answer loaded questions & what to blame it on (when asked by the media)
random quotes from your link – By Jason Beattie Head of politics & Naimah Archibald-Powell,
22:16, 24 OCT 2019
“Climate change is the defining issue of our age. The world is heating up and – unless this trend is reversed – it is going to have devastating consequences.
Species are threatened with extinction and huge areas of the world could be come uninhabitable.
Tackling it is going to require major changes to the way we live”
could rant, but the wife has told me to “give it a rest”
What’s interesting in follow-up as to XR is a natural outcome of the corruption revealed by climategate is this:
We are visited occasionally by someone who co-authored a book on climategate, yet decided the plain language of corruption was ok, that they were just playing tough but fair. And it is the pesky skeptics who must be trashed, ridiculed, demeaned, ignored. Like a self inflicted Stockholm syndrome. But the pint is this:
The corrupt nihilistic madness of XR would never have taken root if climategate had been pursued and the hypesters held to account. Instead their transparent bs was swept away, their corruption praised. So if one believes (or poses as a believer) what big social movement is as unbothered by data or integrity is out there that is powerful, global and will not ever challenge someone to learn critical thinking? Why the climate consensus has loads of room for just that.
Climate is the cynical nihilist’s game of choice. All Lent, no Easter. Other’s pain for one’s gain.