Are Global Warming Denialists Feeling the Heat?

Question

Even the guests the right wing talkies bring on their shows are starting to admit there is anthropogenic GW. Now they have switched their tune to saying "ya, humans are doing it but there's nothing anyone can do about it". I even heard a guy on Glenn Beck the other day who said GW would be good for the economy.

At what point will people cave in?

People constantly cite what they think are errors in Al Gore's movie, yet they ignore the fact that the overall message of the movie, that anthropogenic GW is happening, was not in dispute. What is it with republicans and their obsession with bashing science?

Jmaximus. The debate is over. Half the debate? This is as absurd as saying there is still a debate about whether evolution is true. There's not. In any realm of inquiry you can find someone who calls themselves a scientist who disagrees with the mainstream, but that does not mean there is a debate raging on, nor does it mean I should attribute "half of the debate" to a tiny fraction of naysayers.

Answer 1

At what point will they cave in? When their homes in Kansas are ocean-front, probably.

It's a matter of pride. The issue was identified and voiced by the left from the get-go, so admitting to it feels like embracing the left to them. Since they would rather gnaw their own arms off rather than embrace the left, they will keep parroting pseudo-science and denials.

Answer 2

2 big problems with your question, aaronesque. 1) you posted it in the political section, which is half the problem, and what the global warming alarmists like to do- politicize a science issue. 2) you say at what point will people "Cave in"? meaning, finally just accept what YOU believe? well, you can keep saying something over and over, but it doesnt necessarily make it true!

for those who say that the "Deniers are ignored", or that the "Debate is over" about AGW, that is as close minded as those on the right who say "There is only 1 religion". there is ALWAYS a debate about AGW, and as someone who supposedly supports science, Aaronesque, you should know this! there is ALWAYS debate with science. that is the whole purpose of RESEARCH- to support or reject hypotheses. as a fan of science, i consider the data from BOTH sides. and in THIS issue, there is JUST AS MUCH, if not more, research to show that AGW does not exist, as there is to show that it does. One of the fundamental principles of AGW is flawed- meteorological science shows that rises in CO2 level come AFTER rises in temperature. so how can rises in CO2 be driving the temps higher? Simply put, it can't.

the debate and data is far to expansive and vast to put into words here. i suggest you think for yourself. the fact that you are so willing to prop up "Science", and then outright REJECT half of the debate is shocking to me. it makes me think you really dont use, believe, or respect science yourself.

Answer 3

It's funny to see how the global warming denier argument has evolved over the past few years.

It started out as "there is no global warming".
Then "humans are not causing the warming".
Then "the warming might be good for us".
Now it's generally "the warming is bad, but we should let the market control greenhouse gas emissions. People will demand reductions and the market will react accordingly. We need to keep government regulation out of it".

We've gotten to the point where few people deny anthropogenic global warming. Even Creationist Republican presidential nominees Huckabee and (former nominee) Brownback have acknowledged that humans are to blame:

"Huckabee and Brownback call for strong actions to ease the effects of people on the climate.

The debate among the Republican presidential nominees is largely not about whether people are warming the planet, but about how to deal with it."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/17/us/politics/17climate.html?_r=2&th&emc=th&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Apparently the evidence for anthropogenic global warming is more convincing than evidence for evolution! I think very shortly it will be viewed as crazy/stupid to deny that humans are the primary cause of the current warming. Soon the battle will become entirely about what we need to do to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Conservatives will try and use the "volunteerism" free market approach while liberals try to use government regulation.

Answer 4

I just saw an interesting show on Discovery or History Channel about the small ice age. Question: If it is acknowledged that the sun's temporary weakness caused this global cooling and it ended when the sun strengthened, why is the fact that the sun is stronger now (high activity of sun spots) in fact so much so that it is also affecting ice caps on Mars, not the cause of Global Warming on earth? The question is not whether or not warming is occurring but if it is even a significant amount or only noticeable due to the fact that we have much greater ability to measure such things today.

