What the heck is wrong with GW deniers?

Question

I don't have a problem with people who examine the scientific evidence on anthropogenic global warming and aren't convinced. I don't understand them, but at least they looked at the data.

The people who come to a conclusion based on a lack of information really tick me off though. If we are causing global warming - as the scientific experts agree is the case - this is the most important issue in human history. Yet you get people here who say 'Global warming is BS because it snowed today' or 'I don't believe GW exists, who's with me?'. Geez, take 5 seconds and look at a freaking global temperature graph!

Then there's the people who say 'one volcano eruption emits more CO2 than humans have in 5,000 years' or 'carbonation in soda and beer is responsible for global warming' or 'cow farts cause global warming'.

Are they too lazy to take a few minutes to research this critical issue, or do they simply not want to learn the truth that humans are responsible for global warming?

Silly, heada, Icelander, Kitty - as the question asks, what the heck is wrong with you?

Icelander, you should try reading your own link sometime. It doesn't say what you think it says.

Answer 1

The idea that our very way of life is the source of the problem is beyond the realm of thought for the average person. The modern version of this argument has been going on for ~50 years, since Rachel Carson. We got over the flaming Ohio River and foaming beaches with some band-aid fixes, but we are again seeing some real consequences. We had a scare with the ozone problem, but with a bit more effort we were able to circumvent this one. This time there is no possible "fix" other than a reconfiguration of our civilization. Global warming is a symptom of the impending environmental crunch. What it will look like has been the object of plenty speculation, but even in the most benign version, resources get scarce, everything gets very expensive, and we live in some kind of a degraded and diminished brown and toxic world. So what's the average person to do? We just can't comprehend that we are living a "wrong" way and that we have to change. Forget the conspiracy stuff, the people that run the world just pander to us, while profiting handsomely of course, but really they are just the tail wagging the dog. I've had so many conversations, over decades, with people trying to relate all this and I have met precious few, like I can count on one hand the people that really get it. And every one of those - to a fault! - just say we are beyond redemption, get over it and live your life. So my reason is: this problem is so big it really and truly creates a schizophrenic split in the mind. Einstein said "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." I say "When you confront the beliefs of the ignorant the first reaction is violent denial." We have a big hill to climb. First to see it, then to admit it, then to accept it, then to get beyond the grief and despair, then into action. Any ideas?

That we experience anthropogenic environmental degradation is beyond dispute. That fossil fuel energy production causes massive global problems is beyond dispute. Whether those problems include Global Warming is not even relevant to me. We should be 100% benign renewable, like solar, anyway.

Answer 2

I think you’re being a little bit hypocritical here dana.

What about the people who believe in catastrophic global warming because “It’s going make the polar bears go extinct”, or “Because Al Gore says so in “An Inconvenient Truth””?

This is a bit of a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Let’s be honest about this, you and I are as bad as each other here. I see some of the things people say on here supporting my side of the argument, such as your example: 'one volcano eruption emits more CO2 than humans have in 5,000 years' and I roll my eyes probably as much as you do, but I keep quite. Why? Because they’re on my side. However, you’re no better than me, because you do exactly the same, don’t you? I don’t see you correcting the “all the polar bears are dying” crowd.

You’re even showing double standards on this question; you criticise Silly, heada, Icelander & Kitty, but ignore Charlotte S, despite her blatantly straw man argument – because I have doubts about the catastrophic global warming hypothesis, I therefore don't give two hoots about [my] children and grandchildren's future.

Given the way that the media constantly, and one-sidedly, stirs up the hysteria about global warming, I think it is commendable that people are able to see through the hype and acknowledge the possibility that we are being conned.

That you have “sold your soul” to the great catastrophic global warming “god”, and therefore refuse to accept any criticisms of your chosen religious doctrine, is not *proof* that you are correct. If you had an objective bone in your body you would accept that there are enough problems with the science to warrant a cautious approach to the subject. Instead, you imply that the science is certain and the debate is over – something that is plainly not the case.

I also wish people were better informed on this subject, but I’d like them to have *all* the facts available to them – including the information that you, and other Global Warming Alarmists, would rather they didn’t have access to.

Ultimately, there is nothing “wrong” with GW deniers, they just aren’t convinced by the scaremongering of the alarmists.

Neither am I.

Answer 3

There are people who believe in global warming who are just as bad. I have heard of people who say that tsunamis are caused by global warming, others who say that global warming exists because it is really hot today.

As for cow farts causing global warming. This is a claim made by some environmentalists. The say that cow farts contain methane, a green house gas. But you are right, it is a ridiculous statement and we are being satirical about that and other ridiculous statements they make.

As for "5 seconds and look at a freaking global temperature graph!" you are right. Look a graph that show correlation between sun spots and temperatures and co2 and temperatures and tell me which one is the better one. I have heard astrophysicist who say that the sun's activity is also unprecedented for the last 1000 years. (coincidently since the medieval warm period) Unless you decide to use Mann's temperature reconstruction graph, in which case there is no correlation. That means that the debate is far from over, and that there are still many uncertainties.

There are many people who say even if global warming is not true, it still can not hurt to reduce co2. So they go around and exaggerate the effects, and try to scare people into supporting their cause. But IF, I stress if, global warming is real, the Kyoto accord will not do anything, it will take drastic measures to combat the problem. And that will hurt.

Answer 4

Hey dana1981, I'm with you!! These people think it is a matter of politics, but not seeing the threat of global warming. We are talking about the future existence of human being!! They obviously don't care about this because they are too comfortable living here in the States.

We all have our responsibilities to make this earth a better place to live for future generations. Hope one day these people will understand...

Answer 5

Yes I know how Global Warming stats can be manipulated and I didn't need a stats class to tell me that.

If I had my science binder here, I can give them all non-believers a collection of facts from all sides of this issue.

I agree with you 100%. They should know the different sides of the story before arguing for what they believe is right. Come on, some people believe the sand from the Sahara desert contributes to Global Warming (not saying they are wrong).

Answer 6

Yeah too bad they didn't take a few minutes to show any of those graphs or data on Live Earth today. As it was, they left the viewer to make up their minds about GW on the basis of what their favorite stars that showed up told them. What message should the average music fan get from all the bands that didn't participate?

Answer 7

The Chimp has a more environmental friendly house than The Hypocrite.. The Chimp's Ranch is carbon neutral while The Hypocriote's house in Nashville is emitting more electricty than 3 one bedroom apartments.

I am so glad that Chimp beat The Hypocrite in 2000.

Answer 8

But you are totally OK with people who believe in Global Warming with no inspection of the data, who misquote and over-inflate the claims of the IPCC and other like bodies. Even Al Gore's claims in "An Inconvenient Truth" aren't in line with the current IPCC findings.

Isn't that a double standard?

Answer 9

They are not only lazy but ignorant fools and obviously don't give two hoots about their children and grandchildren's future.

Because Al Gore is a spokesman and a Dem, they will dispute and dismiss the documentation and refuse to even do any research the issues on the subject. Pathetic and digusting !

Answer 10

the largest source of co2 is humans-what do you think we breath out? it's the sun, and there is nothing we can do about it. why do you think the temperature on both the moon and mars is rising? how many cars are there? history has shown that we heat up, cool down, heat back up, cool back down. i think you are too lazy to look at the facts.