Lots of people are commenting that Americans are waking up en masse. One view I get of it comes from what many American applicants to join the list tell listadmin.
In the last year the numbers of applicants rose steadily overall, a considerably steeper rise than a year previously. The global distribution remains the same - very global! There were always a number of these people among the US contingent: >>>>>Results of previous PIPA/Knowledge Networks poll [May 04]: >>>>> >>>>>- A 57% majority believed Iraq was either "directly involved" in >>>>>carrying out the 9/11 attacks or had provided "substantial support" >>>>>to al-Qaeda >>>>>- 82% either said that "experts mostly agree Iraq was providing >>>>>substantial support to al Qaeda" or "experts are evenly divided on >>>>>the question" >>>>>- 45% believe that evidence that Iraq was supporting al Qaeda >>>>>has been found >>>>>- 60% believe that just before the war Iraq either had weapons of >>>>>mass destruction or a major program for developing them >>>>>- 65% said most experts say Iraq did have them or that experts are >>>>>divided on the question >>>>>- estimates of the number of US troop fatalities in Iraq varied widely >>>>>- 59% were unaware that the majority of world public opinion is >>>>>opposed to the US war with Iraq >>>>>- asked how many nuclear weapons the U.S. has, the median estimate >>>>>was 200 (the actual number is 6,000) >>>>> >>>>>These beliefs are closely correlated with intentions to vote for Bush. They often give personal detail, but there tends to be a sameness of view. They'd often tell listadmin they were interested in biofuels because they didn't want to put their money in the pockets of terrorists. Over the last eight months it's been changing, there's a curve. It changed from terrorists to terrorist nations, and then to unstable Middle Eastern regimes. Muslims continued to be favourite unpopular people not to put your money in the pockets of (and worse). Around that time (post-Katrina) people also started mentioning environmental benefits as a possible by-product of using biofuels. Then the actual amount they didn't want to give to whoever it was started getting much more important as the gas price rose, but the environment got more important too, even unto climate change. Climate change slowly started changing into global warming, and everything got more intense as the gas price kept rising. The number of people who just wanted to (or had to) save money rose with it. Government started creeping up the unpopularity chart, though mostly only obliquely mentioned, and it hasn't made it to the bigtime yet. More recently, indepence from foreign oil shot right up, displacing unstable Middle Eastern regimes, which fell right down in unpopularity. Foreign oil is still right up there, but it was joined by Big Oil companies, and then by ExxonMobil, and then by ExxonMobil's retiring CEO with his $400 million gold watch. Just think of that: Osama bin Laden just morphed into the CEO of ExxonMobil. Ain't that something. Nobody has yet said they want to make biodiesel because they hate Iran. (But they have said that about Saudi Arabia.) Iraq comes into it occasionally but never the Iraqis, except maybe as being not worth investing more dead soldiers in. Oil and war are sometimes linked, especially more recently. "What's all this off-topic political crap got to do with BIODIESEL?????" LOL! It's a list joke. That's what these folks used to say here, and some still do. Some who hate ExxonMobil's CEO still say that. They're moved by memes, as Godwin would say. Just because they think something new now doesn't mean they've worked anything much else out yet. It doesn't even mean they're aware they thought (felt) something different yesterday. Can you project the curve forward? Who is it they're going to end up wanting to make biodiesel so they don't have to put money in his pocket? An interesting glimpse. The only thing I'll bet on is that it won't be Osama bin Laden. By the way, I'm not being disparaging, I really don't like it when people sneer at "sheeple". But when you're watching social movement it's the tide that counts, more than the drops of water. Of course in another way they're the only thing that matters. Something else that's to be seen in the same dataset is a different sort of pattern among responses from Americans who probably don't watch FauxTV. It's more interesting, but it's more difficult to describe too because there's more variety, the sameness is lacking. It's something you'd do by using lots of examples, not just painting broad sweeping patterns, it's more of a mosaic. They often talk about Iran, and Iraq, oil, war, money, corrupt corporations and politicians, the environment and global warming, even torture sometimes. They often say what they're doing too, or what their plans or their dreams are. There seem to be fewer viral memes at work here, they're generally more focused. IMHO it more than makes up for any disconnects in the others. Sorry, no numbers. Just to reassure, I use this information as demographic data, IMO I wouldn't be doing my job as list-owner properly if I didn't, and it also has a bearing on JtF since they've all been to one of three web pages there. I'm more interested in reach and penetration than in high numbers of page views (though we have those too). But the information is treated as strictly private and confidential, it's not divulged to anybody, and any snippets that might emerge, such as this, give no trace of identities. Best Keith Addison Journey to Forever KYOTO Pref., Japan http://journeytoforever.org/ Biofuel list owner _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
