Do you think people doubt global warming because it involves data from over 4,000 years ago?

Question

That is one of the biggest taboos about evolution. That there is proof of the planet being 4.6 billion years old. Fundies believe that the creation of the planet was 4,000 years ago, and deny anything that refers to the Earth being older. Is that what we are up against when it comes to proving global warming?

Answer 1

We have 542 million years of climate data to work with much of which is obtained by oxygen isotope analysis. We can't really go further back than this as beyond this point there were only singular cellular organisms i habiting the planet. This dataset provides with a pretty good indication of the historical climate but isn't as accurate as the 800,000 year record obtained from the Antractic ice core samples.

The ice core record is similar to a tree ring record in that each season a new layer of snow falls, in time this is compressed to ice and over the years the layers form one on top of another. Ultimately they form sheets of ice up to 4km thick and trapped within each layer of ice is a sample of that atmosphere at that point in time.

Similarly, mountain glacier records, sedementary deposits, dendrological records can be counted back year by year for many thousands of years.

If the world was only 4000 years old (or 6000 as some claim) then these gelogical records would have to have been formed on a planet very differnt to our own - namely one where a full seasonal cycle lasted no more than 3 days and each season lasted apporx 18 hours. Of course, over this period of time there would be little physical deformation of the seminentary layers and so no distinguishing boundaries between one layer and the next.

Either - Earth is at the very minimum, 800,000 years old. Or, it was once a completely different planet in a different solar system. Or, there is magic involved.

To the scientist it's clear what the evidence is telling us, to those who chose not to believe the science there is no credible alternative explanation so it has to be put down to magic or some other inexplicable cause.

Answer 2

The religious zealots maybe, the rest because they just don't know what it means. I have answered this question so many times I'm tired of typing the same thing over and over. Sorry. Just read the link.

Browse the word "memes" (pronounced meems) and view the video.

Answer 3

What u . s . are you from? i do no longer understand any religious people who have faith the international is 6000 yrs old. What unusual faith is that? maximum of my kin, acquaintances, and co-workers are Christians and have faith in worldwide warming. some have faith it rather is by technique of mans toxins. some do no longer. some have faith it rather is a few toxins and a few organic. My component is i do no longer think faith has plenty to do with the numbers of folk believing one way or the different. a minimum of right here interior the mid west US.

Answer 4

No actually one of the most common comments they make is "you only have 100 years of accurate data". Which is pretty ridiculous, but they say it pretty often.

I think it's more that they don't undestand the science and/or don't want to understand the science that causes them to doubt anthropogenic global warming.

Answer 5

I dunno, but there's a similarity between Global Warming deniers and Evolution deniers in that they both just don't want to believe and will grasp at anything - rumour, conspiracy theory, illogical counter 'facts', plain head in the sand ignorance, anti-science prejuidice - to facilitate denial.

I would say it is more that once you deny one scientific fact (eg. evolution), it becomes easier to doubt another thru the same process.