Is it just me or does anyone else find the ignorance in this category a bit alarming?

Question

Misinformation, willful ignorance, unrestrained anger & hatred, silly answers. If it weren't for a handful of thoughtful, well-spoken regulars and the occasional breathe of fresh air from optimistic newcomers, I'd have given up on this forum months ago.

Answer 1

Don't give up, it's too important. It's been so long it's hard to remember the shock you feel when you first realize what's going on in the world. You actually have to go through the stages of grief before you can come back up and begin to think about what you can do about it. So I think the people you're talking about are stuck at denial. Einstein said "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre minds." I say - When you confront the beliefs of the ignorant, the first reaction is violent denial. Can you blame them? We are finally at the point where we can no longer deny that everything has to change; that each one of us has to face this every day for the rest of our lives.

Answer 2

I don't mind ignorance, because it's easy to educate people as long as they're open-minded.

What I do mind are the other things you mentioned - mostly misinformation and willful ignorance. There's not much worse than someone who is completely wrong about an issue and is convinced that he's completely right. Some people think that being sure about something makes you right. They'll say "scientists are only 90% sure that humans are causing global warming but I'm 100% sure we're not", as though being 10% more sure makes them right.

The only thing worse is the people who spread misinformation. Those who say that most scientists think the current global warming is a natural cycle/caused by the Sun, or that volcanoes emit more CO2 than humans have in 5 bazillion years, or that all the planets in our solar system are warming. These sorts of things spread like a virus because people want to believe they're true. They never cite a source and you wonder where they got the misinformation, then the next day you see someone else saying the same thing, and it's hard to keep up with it and correct it all.

But it is important to make sure the correct information is presented, and presented in a way such that people can easily tell which information is correct (i.e. with evidence presented and sources cited). And I know I'm always learning stuff along the way from the other regulars like Trevor, who know their stuff and always cite their sources so I can check the information myself.

Answer 3

Whoa, it is eworld Amy, I don't like to think this bothers you. The people who ask questions are just people off the street, yes it is sometimes frustrating to see another 'paper or plastic bag' question but we personally can chose not to answer them.

As to the 'politics' well that happens everywhere, people have differing views. That is good we need to learn from each other. We don't have to take part in heated 'debates' if we don't want to get involved. It is only natural that we chose our online friends who have similiar views to us. Having said that I am a massive fan of some of the 'opposition'. Answers would just not be the same without Mr Jello, lol.

Yes I agree too that we get silly questions, but don't they make you laugh? I love it when the section goes stir crazy, even plastic bag questions are more tolerable then. Answers is my way of relaxing, answering a few questions, chatting to online friends and I am always excited by the new learning, I celebrate it and love it hope you can do so again too.

Answer 4

The magnitude of the public that prefers lies to uneasy truths and so find excuses not to respond to Natures plight or become responsible with our Natural resources,the effects of which will eventually come back to us humans,is the most alarming of all.

As if being absolved from blame is the real issue.And it is not .

Apart from that i agree it becomes tedious when the same silly questions are asked over and over again ,day after day.

One only has to check questions asked to prevent asking again =global warming is a scam?

And still people like Bob can find the patience to sensibly respond to this ,if i had a hat i would tip it ,on the other hand if i had a hammer i would ...bleep bleep--etc.

Answer 5

You ain't the only one lady!

It has been a while since I bothered to answer enough questions to be a "Top Contributor" because too many askers have preconceived ideas and are just phishing for people to agree with them (which is true of both sides I'm finding).

I don't think the Yahoo staff has come up with a permanent solution to it with their reporting system, but at least they are trying. I don't think they expected their product to develop I-net communities within it, they are still scratching their heads.

The drawbacks of free speech. Just use the tools available to you: the redline and the reporting system. And choose the questions you answer wisely, you already have a grasp on the patterns, I'm sure you'll come up with your own system.

Answer 6

Well, here's some proof that you're right.

"Most climatologist believe that the present global warming trend is a natural occurrence."

And here's some proof that that statement is wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

"The fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists. I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

NASA's Gavin Schmidt

uga-danny - No, scientists know it's mostly man made right now.

You seem like a smart guy. Head to a college library and look up this:

Meehl, G.A., W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym and C. Tebaldi (2004). "Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate". Journal of Climate 17: 3721-3727

It's summarized at:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

but that is not enough to be truly convincing.

Then spend some time downloading and reading this:

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch02.pdf

(you'll need Adobe Acrobat, free download)

And you'll know why this guy says:

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

Answer 7

I think the people who answer the GW questions are concerned about it. Some handle their worries with sarcasm and denial. The fact that they are "tuning in" says something. I know teachers and people with Masters Degrees who refuse to read newspapers because they find them depressing.................. At least there are people educating and informing us with what they know. I take comfort from the educated people who have hope.

Answer 8

Yep, it pisses me off too. But since folks won't be around to see the world get torn apart by global warming, they aren't so worried about it. Most people are focusing on the now, nuclear threats and stuff. We are too materialistic to make the change to help our planet, we want our pretty cars and sparkly toys. I'd give it all up though, I think a lot of folks would. But nobodys going to make that move yet.

Answer 9

bob,
we can play this game all day. It will be long time before anyone knows if global warming is man made or not, not even an environmental scientist with an advanced degree:)

"Geophysicist Dr. Claude Allegre, ....., converted from climate alarmist to skeptic in 2006. Allegre, who was one of the first scientists to sound global warming fears 20 years ago, now says the cause of climate change is "unknown" and accused the “prophets of doom of global warming” of being motivated by money, noting that "the ecology of helpless protesting has become a very lucrative business for some people!"

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=927b9303-802a-23ad-494b-dccb00b51a12
here's another site for you to check out bob, do you believe it?
http://www.elvis-is-alive.com/

-----
haha, I partially agree with shawn's answer because it's true. It's such a hot issue because no one really knows if global warming is human induced or not. Most climatologist think it's a natural occurrence.
I personally believe it's a mixture of both:

What upsets me the most, is when people make assumptions based strictly on numbers, e.g., temperature.

stuck my foot in my mouth. i guess i shouldn't believe my meteorologist friend anymore:)

Answer 10

Its not really that bad. The idiots come here to spout their pseudo-theories about global warming not existing or whatever because if they said this stuff anywhere else,, all they'd get is laughed at.

Here, they can kid themselves that everyone takes themseriously--they don't realize they are being laughed here too. LOL