Stephan Lewandowsky – a self-confessed danger to democracy

Australian Climate Madness takes a swipe at Stephan Lewandowsky’s latest taxpayer-funded polemic. This is an extended version of my comment.

Lewandowsky’s sneaky request “to mention only my assistant’s name, Charles Hanich, on the online survey” has particular relevance to what followed. Before Joanne Nova published her “Lewandowsky show skeptics are nutters… post, she contacted a number of skeptic bloggers to search their inbox for Lewandowsky’s survey. There was no mention of his research assistant in the paper, so naturally all the resultant searches drew a blank. On this basis I wrote on 03.09.12:-

The claim in the paper that they contacted five sceptical blogs to improve the spread of views is highly suspect.

It turns out that my suspicions were correct. Stephen Lewandowsky had not contacted any of the skeptic sites, and deliberately kept people in the dark as to this fact.

Lewandowsky posted on 10.09.12 at Shaping Tomorrow’s World

1. When will an apology be forthcoming for the accusations launched against me? And how many individuals should now be issuing a public apology?

To explore the magnitude of this question we must take stock of public statements that have been made about my research. For example, one blogger considered it “highly suspect” whether I had contacted any “skeptic” sites. (emphasis mine)

Linking to my comment, Prof. Lewandowsky, knowing my suspicions to be true, brazenly demands that I apologize for daring to suspect him.

He digs himself a deeper hole by saying later

we now know that the presumed lack of evidence was actually evidence for a measure of carelessness or shoddy record keeping among the individuals contacted.

It gets worse. Prof Lewandowsky co-wrote with John Cook a short pamphlet called The Debunking Handbook.

It’s self-evident that democratic societies should base their decisions on accurate information. On many issues, however, misinformation can become entrenched in parts of the community, particularly when vested interests are involved. Reducing the influence of misinformation is a difficult and complex challenge.

What Lewandowsky engaged in was misinformation. He asked to keep secret his identity, gave obscure (or non-existent) clues to emails and then claimed bloggers “amnesia” when they failed to find emails sent to them by unidentified individual. He did this whilst believing that such misinformation would work to the advantage of himself and his unsupported beliefs, whilst undermining democracy.

He later went onto attack my simple analysis using pivot tables. Yet such analysis revealed much the LOG12 paper omitted. For example

- how few skeptic responses there were (c.15%)

- how few supported many of the conspiracy theories (e.g. Moon landing hoax = 10/1145, AIDS created by US Govt = 9/1145)

- That key to the higher proportion of skeptics supporting conspiracy theories were two rogue responses.

The whole paper is misinformation, aimed at getting an alleged majority to discriminate against those who have alternative points of view. Lack of any counter-balance is the major factor that makes people vulnerable to misinformation. Further research on belief in conspiracy theories would reveal that they are more predominant in communities where there are strong belief systems with enforced dominance.

Kevin Marshall

Anyone who wishes to contact me can do so through the comments. I will not publish any such request made in a non-threatening fashion. I will publish counter-arguments, so that others might compare and contrast for themselves.

Lewandowsky’s Recursive Corruption of Science

Wattsupwiththat have a guest post by Brandon Shollenberger on “Stephan Lewandowsky and John Cook – making things up“. It details how the Recursive Fury paper elements that are fabricated. This is a comment just posted.

The “Recursive fury” paper fails to consider an alternative hypothesis. If psychology expert L came along and said that you should not be listened to about subject A, which you believe strongly about, because:-

(a) Nearly all the “experts” disagree with you.

(b) Some fellow believers allegedly have political beliefs that the person L does not like.

(c) A higher proportion of your fellow believers than L’s group allegedly hold other beliefs that most people view as being “nutty

Then you would be somewhat upset – a normal, human, reaction. If you later found out that the claims about the experts were not true, the questions were biased and the statistical conclusions were contradicted by basic statistical analysis, you would be justifiably furious.

Like with people who attribute every extreme weather event to global warming, Lewandowsky bases his case for ignoring sceptical opinions on a distorted opinion of corrupted evidence. When it gets a very predictable response, he interprets this with a distorted opinion of corrupted evidence. The only recursive bit is in the methods Lewandowsky employs in corrupting science.

Lewandowsky et al. 2012 (LOG12) – Questionnaire examined

The latest paper from Lewandowsky is

Conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation : Stephan Lewandowsky, John Cook1,, Klaus Oberauer and Michael Hubble

The authors explain

This article analyzes the response of the climate blogosphere to the publication of LOG12. We identify and trace the hypotheses that emerged in response to LOG12 and that questioned the validity of the paper’s conclusions. Using established criteria to identify conspiracist ideation, we show that many of the hypotheses exhibited conspiratorial content and counterfactual thinking.

In order to respond, it is first necessary to gain a proper understanding of the original questionnaire and the conclusions the authors reached. This posting starts with examining the forty questions to see if the questions were balanced or designed to support the authors’ hypotheses. The full list can be found at Joanne Nova’s website.

Free-market Politics Questions

1. An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs.
2. I support the free-market system but not at the expense of environmental quality
3. The free-market system may be efficient for resource allocation, but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice
4. The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns
5. Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development
6. The free-market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption

There were two areas that the questionnaire tried to test around the motivated rejection of climate science – free-market ideology and conspiracist ideation. The first six questions dealt with belief in free markets. There are a number of issues.

First, those who believe in free-markets are libertarians. They value individual liberty above all else and see laissez-faire capitalism as the only means to achieve this. The reason for many rejecting climate change policies is a belief that it would lead to a suppression of individual choice. They can also see that those who oppose the “scientific” consensus are stigmatized, and criticism suppressed. They might see historical parallels in the rise of communism, Nazism and in the McCarthyist era. Without such questions, rejection of the consensus could be viewed as much shallower and more dogmatic than is actually the case.

