That was at 9:39 pm Eastern on Monday night, when I first saw the poll (full disclosure: I voted "extremely" with almost twenty thousand others). Because I was intrigued by the question and the results (seemingly so contrary to the myth of the unconcerned American), I snuck back less than an hour later, to see if the percentages had changed. By then, rather oddly, the entire question had been altered, as if CNN was already bored by the topic. Someone at the news organization apparently had decided that the real issue was that "it's all a con" option, which 22 percent of respondents had credited as true. So instead of asking us how concerned we are about global warming, the news organization asked:

"Do you believe global warming is a proven fact caused by man?"

Amazingly, in the course of just 44 minutes, almost five thousand fresh votes had materialized, to offer the following "snapshot" of our collective wisdom and anxiety:

Yes:  59% (2,850)
No:    41% (1,988)
Total votes: 4,838
Updated 10:23 p.m. EST, Mon December 7, 2009

This, too, was not a scientific poll, CNN reminds us. I'd have to agree, of course; it's also a poorly written question. Yet if it's even ballpark as a loose approximation of our collective thinking, I'm frankly worried that 41% of even a small demographic doesn't think global warming is caused by man.

If we extract man from the imperative that we act quickly and responsibly to curb quite dramatic signs of climate change around the world (including the lengthy drought that has many people in Georgia and parts of Florida understandably concerned), then the opportunities that we face in Copenhagen will vanish into a puff of air. The action that we can and must take, to address serious warning signs of climate instability, may then be too late. St. Mark's Square in Venice is now regularly under water, to invoke only one major icon of world significance. During the summer, Barcelona, Spain, took the notable step of importing (at great cost) drinkable water from Marseille, France, to supplement its needs, which the drying rivers nearby couldn't meet. Parts of my own country, England, having been battered by storms and gales for much of the "summer," suffered what commentators called "biblical" amounts of flooding. These are not encouraging signs; they are frankly very worrying. We have reason to be concerned.

To accompany its coverage of the talks in Copenhagen, the BBC decided not to poll its viewers over whether we "believe global warming is a proven fact caused by man," perhaps because there's more consensus in the UK about such matter-of-fact evidence. Instead, the BBC published a feature entitled "Global Warming Maps: A Glimpse into the Future," which detailed projected changes in "water stress," "rising waters," and "heat maps" all the way to 2095. You can find the full results here. They are sobering, to say the least, with one image reproduced here:

The same news organization also entitled one news piece: "Copenhagen Summit Welcomes US Emissions Curbs." At long last, it might have added, after the cynical posturing of President Bush over the Kyoto protocol. Fortunately, we now have a President who treats these issues with the seriousness they deserve.

The Guardian, meanwhile, published a smart piece on the "Climate Change Denial Industry." The article reported on the politically motivated disinformation that the denial industry is busy spreading, including its making a song and dance over emails that don't—and simply cannot—mask the underlying trends and evidence unfolding before us. As columnist George Monbiot put it, "The climate denial industry is out to dupe the public. And it's working." Over here, indeed, the Washington Post just gave Sarah Palin a platform for discussing climate issues. Sarah Palin, the vice-presidential candidate who insists that climate change is mostly just a myth but Russia is visible from her backyard. Yes, the Washington Post. No, I haven't the stomach to provide a link.

Instead, in updating this post, I'll point your attention to Myles Allen's superb op ed in the Guardian, "Science Forgotten in Climate Emails Fuss," which justly points out: "No one identifies any scientific flaws in the work of Phil Jones [the University of East Anglia scientist at the center of the email furor], yet the 'fallen idol' narrative is too alluring for the media to resist."

"The discovery of the HIV virus involved one of the murkiest incidents in the history of science," Allen rightly recalls, yet "reporters on the HIV affair always scrupulously stressed that although the integrity of some of the individuals involved was called into question, the evidence that HIV causes Aids was unaffected." Can you imagine what would have happened over the treatment of Aids, Allen invites us to speculate, if we had systematically confused one with the other? We run the serious risk of doing that now.

I know that Gordon Brown is on a political deathbed largely of his own making, but I have to applaud him for insisting, "EU cuts must go deeper to get Copenhagen climate deal." The British Prime minister told the Guardian that he hopes the European Union will agree to a cut in emissions of 30% by 2020. That is both necessary and possible, providing our priorities can change in time.

We have to be frank about the urgency here, while also completely focused on the work of shoring up the economy by putting meaningful resources toward green energy. That is "an affordable truth," economist Paul Krugman insists with evidence in the New York Times. With all the TARP money the banks are now returning to the Federal Government, a wise percentage of it invested in American jobs and our future environment is surely money very-well spent.

www.christopherlane.org