Why all the pushback on global warming?

Question

Forget the Kyoto Treaty, Al Gore's film, even all the UN or George Bush conspiracy theories for a moment. I just want to understand why some seem adamantly opposed to the idea of global warming in its entirety.

For those who oppose global warming theories; I'd like to know wheter you feel it's not at all possible (or even likely) that man is having any tangible, damaging effect on the environment? Or is the real debate more around "to what extent" and whether or not it's economically worth the cost of doing something differently?

Answer 1

While there MAY be actual global warming, the major question is who or what is primarily responsible. Gore and Co. lay the blame at mankind, particularly the U. S. Other likely causes are natural: sunspot activity, volcanism, who knows? The HUGE problem with the Kyoto treaty and other international "fixes," is that at best, it will do little or nothing to solve a problem that may not even exist, but would hammer the U.S. economy. Check out Michael Crichton's book, "State of Fear." It's fictional, but BRILLIANTLY researched, and heavily footnoted.

Answer 2

I do not oppose global warming theories, but I think man's impact is being over-emphasized. There have been -extreme- periods of warmth in the distant pass, far in excess of the minor warming trend of the past century.

A single volcanic eruption can release more tons of greenhouse gas than all of humanity for a year. And there are plenty of volcanic eruptions. And that is only one of many natural phenomena that can influence weather patterns. The real question, though, is do we exacerbate this effect, making the highs higher? The answer there is an obvious 'yes'.

I guess my point is, we aren't the true cause, but we can definitely aggravate the effects. The question of economic worth would depend on our ability to accurately gauge the extent of that aggravation and what portion of our activities could be described as 'negligible'.

There is a serious need for legitimate (non-sponsored non-biased) research on this topic to look at what our role truly is and whether we can take steps to minimize it.

Answer 3

Many conservatives feel the global warming debate is a Trojan horse designed to weaken the United States, by increasing gas prices and stiffling economic growth. The problem is that many of the loudest voices in the debate have no credibility in the eyes of conservatives (Al Gore, Hollywood, etc...). Additionally, was there a serious discussion of global warming during the "roaring" 90s? Only when a conservative president comes into power is the world doomed.

A good example of how to win people to your cause is Bono. He doesn't demonize groups to advance his agenda, he actually embraces anyone who will listen which gives his cause credibility.

Answer 4

I think we give ourselves too much credit, the Earth is a living planet that is constantly changing, this one point always gets lost on both sides of this debate.