Second is that these questions are framed by somebody who clearly does not understand nor like the market mechanism. Most free-marketers would not view it a structural system, but a spontaneous order. Nor would they see a market mechanism as being antagonistic to development or preserving the environment.

Third is that there are a large group of people who may general reject environmentalism, but be quite centrist in their political views. Conversely, there might be some people who are highly antagonist to capitalism, but also sceptical of global warming. Without questions for a broad range of political views, responses will be more polarized than is actually the case.

In conclusion, these six questions seem aimed at marginalizing sceptics.

Conspiracy Theory Questions

A total of 15 questions

7. The Iraq War in 2003 was launched for reasons other than to remove WMD from Iraq
8. A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order are planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government, which would replace sovereign governments
9. SARS was produced under laboratory conditions as a biological weapon
10. The US government had foreknowledge about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, but allowed the attack to take place to as to be able to enter the Second World War.
11. US Agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970′s
12. The assassination of Martin Luther King Jr was the results of an organized conspiracy by US government agencies such as the CIA and FBI
13. The Apollo Moon landings never happened and were stages in a Hollywood film studio
14. Area 51 in Nevada US is a secretive military base that contains hidden alien spacecraft and or alien bodies
15. The assassination of John F Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, but was rather a detailed, organized conspiracy to kill the President
16. The US government allowed the 9/11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (eh wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (eg attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks
17. In July 1947, the US military recovered the wreckage of an alien craft from Roswell, New Mexico and covered up the fact
18. Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her
19. The Oklahoma City Bombers, Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nicols did not act alone but rather received assistance from Neo Nazi groups
20. The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate “research”.
21. The Coca Cola company intentionally changed to an inferior formular with the intent of driving up demand for their classic product, later reintroducing it for their financial gain.

When I first looked at these questions it struck me that some were related to the climate issue. Therefore I left them out as biasing the results.

I think there are five broad categories of question, which I have colour-coded.

Blue questions are neutral to the climate change issue.

Red questions are those that see the climate consensus as some sort of conspiracy.

Green questions are those that see motivations for rejecting the climate consensus as some sort of conspiracy.

Pink Questions are conspiracies that those who reject the climate consensus might believe in, but unrelated to the climate issue.

Brown Questions are conspiracies that those who accept the climate consensus might believe in, but unrelated to the climate issue.

What is clear is that there are no questions that ask if scepticism was underpinned by of some sort of conspiracy. A common theme is that denial being promoted by secretive funding by fossil fuel interests. For instance searching “Koch” on Desmogblog reveals 2440 hits. With such a question, there would have been symmetry. I have rated question 7 (WMD) as possibly appealing more to the climate consensus types, as they tend to be more to the left of centre and certainly are mostly anti George Bush. This was the only question NOT reported in the LOG12 paper. So two conspiracy-type questions specifically appealing to sceptics, and none (reported) that no conspiracy-type questions specifically appealing to “pro-science” types out of 14 would have been sufficient to bias the results towards “finding” that sceptics are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories.

Climate Change Science Questions

22. I believe that burning fossil fuels increases atmospheric temperature to some measurable degree
23. I believe that the burning of fossil fuels on the scale observed over the last 50 years has increased atmospheric temperature to an appreciable degree
24. I believe that the burning of fossil fuels on the scale observed over the last 50 years will cause serious negative changes to the planet’s climate, unless there is a substantial switch to non-CO2 emitting energy sources
25. I believe that the burning of fossil fuels on the scale observed over the last 50 years has caused serious negative changes to the planet’s climate

There is an complete absence of questions about future projections of accelerating warming; or of future catastrophes well in excess of anything so far observed; of the strength of the science or the uncertainties; our trust in what scientists are telling us; nor of the ability of policy to do anything successfully combat it. These are the questions that many sceptics, including myself, are grappling with. As Warren Meyer concludes, it is the projected catastrophe that sceptics “deny”. Joanna Nova, Lord Monckton, Prof Richard Lindzen, Anthony WattsBishop Hill (Andrew Montford), Prof Bob Carter and Lord Nigel Lawson all recognize to some extent that humans might be causing some global warming and that this may continue.
Many, like Lord Lawson (and myself) conclude that the policies to “combat climate change” are both ineffective and hugely harmful to economic prosperity, yet there is no recognition of this aspect. The whole thrust of the questions appears to be one of polarization, making sure that those who reject the consensus is as large as possible.

Environment questions

26. The problem of CFC;s is no longer a serious threat to the ozone layer
27. The problem of acid rain is no longer a serious threat to the global ecosystem

Two questions on the environment, that quite rightly see where people stand on other environment issues.

Personal Questions

28. In many ways my life is close to my ideal
29. The conditions of my life are excellent
30. I am satisfied with my life
31. So far I have gotten the important things I want in life
32. If I could live my life over I would change almost nothing
39. Out of 100 people in your neighborhood, how many do you think earn more than you do?
40. Out of 100 people in your country overall, how many do you think earn more than you do?

Six psychology questions. They do not appear in the conclusions of the paper. This might be because there was no relationship to respondents’ self-esteem and their views on climate science.

Established Science Questions

33. The HIV virus causes AIDS
34. Smoking causes lung cancer
35. Human CO2 emissions cause climate change
36. Out of 100 medical students how many do you think believe that the HIV Virus causes AIDS
37. Out of 100 medical students how many do you think believe that smoking causes lung cancer?
38. Out of 100 climate scientists how many do you think believe that human CO2 emissions cause climate change?

