Why is there so much misinformation about global warming?

Question

And why do people continue to believe things that have been disproven?

I've asked this in the Environment section and haven't gotten a good answer, except that people will believe what they want to believe.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApKvie5J_.B1pnQlT7eTH0fty6IX?qid=20070529143841AAyApmD

For example, that volcanoes cause global warming when in reality they contribute 1% the greenhouse gases of humans and actually cause global cooling. Or that the sun is responsible for global warming when the only other planets warming are parts of Mars (due to dust storms darkening the surface, and other parts of Mars are cooling!) and Pluto. If it were due to the sun, every planet would be warming inversely proportionate to their distances from the sun! Or any number of myths that people have brought up here, from cow farts to soda pop causing global warming. Or that it's all a hoax perpetrated by scientists who don't even make profits.

What do you think?

The only explanation I can come up with is that people don't want to believe that humans cause global warming, and people find a way to believe what they want to believe. Also that people are too lazy to really research the scientific evidence so instead they listen to what Rush Limbaugh tells them.

I'll keep this in the Environment section when people stop presenting misinformation about global warming in the Politics section.

Water vapor is another myth. Atmospheric water vapor levels are entirely dependent on the atmospheric temperature - the hotter the Earth gets, the more water vapor the atmosphere can hold. Thus water vapor amplifies global warming, it does not initiate it.

Climate models are pretty accurate. Here's a good example of one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

penfold, you're a great example of what I'm talking about. If you would just spend 2 minutes researching it you would know that my information on volcanoes is correct. You're making statements and forming opinions based on virtually no information. This is an incredibly important issue - quite possibly the most important in human history, and people can't bother to educate themselves.

Answer 1

1) Conservatives have always distrusted environmentalists and anything that pushes for progressive reform that compromises their selfish interests. What they don't realize is that they are doing a service for the likes of oil companies without the companies themselves having to appeal to that base

2) Much of the misinfomation perpetuated out there are from political pundits who write in satire or who are blinded by an ideology that they believe to be absolute in politics. Ann Coulter, Limbagh, O' Reilly are all loudmouth, negative hate mongers with a distrust for anything that the liberals stand for. When an issue becomes championed as a partisan centerpiece, it will most likely be shot down by the opponents and their own base.

3) Most people in this country haven't been educated on Global Warming since high school, elementary or in college and they are more inclined to believe what's heard on the radio.

Answer 2

I know that the climate is changing, now we call it global warming, later on, we will call it global cooling, so I would stick to climate change expression.
From all the facts you ennumerate above, you forget the most important one, the one that IS REALLY behing climate changes, and this fact is water vapor. The water vapor is mostly concentrated at about 10m over the ocean, and this alone captured about 70% of all the radiations (converting them into infrared radiation), while the Co2 is only responsible for less a 1/1000% of the heat absorbtion on Earth. As for the studies put forward by some scientists, I do know that in this world, they are much less qualify persons than unqualified ones, and that its not because you have a paper on your wall, that you are good!! Anyways, I am still waiting for a climatologist to predict the weather 1 week in advance with acuracy, so I am not expecting them to tell me how the world will be in 20 years... Better purchase the Almanach...

Answer 3

some people are really stubborn and will only believe what they want to. Also global warming is seen as an issue of the left and democrats so many people on the right will refuse to support anything that democrats and liberal do, no matter how much scientific evidence and research there is out there. Narrow and closed minds will let in what they want and keep out what they don't.

Answer 4

My problem is that both sides use computer models to get their conclusions. There are no computer models that can come close to achieving the complexity of something as vast as the global climate system, so any conclusions drawn from them is little better than a guess. There are so many assumption made by both sides that valid conclusions are impossible. Leaping to any sort of "solution" is ridiculous, as is just sitting around doing nothing to help the environment.

Moderate conservation and exploration of alternative fuels makes sense. Jumping off of a cliff, economically speaking, does not.

Edit:

Climate models being "pretty accurate" is not equal to climate models being able to predict exactly what will happen based on whether there is 3.5% CO2 in the atmosphere or 3.7% CO2. There is no way they will model the complex ocean currents if polar melt runs into warmer salt water with any accuracy. There is no way they will accurately model altered cloud formation because of either water temperature increases or the previously mentioned current changes. There is no way they will accurately model the effects on El Nino and La Nina that the different percentage of fresh water in both oceans will have, or what the effect of the different water temperatures would be on either one. And there sure as hell is no way they will accurately model all of that combined into one big piece.

I'm sorry, but "pretty accurate" doesn't really cut it when making decisions that have such a monstrous impact on both the economy and the environment.

Answer 5

I am not convinced that your informnation regarding the effect of vocanoes is correct. It is my understanding (I couldn`t give you a reference) That mount St Helens put more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere during the 1980 eruption than mankind has since the start of the industrial revolution.
That the climate is changing is established from the available data to a reasonable degree. All other data regarding climate change revolve around insufficient data and models of climate that are known to be crude in the extreme. The only certain fact regarding climate change and the effect of mankind on it, is that we do not have sufficient information to make a proper judgement.
The lack of information does not negate the wisdom of taking action to reduce our fossil fuel consumption as this would bring other more obvious benefits in terms of managing the available reserves in a more sustainable way and also reducing the tensions that reliance on dwindling reserves create. If these actions also help to reduce man`s effect on the climate, that would be a desirable side effect.
It is very unlikely that nations will be able to reduce consumption to such an extent that global climate change is significantly effected. I feel that if we are to maintain a climate that suits us best then we may have to intervene directly with measures to reduce the sunlight reaching the atmosphere and by seeding the oceanic deserts to increase carbon capture in the oceans. There are numerous ideas for interventions of this type and ultimately they will have to be part of any effective solution.

Answer 6

Its available yet no longer susceptible to be useful. i in my opinion detect the finished worldwide warming industry to be between the biggest bummers of my lifetime. this is punctiliously just about as though we've all been transported to a junior severe college crammed with the worst style of classmates and are being forced to stay with the communicate group working the instructor. those people have been via no skill cool, the Clinton's, Gore's and their acquaintances have via no skill performed something even remotely suitable quite worth declaring distinctive than getting appropriate right into a severe quantity of money. I do my superb to concentration on subject concerns i'm going to administration. If this is bothering you, you're no longer on my own. we are living in an age the region administration does not exist. it ought to bypass it ought to no longer, ignoring those people of 0 cool seems to artwork for me.

Answer 7

There will always be stupid people, there is nothing you can do about stupid people. Well not nothing. You could buy some swamp land in Florida and sell it to the STUPID people. In 20 years it will be worthless and under water. Rush thinks that when the ice caps melt it's the same as a ice cube melting in your glass of water, you put the ice in first before the water. The water does not overflow. Rush is too stupid to know that in the case of Global warming humans will cause the ice to fall into a already full glass. Stupid is as stupid does.. TOM HANKS

Answer 8

I'd like to know the answer to this myself... the best I can figure out is that they just love to follow.

It's the same reason they still say Al Gore said he invented the Internet when nothing could be farther from the truth. But like a bunch a boobleheads they go bouncing down the highway of life oblivious to the world around them.

Answer 9

The corporations use their Republican Party, their media and the discredited wacko scientists that they own to keep the people from the truth of global warming

Global Warming screws with the corporate way, the American way of lies..I mean life.

They'll keep the lies propped up as long as corporately possible

Follow the money

Answer 10

Because Big Oil has billions upon billions to spend on disinformation.

The Tobacco Industry did the exact same thing - the medical info was out there in the fifties! Look how long it took before people accepted it as real.