Not exactly the results you would expect.  (Well depending on the specific you, I guess it's what some people here would suspect... but still.)

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1547.html

Seeming public apathy over climate change is often attributed to a deficit in comprehension. The public knows too little science, it is claimed, to understand the evidence or avoid being misled. Widespread limits on technical reasoning aggravate the problem by forcing citizens to use unreliable cognitive heuristics to assess risk. We conducted a study to test this account and found no support for it. Members of the public with the highest degrees of science literacy and technical reasoning capacity were not the most concerned about climate change. Rather, they were the ones among whom cultural polarization was greatest. This result suggests that public divisions over climate change stem not from the public’s incomprehension of science but from a distinctive conflict of interest: between the personal interest individuals have in forming beliefs in line with those held by others with whom they share close ties and the collective one they all share in making use of the best available science to promote common welfare.

I would say the apathy is exactly what it is. People more knowledgeable will be more passionate one way or another, though i do wonder who these educated nimrods are who conspire against climate change science, and exactly how much they're getting paid by the Koch Bros to think that way.

Just some dangerous heretics. We should burn them alive and have done with it.

Violation of the Kyoto protocol, sadly. America might be for burning them, but i'm again it.

It's cool. Kyoto is in tatters anyway now that people smartened up to what a sham it was.

For a moment i forgot what we were talking about and thought you were giving your opinion on Kyoto, and i was about to agree that Kyoto isn't much of a city outside of the historic bits. Anyhoo, foreign service test tomorrow, needs my sleep.

I'm gonna guess you didn't read the linked study...

Without reading all of that incredibly dense text (I have to get back to work soon), it appears that political alignment has as much (or more) to do with climate change beliefs as scientific understanding.

I don't find that even the slightest bit surprising.

No, the surprsing part is that you are more likely to disagree the more you know about science.

If you are a democrat and know more about science you are very slightly more concerened about Global Warming effects the a democrat who isn't cocnerned.

While if your a republican and you understand science better your FAR less likely to be concerned about Global warming then your rank and file republican.

Which leads to a general trend on average that shows the more you know about science, the less you are worried about global warming.

It was hypothisized by the paper, that it would be the dumber less sceintifically informed republicans that would be those outliers.

Instead it's the scientificly informed ones who have  a reason to look at it skeptically.