There are two sections. Three questions on what the respondent thinks about three propositions and three questions of about where the respondent thinks the scientific consensus lies. The questions are somewhat sneaky. That HIV causes AIDS and smoking causes lung cancer is quite clear to the vast majority. But human CO2 emissions causing “climate change” is something more ambiguous to anyone who thinks about the issue. Does a small amount of warming really mean a change in the climate? Is it a change of climate system – from rainforest to savannah for instance? Or is it the same climate type, but with more extreme weather events. As a political concept in the minds of the authors it might be quite clear, but to respondents who have a less polarized view of the world it may not be so clear. The ordering is quite clear though. The questions are viewed by the question-setters are equally valid, so answering the third question differently is indicating to the respondent something of how they are viewed.

Conclusions

The questions appear to have been devised to obtain verification of the hypothesis that rejection of climate science is motivated by belief in free-market ideology and due to a conspiracist ideation. In more colloquial language, the questions were biased to support the view that denial of climate science is due to free-market ideologues who are incapable of evaluating the evidence. The questions on free-market ideology betray the question-setters prejudices. The questions on conspiracy theories are show something of the question-setters own beliefs or a deliberate ploy to bias the results in the desired direction. The questions on climate science show a desire to show consensus amongst pro-science views, along with trying to ignore the possibility that policy questions are a matter of contention as well as the “science”.

Kevin Marshall

Lewandowsky on Radio 4 – missing out basic human psychology

Mike Haseler comments upon the appearance of Prof Stephan Lewandowsky on Radio 4 this week.

Lewandowski is a nasty piece of work who set out to fabricate data using bogus questions by which he attempted to prove sceptics are conspiracy theorists. All he managed to prove is that he is incapable of admitting the poor quality of his work. So, imagine my disgust tonight when I heard the BBC were broadcasting some of his material:

“Why do we continue to believe information even when we are told it’s wrong? Claudia Hammond discovers how the brain stores facts and why we don’t erase erroneous explanations.” (all in the mind)

That section of the program wasn’t very interesting (I fell asleep listening) but having had the misfortune to read the scenario before, the gist of it was that sometimes people will use ideas that they have been explicitly told are wrong showing that most people do not trust academics like Lewandowski.

Obviously that’s not what he intended the result to be.

The scenario given was that subjects were told there was a fire in a barn. They were told oil paints were stored in the barn. They were then told they were not stored in the barn (at which point is anyone going to believe the researcher?). Then they are asked why the fire had thick smoke. Lewandowski is trying to prove “false memories” or some such junk, by showing people still use the information that there was oil paints which they have been told is false. The reality is that what he proves is that very often people don’t believe the information the academics force down their throat and they come up with quite plausible explanations (the smoke was caused by the oil paints the researcher told them wasn’t present) which don’t agree with the “truth” ordained to them by academics like Lewandowski. What this clearly shows is that the general public is more inclined to trust their own ideas of what happened rather than rely on academics like Lewandowski when they are so untrustworthy they can’t make up their mind whether there is or is not paint in the barn.

My comment was

Your point about not believing somebody who has fed you false information is an enormously important part of human psychology. In close relationships, such as with one’s partner or a close friend we trust the other implicitly. If that trust is betrayed – such as a wife finding out after many years of marriage that the husband has a mistress – then it is not easily regained. A lot of distrust in climate science is that when the science gets it wrong, or is found giving false certainties (such as Glaciergate and Climategate), the reaction has not been to confess to error, but to sweep the issue under the carpet, or blame others.

Another aspect is that people tend to trust new information from people that they trust and respect, rather than people that they are prejudiced against. However hard we try to be neutral, people tend to more easily accept the words of the politicians that have their world view, than those of the opposite party. A life-long Tory from Haslemere has similar prejudices to a Labour supporter from Middlesbrough. They would far sooner trust a politician from their party than from the other side.

The problem with Lewandowsky is he fails to understand the problems of regaining trust when it has been breached, but instead tries to create prejudice against those who question his dogmatic views.


Climate Change Questionnaire of Univ of Western Australia

This is the climate change questionnaire questions in the survey I answered in early June 2012 and commented upon here.

UPDATE

It has been brought to my attention that this is NOT the questionnaire used in Lewandowsky et al 2012. There are similarities but this appears to be a development of the 2010 survey, and was probably being trailed at Watching the Deniers site. It was located on the University of Western Australia site – try the link.  THE ACTUAL (& shorter) QUESTIONNAIRE is analyzed here.

I believe that this survey is the basis of the recent paper:-

Lewandowsky, Oberauer & GignacNASA faked the moon landing|Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science (in press, Psychological Science)

Note to Professor Lewandowsky of University of Western Australia

If this is not the original survey, but has been doctored in any way, I will happily publish the actual survey. I will also provide details of the researcher and the url for any investigation. I can be contacted through the moderated comments. I am not aware of any copyright restrictions on reposting the questions. I accessed this from “Watching the Deniers” website, where there was no mention of copyright material. Neither was there any mention of copyright on the introductory front page. The doing a search I only came across a link to a 2010 survey. Neither could I find a link within The University of Western Australia Website, though it is on their servers.

