How is it that there is even a question as to the existence of global warming?

Question

With all of the research and the science that proves the existance of global warming, why and how do people continue to say its a lie. Who is perpetuating this "lie" and for what purpose?

Answer 1

Excellent question - one I've been in discussion about for much of the last week.

You're right that the science is overwhelming but there are many reasons people don't beleive in global warming.

What you'll find is that the US is the only country in the world where a significant number of people refute GW and you'll also find it's the only country where religion and politics has become involved.

That's a dangerous thing because some people are by their very nature, opposed to religion and politics on one side or another. The result being that whatever is said, no matter how rational, some people will instinctively reject it - basically a case of the Dems / Reps / Christians / Jews / Muslims etc support it so it has to be wrong / right.

The myths that have sprouted up to refute global warming include a lot of scare tactics - nobody wants to radically change their lifestyles or be hit with a massive tax burden. Faced with the threat of this many people are bound to take a stance against the science of GW.

The US also suffers from an inherent distrust of politicians, scientists, the media etc and as such conspiracy theories are rife - look at 9/11, Elvis, chemtrials, moon landings etc etc. None of these have rational explanations other than the facts but it doesn't stop substantial numbers of people from coming up with some truly remarkable claims to the contrary, the same is true of GW.

Without wishing to be disrepsectful to anyone, there are many people on this forum who will post answers to questions about GW who really don't have so much as a clue what they're talking about. There are a few people on here who are qualified to give answers and as far as I'm aware, every one of them concurs that GW is a real threat. In short, those who have studied GW agree with it, whereas those who disagree haven't studied it.

Some people also take an individualistic view of things. They may benefit personally and it's therefore in their interest to refute global warming, much the same stance is adopoted by those who think they have something to lose, rather than face facts it's often easier to deny them in the hope that everything will be okay.

As to who is perpetuating the lie. Nowadays the answer is a handful of individuals but in the past several large organisations, especially the oil companies, were actively engaged in a policy of discrediting the science. In recent years every single major oil company and major organisation has accepted global warming as fact - they might not like it but they now accept it.

But the damage has already been done, the rumours have been created, the facts distorted and the science discredited. Like all rumours, they might not be true but they're going to be around for a long time.

Answer 2

People are skeptical of global warming because that is how the scientific method works. Science is based on the scientific method and not on consenses. For any hypothesis, there is going to be an antithesis. This is how reason works.

A skeptical debate is healthy and should be encouraged. So the major contributers to the questioning of global warming are scientists themselves.

Religion and politics is based on belief. Science, unlike religion, does not depend on belief but on skepticism. Let's not stifle debate and kill science in the name of religion, politics, or what we "wish" to be true.

Science is not politics. Be wary when Inquisition like behavior occurs to stifle the scientific process and shut off research and views that do not agree with an "authority sanctioned" view point, whether it's the Church or the IPCC. Remember what happened to Galileo and Bruno? This has happened in the past and people were called heretics and in another age, witches. Today they may be called incorrectly "anti-environmentalists" or incorrectly "religious conservatives." The scientist being attacked could very well be an evironmentalist and a liberal. It is unfair to label someone as something they are not just because they are trying to do honest research. This is unbelievable in an age of rationality and science.

The scientists who oppose the IPCC global warming theory do not consider the theory a "lie." Just that there are other research that contradicts the theory. There is a difference. The scientists consider that the statement that

"all or most scientists unanimousley agree with the theory "

to be a lie. There is a big difference. The purpose of the IPCC seems to be a noble one, that is to create international laws for the environment. Even that is something most scientists will agree with. What is disagreeable is the selective use of science with total dis-regard for the scientific method will set up such a precidence that the entire credibility of science will fall into the dark ages. Most scientists do not like this.

We went through the Enlightenment to free ourselves from the Church, we don't need a new Church of IPCC to replace it.

I suggest looking at all sides of the issue and that is why I always give sources for all sides. If you are smart, you would atleast study some of the scientific literature on the other side before claiming that scientists are part of some right wing conspiracy.

