If people fear the end of the world, why is there so much complacency on the issue of global warming?

Question

Is there any scientific proof that its a natural cycle?

Answer 1

because there is isn't a problem it's natural

check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU if you actually believe in knowing the truth you'll watch it and then form an opinion

Answer 2

Most of the time, it's due to apathy as well as ignorance that created this sense of complacency in people. People usually believe what their eyes can see. Instantaneous natural disasters like volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes etc, have always been viewed as extremely life-threatening and perilous but what is not usually seen are actually far more dangerous! Global warming, is a perpetual natural crisis the world has been facing from time immemorial. As long as men never stop working and manufacturing, the effect of global warming will not cease to aggravate at an alarming rate. Thus, such complancency can only be remedied through provision of adequate information to the public by various means and mediums such as the media, education etc.

Answer 3

Because our sub -conscience knows it is already too late - the fact is we are doomed. There is a 'little' thing called Entropy. Basically it says the more order one trys to obtain, the more disorder it will create. So, the more we try to clean up the mess we made here on earth, the worse the problem will get. There is no running away from this Law. The only thing we can do is slow down it's effects - we can NEVER reverse them. The trouble is if we stopped everything that is adding to global warming right now, today, it would take about 100 years for the 'flywheel' effect associated with it to slow down. We are still doomed. This is like going 100 mph in a car headed right for a brick wall and thinking if you slam on the brakes when you are 25 feet away from the wall, everything will be all right. Trying to disprove Entropy is the supreme Law of the universe is like trying to disprove there is gravity by walking off a 50 story building. While this idiot is passing the 10th floor on his way down, he can be heard saying, "Well, so far - so good!"

There are 3 Laws of Thermodynamics that rule supreme in our universe. Simply put, they are;

Law 1 - you cannot win at this game.
Law 2 - you cannot break even in this game.
Law 3 - you cannot get out of this game.

Answer 4

Because people actually like to worry about things they can't do anything about.

Worrying about things that obviously require you to take some action and make some changes is unpleasant.

And for some people this is a political issue, not a scientific one. For example, the silly swindle movie has cropped up again. Simply nonsense.

It is scientifically wrong. The producer has a clear bias. Channel 4 had to apologise for his distortions of scientific views after they broadcast a 1997 movie of his trashing the environmental movement in general. Details:

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2355956.ece

" A Channel 4 documentary claimed that climate change was a conspiratorial lie. But an analysis of the evidence it used shows the film was riddled with distortions and errors."

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Durkin_(television_director)

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313pure_propaganda_the.php

"Pure Propaganda"

EDIT I've answered Flyboy's 10 questions elsewhere. The short version is that everything there is refuted by hard scientific data against it. Except 7. We need a new treaty.

Answer 5

Actually i dont believe ppl fear the end of the world. The end of the world is, i think, mostly looked at as the proof that theres life after death so maybe many ppl actually would like to see it.
Most of the ppl i speak to about the subject dont think theres gonna be one, or dont care, or are not afraid, or even want it to come.
About complacency on global warming, ppl are complacent with mostly everything that dont put them under a certain degree of direct duress.
If you warn ppl about something most likely they wont do but what is presently easier, seemingly more practical, or more pleasurable.

Answer 6

Your question virtually answers itself. There have been such Prophets of doom since time immemorial and yet here we are. Remember the "Boy who cried wolf"?
There is so much nonsense that people react by ignoring the lot. Some guy in your answers actually linked future temperatures to the total of CO2 production in the future. The temperature once it stabilises depends on the historical rate of production because CO2 is removed from the atmosphere fairly quickly; within a century at most. That may seem a long time but in the Greenhouse Hypothesis there is considerable lag in the link between CO2 concentration and temperature of the Earth. The models that predicted 10 degrees demonstrate a probability of accuracy of close to Zero.
When people blatantly overstate the situation to cause fear or panic most adults will simply switch off.