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

I believe that the climate is always changing and what we are currently observing is just natural fluctuation.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that the climate is always changing and what we are currently observing is just natural fluctuation. Strongly Disagree

I believe that the climate is always changing and what we are currently observing is just natural fluctuation. Disagree

I believe that the climate is always changing and what we are currently observing is just natural fluctuation. Neutral

I believe that the climate is always changing and what we are currently observing is just natural fluctuation. Agree

I believe that the climate is always changing and what we are currently observing is just natural fluctuation. Strongly Agree

I believe that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Strongly Disagree

I believe that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Disagree

I believe that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Neutral

I believe that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Agree

I believe that most of the warming over the last 50 years is due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Strongly Agree

I believe that the burning of fossil fuels over the last 50 years has caused serious damage to the planet’s climate.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that the burning of fossil fuels over the last 50 years has caused serious damage to the planet’s climate. Strongly Disagree

I believe that the burning of fossil fuels over the last 50 years has caused serious damage to the planet’s climate. Disagree

I believe that the burning of fossil fuels over the last 50 years has caused serious damage to the planet’s climate. Neutral

I believe that the burning of fossil fuels over the last 50 years has caused serious damage to the planet’s climate. Agree

I believe that the burning of fossil fuels over the last 50 years has caused serious damage to the planet’s climate. Strongly Agree

Human CO2 emissions cause climate change.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Human CO2 emissions cause climate change. Strongly Disagree

Human CO2 emissions cause climate change. Disagree

Human CO2 emissions cause climate change. Neutral

Human CO2 emissions cause climate change. Agree

Human CO2 emissions cause climate change. Strongly Agree

Humans are too insignificant to have an appreciable impact on global temperature.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Humans are too insignificant to have an appreciable impact on global temperature. Strongly Disagree

Humans are too insignificant to have an appreciable impact on global temperature. Disagree

Humans are too insignificant to have an appreciable impact on global temperature. Neutral

Humans are too insignificant to have an appreciable impact on global temperature. Agree

Humans are too insignificant to have an appreciable impact on global temperature. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

I believe that genetic modification is an important and viable contribution to help feed the world’s rapidly growing population.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that genetic modification is an important and viable contribution to help feed the world’s rapidly growing population. Strongly Disagree

I believe that genetic modification is an important and viable contribution to help feed the world’s rapidly growing population. Disagree

I believe that genetic modification is an important and viable contribution to help feed the world’s rapidly growing population. Neutral

I believe that genetic modification is an important and viable contribution to help feed the world’s rapidly growing population. Agree

I believe that genetic modification is an important and viable contribution to help feed the world’s rapidly growing population. Strongly Agree

I believe genetically engineered foods have already damaged the environment.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe genetically engineered foods have already damaged the environment. Strongly Disagree

I believe genetically engineered foods have already damaged the environment. Disagree

I believe genetically engineered foods have already damaged the environment. Neutral

I believe genetically engineered foods have already damaged the environment. Agree

I believe genetically engineered foods have already damaged the environment. Strongly Agree

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The consequences of genetic modification have been tested exhaustively in the lab, and only foods that have been found safe will be made available to the public. Strongly Disagree

The consequences of genetic modification have been tested exhaustively in the lab, and only foods that have been found safe will be made available to the public. Disagree

The consequences of genetic modification have been tested exhaustively in the lab, and only foods that have been found safe will be made available to the public. Neutral

The consequences of genetic modification have been tested exhaustively in the lab, and only foods that have been found safe will be made available to the public. Agree

The consequences of genetic modification have been tested exhaustively in the lab, and only foods that have been found safe will be made available to the public. Strongly Agree

I believe that because there are so many unknowns, that it is dangerous to manipulate the natural genetic material of foods.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that because there are so many unknowns, that it is dangerous to manipulate the natural genetic material of foods. Strongly Disagree

I believe that because there are so many unknowns, that it is dangerous to manipulate the natural genetic material of foods. Disagree

I believe that because there are so many unknowns, that it is dangerous to manipulate the natural genetic material of foods. Neutral

I believe that because there are so many unknowns, that it is dangerous to manipulate the natural genetic material of foods. Agree

I believe that because there are so many unknowns, that it is dangerous to manipulate the natural genetic material of foods. Strongly Agree

Genetic modification of foods is a safe and reliable technology.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Genetic modification of foods is a safe and reliable technology. Strongly Disagree

Genetic modification of foods is a safe and reliable technology. Disagree

Genetic modification of foods is a safe and reliable technology. Neutral

Genetic modification of foods is a safe and reliable technology. Agree

Genetic modification of foods is a safe and reliable technology. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

I believe that vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases. Strongly Disagree

I believe that vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases. Disagree

I believe that vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases. Neutral

I believe that vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases. Agree

I believe that vaccines are a safe and reliable way to help avert the spread of preventable diseases. Strongly Agree

I believe that vaccines have negative side effects that outweigh the benefits of vaccination for children.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe that vaccines have negative side effects that outweigh the benefits of vaccination for children. Strongly Disagree

I believe that vaccines have negative side effects that outweigh the benefits of vaccination for children. Disagree

I believe that vaccines have negative side effects that outweigh the benefits of vaccination for children. Neutral

I believe that vaccines have negative side effects that outweigh the benefits of vaccination for children. Agree

I believe that vaccines have negative side effects that outweigh the benefits of vaccination for children. Strongly Agree

Vaccines are thoroughly tested in the laboratory and wouldn’t be made available to the public unless it was known that they are safe.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Vaccines are thoroughly tested in the laboratory and wouldn’t be made available to the public unless it was known that they are safe. Strongly Disagree

Vaccines are thoroughly tested in the laboratory and wouldn’t be made available to the public unless it was known that they are safe. Disagree

Vaccines are thoroughly tested in the laboratory and wouldn’t be made available to the public unless it was known that they are safe. Neutral

Vaccines are thoroughly tested in the laboratory and wouldn’t be made available to the public unless it was known that they are safe. Agree

