Why don't global warming deniers....?

Question

Why don't global warming deniers realize that the climate change is different than others that have happened? They point out the medieval change and solar problems, but do they realize the climate change began after industrialization. That means it can't really be solar activity either, otherwise it would have started sooner. The change has been more than ever too, they always say there is no evidence, why don't they open their eyes? It just boggles my mind. These same people would have us cut down every tree and every animal until humans were all that was left.

Answer 1

Some that deny global warming do just that. Of course you have the other side saying that it is ONLY man Made and that we can stop it. I don't believe either is correct. It is a combination of nature and man and while we could decrease the rate of change we cannot stop it. I also don't see how the flooding could possibly be as bad as predicted. the polar ice caps are mostly floating, ice displaces more volume than the water the ice is composed of, so the seas would not rise over fifty feet as some say they would (even if ALL the ice at the polar caps melted) they would only rise a few inches at most.

Answer 2

If GW truly is a man-made, carbon dioxide problem, then why did the time period from the 1940's until the 1970's cool globally? If carbon dioxide was increasing then (and it was), then why didn't the temperatures continue to show an increase during those decades? Remember that it was that cooling period that lead to the infamous "new Global Ice Age" warnings in the 1970's.

Also, how do you explain that in the past, when looking at the carbon dioxide and temperature comparisions, that the temperature has always gone up before the carbon dioxide? When looking at the graphs overall, you can't see that. It appears that the two graphs are acting together. If you look at the actual data on a scale that can provide relative time detail, you can actually see where the temperature is starting to fall and the carbon dioxide is still climbing.

So, with that being said, I claim that I am not a GW denier. Rather, the problems above have not been explained enough to allow me to accept that this particular warming trend is caused by carbon dioxide and man's contribution.

Would you go out and spend $500 to replace your water heater just because you found some water next to it or would you want to make sure you knew it was coming from your water heater first? What if someone was coming by periodically and using the pressure relief valve to let some water out? Would you continue to change it out every time? That, to me, is similar to global warming. Until we find, if we ever do, the true forcing issue, we can reduce carbon dioxide all we want and we will still have no effect on the temperature.

Answer 3

This is a response to bkc99xx, not the original asker.


"If GW truly is a man-made, carbon dioxide problem, then why did the time period from the 1940's until the 1970's cool globally? If carbon dioxide was increasing then (and it was), then why didn't the temperatures continue to show an increase during those decades? Remember that it was that cooling period that lead to the infamous "new Global Ice Age" warnings in the 1970's."

The cooling trend seen from approximately 1940-1970 is fully understood and well integrated into the current theory of anthropogenic global warming. In fact, one might say it was even expected. Aerosol use was at an all time high during this period, and, as I'm sure you're well aware, aerosol actually acts to reduce global surface temperature, which accounts for the lag seen in this time.

And, of course, even the deniers are now forced to admit that your argument about the so-called 'global cooling scare' of the 70's is unfounded and false. First, the entire 'scare' was propagated wholly by the media, with several articles in National Geographic and Newsweek, neither of which are peer-reviewed, scientific publications. This of course overlooks the fact that, as I sad earlier, there actually *was* a cooling trend during this time period owing to use of aerosols, the use of which has since been regulated.

http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/03/what-about-mid-century-cooling.html

http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/02/they-predicted-cooling-in-1970s.html

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=94


"Also, how do you explain that in the past, when looking at the carbon dioxide and temperature comparisons, that the temperature has always gone up before the carbon dioxide? When looking at the graphs overall, you can't see that. It appears that the two graphs are acting together. If you look at the actual data on a scale that can provide relative time detail, you can actually see where the temperature is starting to fall and the carbon dioxide is still climbing."

This is true; in the past a rise in temperature has always preceded a rise in CO2. But once again, this fact is well known by climate scientists and fully integrated into the theory.

CO2 acts as both a forcing and a feedback. That is, CO2 both responds to changes in temperature and acts a greenhouse gas. When the average temperature goes up, more CO2 is released from the oceans, which causes the temperature to go up even further, releasing more CO2, and so on. The only reason this does not cause a "run-away warming effect" because the amount of CO2 that can be released into the atmosphere is limited.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

http://illconsidered.blogspot.com/2006/02/co2-lags-not-leads.html



"So, with that being said, I claim that I am not a GW denier. Rather, the problems above have not been explained enough to allow me to accept that this particular warming trend is caused by carbon dioxide and man's contribution."

I'm assuming you got the majority of this information from 'The Great Global Warming Swindle". Which is really a shame. The amount of pseudo-science and outright misinformation being spread by that piece of propaganda is simply reprehensible.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled/

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled-carl-wunsch-responds/

Answer 4

I've got some dandy hand warmers and there not made from trees or animals.As to your concern about Global warming, in 1974 Time Mag ran quite a story about Global cooling, the old pend alum swings If you dint like this warm weather stick around for 2011

Answer 5

I certainly don't disagree with you.

But to understand their attitude, you have to understand "where they are coming from." If you read their posts carefully, you'll see two threads. First, many of these people are denying global warming based on religious belief (though sociologically, cult-like indoctrination is more accurate). They have been told by right-wing preachers that "global warming" is nothing but a liberal plot, like evolution--and no amount of evidence or logic will sway them on climate change any more than it does with evolution. The ones who conced that it is occuring believe that it is not caused by humans, but by God as part of the "end times."

The second thread are people who have adopted the neo-conservative belief (equally as irrational as the above) that sceintific questions can be decided in the political arena. That many of these posters take this view is obvious. And, if you think about it, so is the source: their leadership. Prime example--Bush, who spent years denying global warming, then its human origins. He attempted to dictate the outcome of scientific research by having research findings altered to reflect this political view (which has been all over the internet and major media--and admitted by the White House).

Granted, any rational person ("believer" or not) knows religion and science are two different areas of human thought and don't overlap--and also knows that scientific questions are decided ultimately based on empirical evidence--period. But these people are not rational.

Answer 6

The main problem is global warming has occurred many times in the past (before industrialization) and also there have been many global cooling in the past also. CO2 emissions don't help but mother nature is far more powerful.

Answer 7

you go and sit in the rain forest and believe the hype from a few idiot scientists....I'll sit in my air conditioned home and enjoy life how I like it. Global Warming is a myth.

Answer 8

you are totaly right ofcourse ,the scariest part is how little people know that we need the environment to survive ourselves .
here is some amunition
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmqEiz2HE3_GnGHQxBRgvfwAAAAA?qid=20070313115027AAEZK5p&show=7#profile-info-e14c1c9fe8243ae3decfb18247f739edaa

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtNPCC7ay5y.egPWM6As95IAAAAA?qid=20070315103800AANWRKb&show=7#profile-info-50wRZ6Bzaa

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhpHALSaeYqF3lBx70h3v7kAAAAA?qid=20070315072630AAEQY1Y&show=7#profile-info-fnLmeihmaa