"Why Don't More Americans Believe Climate Change Is Real?"

Because environmentalists' doomsday scenarios (such as the one in the picture) have consistently never come true.

How many times does a prophet's prophecies have to fail before you can dismiss him as a false prophet?

Another reason: because the loudest voices about global warming fly private jets to their speaking events. As it has been said elsewhere, I'll believe that it's a crisis when the people who say that it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis.

"Why Don't More Americans Believe Climate Change Is Real?"

Because environmentalists' doomsday scenarios (such as the one in the picture) have consistently never come true.

How many times does a prophet's prophecies have to fail before you can dismiss him as a false prophet?

First, I think we tend to focus on near term issues rather than longer term ones, regardless of how dire the long term issues are. Right now, it's jobs & the economy first. Health (flu scares) and terror/wars second. Personal appearance an average third (first for many). And, climate change likely fourth. It's the long term issues that the gov't needs to step in and take reasonable actions despite low levels of interest shown in polls. That's what leadership is about and those folks in DC are elected and paid to lead (yes, hard to believe isn't it).

Second, increase credibility (a.k.a, crying wolf too many times another issues a problem). Despite the argument that most scientists are concerned about climate change, during the past twenty years we had a picture of a frozen earth on the cover of a national mag (it was the next ice age coming, I think), then the ozone was getting too thin resulting in "holes in the ozone layer" (e.g., ban CFCs etc.), now its the ozone getting too thick and laden with CO2. Anyone with a memory will scratch their head.

However, this time there appears to be solid data of a problem and with China and India ramping their economies, not likely to get better.

Solution, better address any arguments made by opponents with data rather than name calling and stick to "climate change" rather than "global warming" as you suggest. For example, I saw John Stossel on 20/20 poke holes in Al Gore's documentary (and he's a libertarian not a right winger) and haven't seen a rebuttal. Someone should have been on 20/20 the following week to correct if he was wrong. People don't want name-calling etc. Instead, they need to have greater certainty before they commit to potential expensive and painful changes in their lives during these difficult times. It just the world we live in.

On a positive note, looks like many are buying more efficient cars. Not clear if related to concerns about climate change, but a good sign.

I think the majority believe climate change is real as it is defined. The Global Warmers have veered to climate change as the recent buzzword, but seem to use it as the end result of GW. There is much more evidence that climate changes as a course of evolution and not necessarily with the help of our pollutants, which most certainly exist.

The problem with me and many others as we think this is another way for the ideology in power to force it's will upon us. The "doomsday" is not going to happen. Melting ice good because the water is desparitly needed in many parts of the world. Ice mining can deliver water to the middle east and other parched areas of the world. We could allow farmers to have farms and not destroy forests. We could re-forest areas that have been deforested and fill now dry lakes like the Aral sea to increase food production. Carbon tax foolish northwest passage good, Greenland becoming green again good!!! The lack of creative and realistic solutions building the cart before the horse. Testing these hybrid technologies for real cost rater than a "model". What happens when the data starts to come in and the OOPS factor is revealed. Right now we need new drilling and refineries that capture gas as well as oil. There is plenty of crude what is missing is pipelines and new state of the art refineries. We have at least a century to get it right. Hydrogen closed system looks most promising but what about the taxes? Who and how will we replace the taxes lost? The needs to be a whole problem approach. Right now it is the economy. Many cannot help but wonder if some of this is not manipulation by a group to force their view of how it is supposed to be on the world population.

"Why Don't More Americans Believe Climate Change Is Real?"

Motivation! Because the proposed solution (cap and trade) is just another tax on the poor (through lost jobs), the middle class and wealthy. They just want your money. Spend a couple minutes to understand the mechanics of cap and trade and you'll see what a sham it is.

Throughout the ages politicians have used fear of natural forces to control its populations (the "burning bush," volcano gods, moon gods, sun gods - gotta keep em happy). Is there global warming? Maybe. Man-made or natural? I don't know, but pictures like the one above are a joke and make me question the motivation of the author.