Vaccines are thoroughly tested in the laboratory and wouldn’t be made available to the public unless it was known that they are safe. Strongly Agree

The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits Strongly Disagree

The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits Disagree

The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits Neutral

The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits Agree

The risk of vaccinations to maim and kill children outweighs their health benefits Strongly Agree

Vaccinations are one of the most significant contributions to public health.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Vaccinations are one of the most significant contributions to public health. Strongly Disagree

Vaccinations are one of the most significant contributions to public health. Disagree

Vaccinations are one of the most significant contributions to public health. Neutral

Vaccinations are one of the most significant contributions to public health. Agree

Vaccinations are one of the most significant contributions to public health. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

I am politically more liberal than conservative.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I am politically more liberal than conservative. Strongly Disagree

I am politically more liberal than conservative. Disagree

I am politically more liberal than conservative. Neutral

I am politically more liberal than conservative. Agree

I am politically more liberal than conservative. Strongly Agree

In any election, given a choice between a Republican and a Democratic candidate, I will select the Republican over the Democrat.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: In any election, given a choice between a Republican and a Democratic candidate, I will select the Republican over the Democrat. Strongly Disagree

In any election, given a choice between a Republican and a Democratic candidate, I will select the Republican over the Democrat. Disagree

In any election, given a choice between a Republican and a Democratic candidate, I will select the Republican over the Democrat. Neutral

In any election, given a choice between a Republican and a Democratic candidate, I will select the Republican over the Democrat. Agree

In any election, given a choice between a Republican and a Democratic candidate, I will select the Republican over the Democrat. Strongly Agree

Communism has been proven to be a failed political ideology.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Communism has been proven to be a failed political ideology. Strongly Disagree

Communism has been proven to be a failed political ideology. Disagree

Communism has been proven to be a failed political ideology. Neutral

Communism has been proven to be a failed political ideology. Agree

Communism has been proven to be a failed political ideology. Strongly Agree

I cannot see myself ever voting to elect conservative candidates.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I cannot see myself ever voting to elect conservative candidates. Strongly Disagree

I cannot see myself ever voting to elect conservative candidates. Disagree

I cannot see myself ever voting to elect conservative candidates. Neutral

I cannot see myself ever voting to elect conservative candidates. Agree

I cannot see myself ever voting to elect conservative candidates. Strongly Agree

The major national media are too left-wing for my taste.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The major national media are too left-wing for my taste. Strongly Disagree

The major national media are too left-wing for my taste. Disagree

The major national media are too left-wing for my taste. Neutral

The major national media are too left-wing for my taste. Agree

The major national media are too left-wing for my taste. Strongly Agree

Socialism has many advantages over capitalism.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Socialism has many advantages over capitalism. Strongly Disagree

Socialism has many advantages over capitalism. Disagree

Socialism has many advantages over capitalism. Neutral

Socialism has many advantages over capitalism. Agree

Socialism has many advantages over capitalism. Strongly Agree

On balance, I lean politically more to the left than to the right.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: On balance, I lean politically more to the left than to the right. Strongly Disagree

On balance, I lean politically more to the left than to the right. Disagree

On balance, I lean politically more to the left than to the right. Neutral

On balance, I lean politically more to the left than to the right. Agree

On balance, I lean politically more to the left than to the right. Strongly Agree

Select ‘neutral’ from the options below

 

 

 

Srongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

 

 

 

Select ‘neutral’ from the options below   Srongly Disagree

  Disagree

  Neutral

  Agree

  Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs. Strongly Disagree

An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs. Disagree

An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs. Neutral

An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs. Agree

An economic system based on free markets unrestrained by government interference automatically works best to meet human needs. Strongly Agree

The free market system may be efficient for resource allocation but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The free market system may be efficient for resource allocation but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice. Strongly Disagree

The free market system may be efficient for resource allocation but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice. Disagree

The free market system may be efficient for resource allocation but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice. Neutral

The free market system may be efficient for resource allocation but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice. Agree

The free market system may be efficient for resource allocation but it is limited in its capacity to promote social justice. Strongly Agree

The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns. Strongly Disagree

The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns. Disagree

The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns. Neutral

The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns. Agree

The preservation of the free market system is more important than localized environmental concerns. Strongly Agree

Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development. Strongly Disagree

Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development. Disagree

Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development. Neutral

Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development. Agree

Free and unregulated markets pose important threats to sustainable development. Strongly Agree

The free market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The free market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption. Strongly Disagree

The free market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption. Disagree

The free market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption. Neutral

The free market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption. Agree

The free market system is likely to promote unsustainable consumption. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order is planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government which would replace sovereign governments.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order is planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government which would replace sovereign governments. Strongly Disagree

A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order is planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government which would replace sovereign governments. Disagree

A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order is planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government which would replace sovereign governments. Neutral

A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order is planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government which would replace sovereign governments. Agree

A powerful and secretive group known as the New World Order is planning to eventually rule the world through an autonomous world government which would replace sovereign governments. Strongly Agree

The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. was the result of an organized conspiracy by U.S. government agencies such as the CIA and FBI.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. was the result of an organized conspiracy by U.S. government agencies such as the CIA and FBI. Strongly Disagree

The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. was the result of an organized conspiracy by U.S. government agencies such as the CIA and FBI. Disagree

The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. was the result of an organized conspiracy by U.S. government agencies such as the CIA and FBI. Neutral

The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. was the result of an organized conspiracy by U.S. government agencies such as the CIA and FBI. Agree

The assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. was the result of an organized conspiracy by U.S. government agencies such as the CIA and FBI. Strongly Agree

