Just last December, polls had the US’s belief in Global Warming down 8%, and 9% fewer people believed its anthropogenic (man-made) origins. The same trend had been measured by various polls several months prior, as well.

There was plenty of speculation as to the reason for this, some pointing to the unusually extreme snowstorms (which are, if anything, only an indication of Climate Change, by the by), “Climate Gate” or the Republican discontent with a new Democratic president. While, since the release of those poll results scientists have shaken their heads in disappointment and wonder, no concrete reason for the downturn in public understanding  was ever identified.

A  study released June 8th by researchers at Yale and George Mason Universities suggests that public concern for global warming (and the resulting climate change) is finally on an up-sweep:

“Since January, public belief that global warming is happening rose four points, to 61 percent, while belief that it is caused mostly by human activities rose three points, to 50 percent. The number of Americans who worry about global warming rose three points, to 53 percent. And the number of Americans who said that the issue is personally important to them rose five points, to 63 percent.”

One can only imagine how many environmentally minded citizens and scientists heaved relieved sighs across the country, having heard this news, thinking “Phew, thank you, there is still hope for our people, after all.” I know this was my initial thought.

Further confirmation of the public’s understanding comes from a Stanford poll completed June 7th; it indicates that trust in climate scientists is high, up three points to 71% trusting moderately or highly. It’s important to note that their results show a 5 point drop (from 2008 to 2009) in public belief in the fact that global warming is occurring, but the scientists maintain positivity in that the majority of the U.S. understands that global warming is happening.

Jon Krosnik, the scientist in charge of the Stanford-AP poll regarding public opinions of environment and energy. They have been conducting annual pools since 2006 with the same questions, and suggest in a new study that wording is key and can change the results of a study dramatically. Krosnik and his fellow authors were unabashed in naming names of problematic polls from otherwise esteemed institutions, and some feathers have unquestionably been ruffled. While Mr. Krosnik remains certain that our country’s concern for Climate Change has only been underestimated by most pollsters, others maintain that “waning belief in global warming and fading concern about its effects are consistent findings.”

How are we to know whose findings to believe? For now, let us move forth with the conclusion that we ought to err on the side of caution when it comes to poll wording.  Possibly more importantly, remember that polls are simply surveys of samples, and the future is in our own hands.