For you in particular, I recommend

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2332531355859226455

and browsing if not intimately studying the information in the following websites

Answer 3

Global warming is a fantasy - concocted via governments globally so as to elevate taxes via stealth. It is an excuse to elevate gasoline charges and phone it 'carbon tax'. Trillions are being milked this fashion at the dull public who've fallen for it. Climate Change is a likelihood, however Global Warming is a fantasy. The northern hemisphere has had 3 conecutively chillier than traditional Winters with heavy snow fall in a few components for the primary time EVER. I realize I'm in no way going to persuade the unshakeable perspectives of a few, however that's now not my reason. I with no trouble are not able to be given the inspiration of Global Warming both.

Answer 4

Some people just have a hard time accepting anything proposed by people they consider liberal or environmental.

So they use arguments that have been discredited over and over again. Like the "swindle" movie. Or other things listed in this thread.

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

"The science might be bunkum, the research discredited. But all that counts for Channel 4 is generating controversy."

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,2032572,00.html

But this may change now that serious conservatives accept global warming as real:

"Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives Tuesday to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"

http://www.newt.org/backpage.asp?art=4331

(His own website)

"I agree with you (Gore) that the debate over climate change is over."

Rep. Dennis Hastert, Republican, Illinois

"I'm trying to learn [about greenhouse gases and global warming]. The more I learn, the bigger believer I become."

Senator Lindsay Graham, Republican, South Carolina

Answer 5

Some of us believe (a) global climate change-- currently warming-- is a cyclical event and nothing to get too bothered over, (b) it's probably a good thing-- a lot of land in Canada and Siberia may just become habitable, (c) receding glaciers in Switzerland reveal old signs of human habitation, and they used to farm grain in Greenland and wine grapes in England, so maybe we're just getting back to normal, and (d) the two biggest factors in the temperature of the planet are the Sun and water vapor, and neither one of those is caused by people.

Global Warming got us out of the last Ice Age. This was NOT caused by Garg the Hunter driving his Escalade.

There is Global Warming on Mars. Ditto for Little Green Dudes in Tahoes.

Answer 6

Let's clear things up a bit, shall we:

-THE WORLD CLIMATE IS NOT STATIC: The world climate has gotten warmer and cooler throughout history; our current warming trend is NOT, by any absolute scientific certainty, a rare event. In fact, there have been periods that have had 20 TIMES GREATER warming trends in just this past century alone.

-HUMAN ACTIVITY IS NOT THE ONLY CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING: Humans may have something to do with the current warming trend but how much, if any, impact has only been estimated,...and those estimates vary greatly.

-THE SIGNIFICANT, BUT OFTEN DISREGARDED, MILANKOVITCH CYCLES: The Milankovitch theories of climate change, as well as theories involving the Earth's orbital angle-of-inclination and solar phenomena, strongly suggest that changes in the Earth's climate comes in cycles. These cycles are measured in TENS and HUNDREDS of thousands of years, and within these periods there are warming and cooling 'blips" that measure in the mere hundreds and thousands of years.

Given this, it is more likely that our current warming trend can be contributed to being a "blip" in the natural scheme of things, rather than some terribly woeful and irreversible condition brought on by mere human activity.

---It never ceases to amaze me to see just how many fools are willing to blindly jump on the various junk-science, global warming "doomsday" prophecies when these "prophecies" are nothing more than political scare tactics intent on garnering incredibly naive constituents by laying a massive guilt trip on them; trying to convince them that humanity has been very, very BAD to the environment and that we all must take part in the healing of this grievous wound we've caused Mother Earth:
Ridiculous?...Absolutely!
[Argumentum ex silentio]

Answer 7

The question is not that climate changes. It always has and always will. The question is how much is anthropogenic, i.e., caused by man. That is still very much in debate.

Please visit http://www.spacecenter.dk/ to see the work done by the Danish National Space Center correlating solar activity, cosmic rays and climate change.

Answer 8

The lie is that it is caused by human action, not that it's happening. The CURRENT cycle has been happening for tens of thousands of years.

Answer 9

The arguments generally aren't about whether or not it exists. The big debate seems to be what is the cause.

Answer 10

There is little question that the Earth is heating up (i.e. warming), the questions revolve around:

Cause
Extent of human effect
What, if anything, should we do about it.