The Apollo moon landings never happened and were staged in a Hollywood film studio.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The Apollo moon landings never happened and were staged in a Hollywood film studio. Strongly Disagree

The Apollo moon landings never happened and were staged in a Hollywood film studio. Disagree

The Apollo moon landings never happened and were staged in a Hollywood film studio. Neutral

The Apollo moon landings never happened and were staged in a Hollywood film studio. Agree

The Apollo moon landings never happened and were staged in a Hollywood film studio. Strongly Agree

The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald but was rather a detailed organized conspiracy to kill the President.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald but was rather a detailed organized conspiracy to kill the President. Strongly Disagree

The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald but was rather a detailed organized conspiracy to kill the President. Disagree

The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald but was rather a detailed organized conspiracy to kill the President. Neutral

The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald but was rather a detailed organized conspiracy to kill the President. Agree

The assassination of John F. Kennedy was not committed by the lone gunman Lee Harvey Oswald but was rather a detailed organized conspiracy to kill the President. Strongly Agree

The U.S. government allowed the 9-11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (e.g., wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (e.g., attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The U.S. government allowed the 9-11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (e.g., wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (e.g., attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks. Strongly Disagree

The U.S. government allowed the 9-11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (e.g., wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (e.g., attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks. Disagree

The U.S. government allowed the 9-11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (e.g., wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (e.g., attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks. Neutral

The U.S. government allowed the 9-11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (e.g., wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (e.g., attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks. Agree

The U.S. government allowed the 9-11 attacks to take place so that it would have an excuse to achieve foreign (e.g., wars in Afghanistan and Iraq) and domestic (e.g., attacks on civil liberties) goals that had been determined prior to the attacks. Strongly Agree

Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her. Strongly Disagree

Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her. Disagree

Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her. Neutral

Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her. Agree

Princess Diana’s death was not an accident but rather an organised assassination by members of the British royal family who disliked her. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate research.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate research. Strongly Disagree

The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate research. Disagree

The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate research. Neutral

The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate research. Agree

The claim that the climate is changing due to emissions from fossil fuels is a hoax perpetrated by corrupt scientists who wish to spend more taxpayer money on climate research. Strongly Agree

U.S. agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970s.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: U.S. agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970s. Strongly Disagree

U.S. agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970s. Disagree

U.S. agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970s. Neutral

U.S. agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970s. Agree

U.S. agencies intentionally created the AIDS epidemic and administered it to Black and gay men in the 1970s. Strongly Agree

The alleged link between second-hand tobacco smoke and ill health is based on bogus science and is an attempt by a corrupt cartel of medical researchers to replace rational science with dogma.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The alleged link between second-hand tobacco smoke and ill health is based on bogus science and is an attempt by a corrupt cartel of medical researchers to replace rational science with dogma. Strongly Disagree

The alleged link between second-hand tobacco smoke and ill health is based on bogus science and is an attempt by a corrupt cartel of medical researchers to replace rational science with dogma. Disagree

The alleged link between second-hand tobacco smoke and ill health is based on bogus science and is an attempt by a corrupt cartel of medical researchers to replace rational science with dogma. Neutral

The alleged link between second-hand tobacco smoke and ill health is based on bogus science and is an attempt by a corrupt cartel of medical researchers to replace rational science with dogma. Agree

The alleged link between second-hand tobacco smoke and ill health is based on bogus science and is an attempt by a corrupt cartel of medical researchers to replace rational science with dogma. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

The HIV virus causes AIDS.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The HIV virus causes AIDS. Strongly Disagree

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Disagree

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Neutral

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Agree

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Strongly Agree

Smoking causes lung cancer.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Smoking causes lung cancer. Strongly Disagree

Smoking causes lung cancer. Disagree

Smoking causes lung cancer. Neutral

Smoking causes lung cancer. Agree

Smoking causes lung cancer. Strongly Agree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Strongly Disagree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Disagree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Neutral

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Agree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

The HIV virus causes AIDS.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The HIV virus causes AIDS. Strongly Disagree

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Disagree

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Neutral

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Agree

The HIV virus causes AIDS. Strongly Agree

Smoking causes lung cancer.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Smoking causes lung cancer. Strongly Disagree

Smoking causes lung cancer. Disagree

Smoking causes lung cancer. Neutral

Smoking causes lung cancer. Agree

Smoking causes lung cancer. Strongly Agree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk.

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Strongly Disagree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Disagree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Neutral

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Agree

Lead in drinking water poses a serious long-term health risk. Strongly Agree


Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

God is important in my life

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: God is important in my life Strongly Disagree

God is important in my life Disagree

God is important in my life Neutral

God is important in my life Agree

God is important in my life Strongly Agree

I believe there is a life after death

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I believe there is a life after death Strongly Disagree

I believe there is a life after death Disagree

I believe there is a life after death Neutral

I believe there is a life after death Agree

I believe there is a life after death Strongly Agree

I get comfort or strength from religion

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I get comfort or strength from religion Strongly Disagree

I get comfort or strength from religion Disagree

I get comfort or strength from religion Neutral

I get comfort or strength from religion Agree

I get comfort or strength from religion Strongly Agree

There is no proof of God: if there is a God, he would have shown himself by now

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: There is no proof of God: if there is a God, he would have shown himself by now Strongly Disagree

There is no proof of God: if there is a God, he would have shown himself by now Disagree

There is no proof of God: if there is a God, he would have shown himself by now Neutral

There is no proof of God: if there is a God, he would have shown himself by now Agree

There is no proof of God: if there is a God, he would have shown himself by now Strongly Agree

