An interesting article from the British newspaper, The Guardian, explores how obtaining support from the Republican base is incompatible with accepting evidence and scientific consensus on anthropogenic global climate change [1]. In fact, the article claims, climate denial is the litmus test for any “serious” Republican candidate. I found this excerpt enlightening:
If you want to appeal to the hard core of the [Republican] party – those whom you need in order to obtain the party’s nomination – you simply can not acknowledge what almost every national science academy and scientific organisation has accepted for many years. In fact, many other prominent Republicans, sensing the winds of retribution, have already back-tracked on whatever previous statements they might have made, if they contained even a whiff of climate reality. Given the importance of getting the United States on board to obtain a comprehensive international agreement on controlling greenhouse gases, this dismissal of scientific evidence about global warming is both sad and alarming.
The data backs up the claims on which this article bases itself – that Republicans are more likely to be in denial of the science or ignorant of the state of the research. The Pew Research Center compiled statistics about a year ago on attitudes toward climate change. They broke down the results according to political affiliation [2]. The Pew Research Center explains their methodology clearly [3] and the survey contained results from 2,251 adults. They note that results from those claiming to affiliate with the Republican party have a margin of error of +/- 5.0%, while those from self-described Democrats or Independents have a margin of error of +/- 4.5% (these are due to the number of such people sampled in the total population). These errors represent 95% confidence intervals, not the more common 68% confidence intervals.
The questions given to respondents regarding global climate change was written as follows:
Q.60/Q.61: From what you’ve read and heard, is there solid evidence that the average temperature on earth has been getting warmer over the past few decades, or not?/ Do you believe that the earth is getting warmer mostly because of human activity such as burning fossil fuels, or mostly because of natural patterms in the earth’s environment?
The study found that only 33% of conservative Republicans, those usually considered to be the “base” of the party, stated that there was a warming trend; 60% said there was NOT. So that’s already a bad start on basic knowledge. Breaking down those 33% who said the earth was warming, 18% said it was natural while 13% said it was due to human activity. So of those 33%, more than half state that it’s a natural occurrence.
The numbers go quite the other way for even moderate Republicans, and far the other way for those who identify with either being a moderate or liberal Democrat.
A candidate from the Republican party is already fighting against 60% of the base when they demonstrate a basic grasp of understanding of climate science. Even still, of the 33% of the base who don’t find recognition of warming to be a problem, more than half of those are unlikely to support a person who states the warming is human-induced.
If the Republican base indeed makes final decisions based on the candidate’s stance on a scientific matter, then the litmus test of a Republican candidate in the primary fight will indeed be ignorance on basic scientific information. As a scientist, I am critical concerned already with the state of science education in the United States; how can we make progress as a nation when candidates are required by their party base to demonstrate willful ignorance of basic scientific data?
[1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/aug/03/global-warming-republicans
[2] http://people-press.org/2010/10/27/little-change-in-opinions-about-global-warming/
[3] http://people-press.org/2010/10/27/little-change-in-opinions-about-global-warming/2/