Answer 7

Part of the problem is that people have difficulty with the science. The scientific case is straightforward, but has areas of uncertainty. Most people are unable to deal with such an argument.

Let me lay out the straightforward case:

1) The CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising, and are almost certainly rising because humans are burning fossil fuels.
2) The amount of CO2 that has been released into the atmosphere so far will, as an isolated factor, warm the surface of the Earth an average of 3 C.
3) If we continue to release CO2 into the atmosphere, burning all the fossil fuel there is, that additional CO2 will wam the surface of the earth by 10 C over the next few centuries.
4) Such a rapid rise in temperatures is unprecedented in the past few million years, and will likely lead to an ecological crisis, that is, mass extinctions. This would likely be accompanied by a massive reduction in human population: gigadeaths.
5) We do not understand the feedback mechanisms, whereby warming effects increase or decrease further warming. We should, therefore, be careful and not release any more CO2 than is absolutely necessary.

Note that the above argument has nothing to do with the issue of whether the temperature has actually been seen to be rising or not, or whether the temperature rose or fell in the past due to a variety of natural drivers such as changes in the Earth's orbit, variations in the Sun's output, variations in cosmic rays, variations in volcanic activity. These are irrelevant---economic records tell us we are releasing CO2, and physics tells us what that CO2 will do to temperatures. Somehow, that straightforward argument is lost on some people.

P.S. I have tried to make the point above that most of the "conservative" arguments are irrelevant to the central scientific argument. Nevertheless, Flyboy has posted a set of these arguments. I will address them:

1) Long-term temperature variations. Yes, the average temperature of the Earth has varied considerably in the past, and this is not caused by human factors. There are many varying inputs to average global temperatures. These include the orbit of the Earth, the luminosity of the Sun, the cosmic ray flux at the Earth, volcanic activity, meteor strikes. These have random time variations, and are not totally understood. This is irrelevant---we know what anthropogenic CO2 will do, because we understand radiative transfer of CO2 and we know what it does in planetary atmospheres. The warming we see is the warming we expect from anthropogenic CO2.

2. The fact that global temperatures declined rapidly in the late 1940s and remained approximately constant through 1975 is irrelevant. This cooling trend could have been caused by any of the natural drivers of global temperature. The best scientific guess, however, is that it was caused by aerosols due to human pollution, and that the cooling effect of these aerosols has now been overwhelmed by the ongoing accumulation of CO2.

3. There are no accurate computer models of the Earth. This is true. We do, however, know what adding a trillion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere will do---this is a far less complex calculation, and one that has been partially verified by models of the other planets and moons in the solar system that have CO2 in their atmospheres. This is a reason for caution rather than optimism.

4. Mars experiencing global warming---there are many factors that drive the mean temperature of Mars. Some are common with Earth, some not. Anthropogenic CO2 is clearly not one of the common factors. This is irrelevant.

5. Ice age predictions of the early seventies. There was such a prediction, but it was put forward as a hypothesis by a small number of climatologists. It related, primarily, to the cycle of ice ages that have predominated on our planet for the past quarter-million years. There was never a warning endorsed by a majority of climate scientists, and no one was seriously proposing political action.

6. There darn well is a scientific consensus.

7. Carbon trading schemes may or may not fix the problem. What is needed is a total reorganization of human industry, so that essentially no fossil fuels are burned. How to accomplish this is the central question, and is the question that needs to be discussed. Ignorant questioning of the physics of planetary atmospheres is harmful to this process.

8. Yes, there were periods in the past that were much warmer than today. The speed of global warming is perhaps more of an issue than the magnitude, although with significant positive feedback, it is possible that the climate could become tens of degrees warmer for hundreds of years. Just because some dinosaurs survived this does not mean that the majority of humanity will.

9. Yes, there were periods where the world was cooler than today. Certainly the Sun is more luminous now than it was 500 million years ago---as the sun evolves off the main sequence over the next 5 billion years, it will become slowly more luminous.