I think of myself as a religious person

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I think of myself as a religious person Strongly Disagree

I think of myself as a religious person Disagree

I think of myself as a religious person Neutral

I think of myself as a religious person Agree

I think of myself as a religious person Strongly Agree

I have made a personal commitment to live my life for God

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I have made a personal commitment to live my life for God Strongly Disagree

I have made a personal commitment to live my life for God Disagree

I have made a personal commitment to live my life for God Neutral

I have made a personal commitment to live my life for God Agree

I have made a personal commitment to live my life for God Strongly Agree

I have had an experience of spiritual worship that was very moving and powerful

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I have had an experience of spiritual worship that was very moving and powerful Strongly Disagree

I have had an experience of spiritual worship that was very moving and powerful Disagree

I have had an experience of spiritual worship that was very moving and powerful Neutral

I have had an experience of spiritual worship that was very moving and powerful Agree

I have had an experience of spiritual worship that was very moving and powerful Strongly Agree

I have experienced a definite answer to prayer or specific guidance from God

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I have experienced a definite answer to prayer or specific guidance from God Strongly Disagree

I have experienced a definite answer to prayer or specific guidance from God Disagree

I have experienced a definite answer to prayer or specific guidance from God Neutral

I have experienced a definite answer to prayer or specific guidance from God Agree

I have experienced a definite answer to prayer or specific guidance from God Strongly Agree

Select option ‘C’ from below:

 

 

 

A

B

C

D

E

F

G

H

 

 

 

Select option ‘C’ from below:   A

  B

  C

  D

  E

  F

  G

  H

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years Strongly Disagree

Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years Disagree

Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years Neutral

Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years Agree

Modern humans are the product of evolutionary processes that have occurred over millions of years Strongly Agree

The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing Strongly Disagree

The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing Disagree

The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing Neutral

The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing Agree

The theory of evolution is based on speculation and not valid scientific observation and testing Strongly Agree

Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory Strongly Disagree

Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory Disagree

Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory Neutral

Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory Agree

Most scientists accept evolutionary theory to be a scientifically valid theory Strongly Agree

There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory Strongly Disagree

There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory Disagree

There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory Neutral

There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory Agree

There is a significant body of data that supports evolutionary theory Strongly Agree

Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have Strongly Disagree

Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have Disagree

Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have Neutral

Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have Agree

Humans exist today in essentially the same form in which they always have Strongly Agree

Evolution is a scientifically valid theory

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Evolution is a scientifically valid theory Strongly Disagree

Evolution is a scientifically valid theory Disagree

Evolution is a scientifically valid theory Neutral

Evolution is a scientifically valid theory Agree

Evolution is a scientifically valid theory Strongly Agree

Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology Strongly Disagree

Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology Disagree

Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology Neutral

Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology Agree

Current evolutionary theory is the result of sound scientific research and methodology Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

Corporations are not respectful of laws

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations are not respectful of laws Strongly Disagree

Corporations are not respectful of laws Disagree

Corporations are not respectful of laws Neutral

Corporations are not respectful of laws Agree

Corporations are not respectful of laws Strongly Agree

Corporations do not accept accountability for their actions

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations do not accept accountability for their actions Strongly Disagree

Corporations do not accept accountability for their actions Disagree

Corporations do not accept accountability for their actions Neutral

Corporations do not accept accountability for their actions Agree

Corporations do not accept accountability for their actions Strongly Agree

People who run corporations will lie if doing so will increase company profits

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: People who run corporations will lie if doing so will increase company profits Strongly Disagree

People who run corporations will lie if doing so will increase company profits Disagree

People who run corporations will lie if doing so will increase company profits Neutral

People who run corporations will lie if doing so will increase company profits Agree

People who run corporations will lie if doing so will increase company profits Strongly Agree

Corporations do not care about acting ethically

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations do not care about acting ethically Strongly Disagree

Corporations do not care about acting ethically Disagree

Corporations do not care about acting ethically Neutral

Corporations do not care about acting ethically Agree

Corporations do not care about acting ethically Strongly Agree

Corporations will break laws if they can make more money from it

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations will break laws if they can make more money from it Strongly Disagree

Corporations will break laws if they can make more money from it Disagree

Corporations will break laws if they can make more money from it Neutral

Corporations will break laws if they can make more money from it Agree

Corporations will break laws if they can make more money from it Strongly Agree

Corporations put their own interests above the public’s interests

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations put their own interests above the public’s interests Strongly Disagree

Corporations put their own interests above the public’s interests Disagree

Corporations put their own interests above the public’s interests Neutral

Corporations put their own interests above the public’s interests Agree

Corporations put their own interests above the public’s interests Strongly Agree

Corporations are driven by greed

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations are driven by greed Strongly Disagree

Corporations are driven by greed Disagree

Corporations are driven by greed Neutral

Corporations are driven by greed Agree

Corporations are driven by greed Strongly Agree

Corporations care only about money

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations care only about money Strongly Disagree

Corporations care only about money Disagree

Corporations care only about money Neutral

Corporations care only about money Agree

Corporations care only about money Strongly Agree

Corporations want power at any cost

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations want power at any cost Strongly Disagree

Corporations want power at any cost Disagree

Corporations want power at any cost Neutral

Corporations want power at any cost Agree

Corporations want power at any cost Strongly Agree

Corporations take a lot more than they give

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations take a lot more than they give Strongly Disagree

Corporations take a lot more than they give Disagree

Corporations take a lot more than they give Neutral

Corporations take a lot more than they give Agree

Corporations take a lot more than they give Strongly Agree

Corporations intentionally deceive the public

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations intentionally deceive the public Strongly Disagree