If you are at a poker table in Vegas and don't know who the mark is, it is you...

With over 31,000, and growing, scientists claiming that it's not real more Americans are seeing the truth. All the PR about "global warming" or "climate change" are about how man is at fault and unless we all stop driving cars the world will look like your photo. More Americans and hopefully soon the world will see the truth that has been right in front of their eyes, the climate has been changing since the earth began and man has almost nothing to do with it. I think you will find that the vast majority of the people that disbelieve the global warming hype do believe that we can all be better stewards of the earth. We just don't want a non-solution to a non-problem shoved down our throats.

John Farrier for President! Hey, award this man a Nobel Prize - the one that Al Gore walked off with.

I do believe in Global Warming (and cooling). It's just that too many politicians, greenies and other people directly impacted by the elaborate network of "green jobs" created from out of nowhere will not relent in trying to convince the entire world that Global Warming is man-made.

But guess what? Global warming (and cooling) has been going on since before the industrialization of man. At even greater extremes than what we have experienced since industrialization. That fact alone should speak volumes in telling people, "Hey. We are not causing it. Neither can we correct it."

But, of course, the jobs of too many lobbyists, scientists, researchers, college professors, and 'green' industries at stakes (who have built up their entire existence around preventing the un-preventable) now for the greenies to reveal what even they are now beginning to realize is the truth...It was happening before we got here, and it will still be happening long after we are gone.

John Farrier for President! Hey, award this man a Nobel Prize - the one that Al Gore walked off with.

I do believe in Global Warming (and cooling). It's just that too many politicians, greenies and other people directly impacted by the elaborate network of "green jobs" created from out of nowhere will not relent in trying to convince the entire world that Global Warming is man-made.

But guess what? Global warming (and cooling) has been going on since before the industrialization of man. At even greater extremes than what we have experienced since industrialization. That fact alone should speak volumes in telling people, "Hey. We are not causing it. Neither can we correct it."

But, of course, the jobs of too many lobbyists, scientists, researchers, college professors, and 'green' industries at stakes (who have built up their entire existence around preventing the un-preventable) now for the greenies to reveal what even they are now beginning to realize is the truth...It was happening before we got here, and it will still be happening long after we are gone.

There are 2 possibilities.
Humans are accentuating climate change or they are not.

Then there are 2 options.
i) take steps to reduce human impact
ii) do nothing

If you take option i) and infact there has been no human influence you have done no harm.
If you take option ii) and do nothing and there has been human impact then there will be a cost to bear.

Now the sensible approach to this is to take action as that is action has less negative consequences. The only debate should be how much money to spend or what to sacrifice. How much are you willing to give up on the chance that there isn't really a problem.

Now to my way of thinking removing reliance on oil has a host of benefits that go beyond .
a) reduced global conflict
b) reduced energy costs (medium to long term)
c) better living conditions in towns and cities

There are 2 possibilities.
Humans are accentuating climate change or they are not.

Then there are 2 options.
i) take steps to reduce human impact
ii) do nothing

If you take option i) and infact there has been no human influence you have done no harm.
If you take option ii) and do nothing and there has been human impact then there will be a cost to bear.

Now the sensible approach to this is to take action as that is action has less negative consequences. The only debate should be how much money to spend or what to sacrifice. How much are you willing to give up on the chance that there isn't really a problem.

Now to my way of thinking removing reliance on oil has a host of benefits that go beyond global warming.
a) reduced global conflict
b) reduced energy costs (medium to long term)
c) better living conditions in towns and cities

We should be promoting green solutions at all times because its the sensible thing to do. Governments need to do more to encourage this. there are many simple steps

i) rather than have householders sorting rubbish insist manufacturers use recyclable packaging (why aren't yoghurt pots made of recyclable plastic?)
ii) push electric cars. Subsidies, infrastructure. I would rather owe £3K to the nation because they built a network of electric car recharging points that because they paid bankers bonuses.
ii) make current power stations more efficient and clean the exhaust gas. Trap that carbon and reuse it.