10. The fact that the Sun does affect average global temperatures does not imply that CO2 does not. The effect of anthropogenic CO2, taken as an isolated factor, is well understood. To understand this, you must understand the physics of planetary atmospheres and radiative transfer. These things are, with study and experimental verification, well understood.

Bonus question: Ad hominum attacks on Al Gore are just a manifestion of self-satisfied conservative smugness. Until world industrial capacity is reorganized so that it doesn't use fossil fuel, it is almost impossible for any individual human being to avoid emitting carbon.

The world's fossil fuels will run out within the millenium anyway. The sooner we stop burning them, the better.

Answer 8

i noticed that public opinion is shifting from complacency to realisation.
it's only a matter of time that realisation of the masses (via showbussiness) will experience the will to help themselves and the earth.
i suggest not fearing yourself and showing a true love for life and acting on your own wisdom and the gifts of energy. then you as a person can open the darkened eyes of lust and addiction from your brethren to see a place where there is more than individual gain.

Answer 9

they want t stick their heads in the sand and refuse to accept that humanity has any blame or even adjust their lives so that they will be more positive environmentally speaking

as to why is a mystery because there is so much evidence and so many people have been witness to some of the effects.

everybody is so preocupied that co2 ,or polution is the only reason of climate change
many people forget about desertification
desserts are like a fire they gobble up the edges with the heat and so grow.

forrests regulate the climate ,they absorb heat during the day and release it at night ,that is why desserts are freezing at night and cooking during the day

Forrests produce water ,and regulate the atmosphere we breathe (they absorb carbon )as well as protecting the earth from the sun

if forrest are being exchanged for ashalt,concrete and desserts
what is gonna keep this planet habitable for us

Global warming is a very complex collection of many effects

this text is limited to effects of people in the country,industrial effects on the environment and the internal combustion engine as well as the over all effects of cities and the ozone part of global warming,is another story,

climate change is caused partly by desertification ,and most desertification is caused by man
the thinner ozone layer helps to speed this up.and this is caused mainly by air polution ,also as a result of mans actions

there are natural cycles in the planets life
but a lot is influenced by mans existance ,and this is increasing with overpopulation,putting strains on Natural resources and increasing contaminations as well as destructions of essential componants the ensure living conditions for all life forms

in North Africa,India,Mexico ,millions of people are effected by land loss and desertification and some have died as a result

in china, thousands of what used to be farmers are running for their lives from the dust storms that have burried their towns and turned their lands into dessert,

,the Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year
and all of the desserts we know are a results of mans actions ,and they are increasing ,not getting less ,in the dinosaurs days ,there were no desserts.

collectively this planet is drying up because of bad farming practices like,over grazing and fertilizers,

each degree rise in temperature means 10%crop loss

and there is less and less water (because of deforestation),to irrigate this production ,
and there are less and less farmers to do it..
and there are 70 million more peole every year that have to eat and drink and wash

who are overpumping deep carbon aquifiers
who are plowing more and more unstable lands because they have lost so many million hectares to desertification ,
because of bad farming practises ,such as using fertilizers and heavy machinary or over grazing

RISING SEAS
The northpole is melting ,and we will know it without ice in our life times.
this does not affect the sea level because it is ice that is already in the water.but the melting ice from Green land and the south pole ,are another matter.

Answer 10

Well first of all a lot of people have been lied to and believe that global warming isn't happening or that we're not causing it (a few of them seem to always appear to provide an incorrect answers for every question on global warming asked here).

As for the rest it is probably because the really bad effects are always predicted for the future and so we aren't suffering now (or so they think) so we just keep putting it off until it's too late.

Answer 11

Most governments and large companies do not give prevention high priority, they believe in "fixing" and consider prevention a waste of valuable resources.
The rule seems to be: Make as much money as you can now and try fix the damage later.
Also the end of the world seems far off for many people.