Corporations intentionally deceive the public Disagree

Corporations intentionally deceive the public Neutral

Corporations intentionally deceive the public Agree

Corporations intentionally deceive the public Strongly Agree

Corporations do not consider the needs of their employees when making business decisions

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations do not consider the needs of their employees when making business decisions Strongly Disagree

Corporations do not consider the needs of their employees when making business decisions Disagree

Corporations do not consider the needs of their employees when making business decisions Neutral

Corporations do not consider the needs of their employees when making business decisions Agree

Corporations do not consider the needs of their employees when making business decisions Strongly Agree

Corporations exploit their workers

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Corporations exploit their workers Strongly Disagree

Corporations exploit their workers Disagree

Corporations exploit their workers Neutral

Corporations exploit their workers Agree

Corporations exploit their workers Strongly Agree

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements:

 

 

 

Strongly Disagree

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly Agree

I have so much in life to be thankful for

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I have so much in life to be thankful for Strongly Disagree

I have so much in life to be thankful for Disagree

I have so much in life to be thankful for Neutral

I have so much in life to be thankful for Agree

I have so much in life to be thankful for Strongly Agree

If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list Strongly Disagree

If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list Disagree

If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list Neutral

If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list Agree

If I had to list everything that I felt grateful for, it would be a very long list Strongly Agree

When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for Strongly Disagree

When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for Disagree

When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for Neutral

When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for Agree

When I look at the world, I don’t see much to be grateful for Strongly Agree

I am grateful to a wide variety of people

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: I am grateful to a wide variety of people Strongly Disagree

I am grateful to a wide variety of people Disagree

I am grateful to a wide variety of people Neutral

I am grateful to a wide variety of people Agree

I am grateful to a wide variety of people Strongly Agree

As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people, events, and situations that have been part of my life history

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people, events, and situations that have been part of my life history Strongly Disagree

As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people, events, and situations that have been part of my life history Disagree

As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people, events, and situations that have been part of my life history Neutral

As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people, events, and situations that have been part of my life history Agree

As I get older I find myself more able to appreciate the people, events, and situations that have been part of my life history Strongly Agree

Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone

 

 

Please indicate how much you agree with the following statements: Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone Strongly Disagree

Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone Disagree

Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone Neutral

Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone Agree

Long amounts of time can go by before I feel grateful to something or someone Strongly Agree

What is your age?


What is your gender?

WWF aims for World Domination?

Donna Laframboise has a posting on the sheer scale of the World Wildlife Fund (cross- posted at wattsupwiththat). No longer a small cuddly charity it has global revenues of €524m, 5,000 staff and a presence in 30 countries.

This is Part 1. What will part 2 bring? Might I guess that it could be on future ambitions?

Might I suggest that Donna Laframboise will direct us to pages 26 & 27 of the 2010 Annual Review (Page 14 on Google Docs)? WWF is celebrating its’ 50th Anniversary, so naturally it will look ahead.

The Section is “WHAT WE WILL ACHIEVE“. There is no “might” or “by supporting others”. It is what WWF will achieve on their on.

The first is mild and a laudatory objective, well-within their remit.

By 2022 the number of tigers in the wild has doubled from just 3,200 in 2010.”

That is great and why many support the WWF, along with saving pandas and polar bears. Although, they might need to persuade others, like the Indonesian and Indian Governments, to do most of the work. Next is a bit more ambitious.

By 2030 “the amazon’s land and freshwater ecosystems are properly conserved, so they’re no longer under threat.”

A bit more ambitious, but short of funding thousands of armed environment enforcement officers to police over a million square miles of Brasil, Peru, Columbia, Bolivia and Venezuela, along with the necessary legal powers this may not be achieved without some assistance. Sovereignty issues spring to mind.

By 2020 “Through energy efficiency, sustainable management of natural resources and emissions cuts, China’s economy is growing within the capacity of one planet.

Now, unless this is meaningless guff, China will make actual cuts in their emissions through the actions of WWF (not the UNIPCC). Currently the Chinese government has said it will grow their emissions by less the nation’s growth rate. With 10% growth, it means the current plans are for China’s emissions will more than double from 2010 levels and still meet the targets. An actual cuts would mean closure of new coal-fired power stations, closing the airports, denying hundreds of millions the prospect of car ownership, covering the area in windmills and a drastic reduction of growth to maybe 2-3%. This could only be achieved by a coup d’etat followed by a government as brutal as Mao Zedong or Josef Stalin in their primes. But the biggest one is.

By 2050 “Global Greenhouse gas emissions have been cut by 80% compared to 1990 levels”

This is the biggest ambition by far. Since 1990 greenhouse gas emissions has increased substantially. So the level of cuts in little more than a generation is immense. There is no global agreement in place, nor is there likely to be. Even if there were an agreement, it cannot be achieved without vast human suffering (here & here). To impose a reduction not just in growth, but in living standards as well, would require a highly repressive global regime, the like of which the world has never seen. There are three possible scenarios

1. WWF has advanced plans underway for World Domination

First it will take over the UNIPCC (where it is already highly influential). Then it will organise a coup d’etat in China. It will then use this as a springboard for world domination.

2. The WWF has a vastly overblown sense of its’ own importance

The WWF has been taken over by a bunch of climate extremists who have lost a true perspective on reality.

3. The WWF does not internally check its’ major annual report

Which means that the longer reports WWF produces on climate change, (the famous grey literature on UNIPPC AR4) are probably not checked as well. WWF therefore needs to clean-up its act if it is to be taken seriously as an environmental organisation.

One might notice an ascending order of likelihood in the scenarios :)

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 26 other followers