How can anyone compare measurements as crude as tree rings or ice core samples with fine computer controlled instruments that can detect fractions of degree variation?

.

Answer 5

yes..It amazes me-that people get mixed up on semantics and then deny the whole premise. Its not so much man-made as it is man-encouraged. The earth is overall, trending towards a warmer-wetter climate like that of earth about 100 million years ago during the Cretaceous period. The problem is is that it is beginning to accelerate beyond what ourselves and other life forms can adapt to, we are falling out of sync with the planet. You can not honestly tell me that stripping Rain Forests of trees that clean CO2 and make O2 while simultaneously spewing pollutants, fossil fuels and CO2 into our atmosphere does not come with consequences. There are always consequences to our actions. The thing is, is that it is becoming more apparent and all of those on here denying it will see it in their life time, there will be drastic changes over the next 20 years and even they will be unable to deny it.

Answer 6

Earths temp has gone up and down a lot over the past several hundred million years. Means nothing. Gore is a pest, an alarmist, and a tool. Even if the planet is a little warmer, it'll fix itself.

Funny how this question is coming in a warm fall. Anyone else remember last year when a conferance in NY (I believe) on Global Warming was postponed due to extreme cold and snow?..........Hmmmmmm

Answer 7

I'll say this much: strong proponents of GW oversell their beliefs, and lace them with fear-mongering to promote their agenda. That's one problem I have with them. The other is that they care little for the fact that if humanity is to address this, it's going to cost world economies some productivity. The second issue is most important. Don't ever convince yourself that conservatives wouldn't adopt environmentally friendly ideas if they lead to profits.

Kyoto's only fault was that it didn't penalize some up and coming economies. If the world takes the problem head on, we can all progress at a slower pace and be content with helping the planet. I don't like the idea of a worldwide protocol that seemingly punishes the US. It would give China and India a chance at overtaking our economies.

The simple fact that CO2 traps heat, and man-made activities create a lot of CO2 is irrefutable. What I'd like to know is what % of climate change is attributable to this, and is it going to absolutely be detrimental and irreversible? Climate science is a huge undertaking, and it's still in its infancy. I reserve my judgment, lest I be called Chicken Little.

Answer 8

Because we have reached the point in the issue where people will begin to conform with the majority of propaganda they are exposed to. If a person is surrounded by global warming believers, by natural psychology, they will start to agree with it unless they have their own mind. If a person is surrounded by global warming deniers, the same is true.

If someone has their own mind and hopefully sticks with scientific method, they will realize that most people (including many scientists) are idiots and that they should carefully weigh the evidence and wait until more conclusive facts are confirmed.

Answer 9

Science? Really? Go back and study science, put any of your so-called GW "science" to the scientific method, and then come back and post that. Most of us agree that maybe the world is warmer, so what. No one can conclusively prove that it is man made, nor that it will lead to catastrophe. But, don't let facts get in the way of your opinion.

Answer 10

there are a few idiotic statements in your little hissy fit here...republicans do not 'bash' science, none i know of are 'switching their tune', and AGW is most definitely still IN DISPUTE although al gore and his media do not let you know this. why, for example, does mr. gore REFUSE to debate the issue publicly with those who say he is misleading the world on this issue? hmmm? very prominent and eminent scientists from several organizations and nations have challenged gore to defend his lies and he 'conveniently' denies them all. what does this tell you? nothing much probably...you have YOUR mind made up, but those of us who doubt the science behind gores hoax do not get the forum or the opportunity to put this to a global debate. why not if this is such an important problem for the world, why does the world not get to discuss it together? and just for your information, there is almost no one out there who denies that the climate is changing, it's just that after eight years of clinton/gore lies, deceit, fraud, manipulation and felonious behavior, you can hardly blame anyone for not running out to immediately purchase a yugo and a yurt based on information presented by them or anyone associated with them.

now go back to your kool-aid...it must be getting warm by now...