Aren't deniers of Global Warming like deniers of the Holocaust?

Question

Discuss.

Focus. Lots of name calling, lots of methane and heat without light. Stick to the topic, please. It would be easy to descend to your level and call names, but I refuse to take the low road. Focus.

Answer 1

The Bush Administration Continues to Muzzle Climate Science

On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino responded to reports that the White House "eviscerated" Center for Disease Control director Dr. Julie Gerberding's Senate testimony on the "Human Impacts of Global Warming."

Dr. Julie Gerberding, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, testified before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on the “Human Impacts of Global Warming.” Gerberding told the committee that global warming “is anticipated to have a broad range of impacts on the health of Americans,” but gave few specifics, instead focusing on CDC’s current preparation plans.

CDC officials are now revealing that the White House heavily edited Gerberding’s testimony, which originally was longer and had more “information on health risks“:

“It was eviscerated,” said a CDC official, familiar with both versions, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the review process.

The official said that while it is customary for testimony to be changed in a White House review, these changes were particularly “heavy-handed,” with the document cut from its original 14 pages to four. It was six pages as presented to the Senate committee.

She claimed that "the decision" was "to focus that testimony on public health benefits" of climate change. "There are public health benefits to climate change," asserted Perino, as it "would help those individuals" who "die from cold-related deaths every winter." But the negative "health impacts of climate change are potentially huge," outweighing the "benefits." "Many of the most important global killers are highly sensitive to climatic conditions. Malaria, diarrhea and protein-energy malnutrition together cause more than 3 million deaths each year," notes the World Health Organization. In fact, in the unredacted version of Gerberding's testimony, the only mention of "public health benefits" related to climate change are a result of "activities needed to protect Americans from the health effects of climate change."

“Public health benefits.” Seriously. The White House touched up the director of the CDC’s Senate testimony, coincidentally taking out the information the Bush gang finds politically inconvenient, and the president’s press secretary is left talking about the silver lining of global warming.

Too bad she didn’t get into specifics; I’d love to know what these “public health benefits” might be. Less hypothermia? Fewer instances of frostbite? A steep decline in the number of snowball-fight-related injuries?

Lest anyone think it was a slip of the tongue, Perino referenced these benefits three times in today’s briefing.

Q: So, why wasn’t the Senate committee able to hear Dr. Gerberding’s full opinion? Why were 10 pages of 14 taken out.

PERINO: I disagree, Peter…. We believe climate change is real; we believe that humans are largely responsible; we are working on a way to solve the problem. And in the meantime, we are working with experts, like Julie Gerberding, to figure out what are going to be the health benefits and the health concerns of climate change, of which there are many.

Answer 2

I wouldn't go that far.

The Holocaust is a documented historical event. People who lived through it are still alive today, and there's really no denying the evidence when millions of people were killed.

In terms of global warming, it depends on what kind of denial you mean. If you mean people who deny that global warming is happening, then yes it's very similar because the evidence is quite obvious that it's happening. Just look at the temperature record.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/img/climate/research/2005/ann/global-blended-temp-pg.gif

On the other, hand, if you're talking about anthropogenic global warming, it's not the same. The scientific evidence supporting the anthropogenic global warming theory is overwhelming, but it's not 100% certain like the Holocaust or the fact that the planet is warming. Even the IPCC is only 90+% certain that humans are the primary cause of the current warming.

Answer 3

What HAS NOT been stressed is the fact that there is a NEW ice formation on the other side of Antarctica. Or the fact that our magnetic poles are moving.

I will admit that I don't know everything that is going on, and I am not going to sit here and try to say that I DO... But I DO know that we are not being told the FULL story.

Just like the fact that there already HAS been engines invented which run off of WATER, but the OIL Companies have the patents and then the most recent creation the guy was killed because he was going to market it.

People need to wake up and start following the money being made.

Answer 4

No, the Holocaust is a fact from the past, Global Warming is something from the future and I haven't met anyone that can predict the future. I'm not saying that it isn't going to happen, I'm just saying that people who think we are going to have it due to the humans starting it is false. It's a natural occurrence just like the Ice Age was.

Answer 5

yes..although that may be an extreme example or correlation, 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

I have yet been convinced that global warming is real. Do i think we are killing the environment, yes. but how can we say we are warming when we have only been keeping records for the last 100 years? How do we know that this isnt what happens to the water every 1,000 years? I have heard we were closer to the sun then ever, I believe a few years ago. Maybe that is what the earth does, as it rotates it moves a little closer to the sun, which would make it warmer here.

I do feel that we should do something about how we treat the environment, but this notion of global warming i think is fake. Look at the temps of that last 100 years, we havent even broken some of those records. I just dont think that we have enough data, or proof that this is real and make everyone panic about it.

Answer 7

i think of cigarettes, Bible-believers, international-Warming, and the Holocaust are all completely random unrelated issues so i'm afraid i don't completely get your question... i visit declare those issues that i think, not by using fact of any thoughts i think, yet by using fact I even have had an entire life of researcing various issues and seeing diverse data. a million: Scientists everywhere in the U.S. are admitting they had some bribery in contact with the launch of knowledge that supported international Warming, and there is limitless data against it. 2: actual, touchable, readable data exists everywhere in the earth indicating the activities that occured in the time of WW. 3: smoking has various scientific data that it motives lungs maximum cancers (as much as there is data against GW.) 4: the bible is obviously genuine, it quite is the final advertising e book of all time and it sits in maximum hotel rooms and bookstores. in case you meant real, then you somewhat atleast have some fellow critics, yet there remains additionally various historic data helping the activities recorded in the Bible, it somewhat is shown greater traditionally precise than the different historic manuscript ever stumbled on.

Answer 8

Actually, for the moment, there are enough Scientists on both sides of the issue to make this a "flip of the coin".
My issue with the "doomsayers" is NOT whether or not it is happening but whether or not we humans can positively affect GLOBAL WEATHER when obviously we have issues with just cotroling rivers (see :Corps of Engineers with rerouting the mouth of the Mississippi River so New Orelean would not flood AND the catastrophic consequences for their efforts that happened to the Texas Gulf Coast since then, i.e. beach erosion, deposits of silt, etc.)

Answer 9

No. They are more like the tobacco executives who denied for thirty years that cigarette smoking causes cancer. There may also be some global warmer deniers who are not denying because of industry ties and money, but actually because they don't believe the science. Though wrong they may actually be sincere in there beliefs.

Answer 10

No, idiot --- As a grandchild of someone with a number on his arm, just believe me.

There is empirical evidence to the WWII Holocaust. There were statements by the NAZI, there are receipts of the Zeklon from Bayer, there are photographs from the British and 3rd Army --- and then there are the people --- people like the guards who admitted what they did and people like my grandfather who was there.

As to "Global Warming" can you define it? Did your mommy ever read you the story of chicken little?
Can you do the mathematics in even a simple climate model?
Can you tell anyone exactly how long accurate temperature readings have been taking in history?
Can you tell this board the effects of solar activity on the Earth's climate?

All organism leave pollution --- all organism leave "pollution" be it faeces, a broken branch, an overturned rock, or a carcass of a meal. --- Human do this too.

If you cannot say that there is clearer air and water in Europe and the US since WWII --- you know nothing.

Get an education before you display your ignorance again.

Answer 11

There are similarities and differences. Both deny reality. The difference is that Holocaust deniers deny it because they are bigoted racists. They know it happened, but want others not to know.

Global Warming deniers deny it because they have a vested interest in those industries which contribute to global warming or to the political party controlled by those interests. They know it is happening, but want others not to know it.

The first group is controlled by ignorant, the second is controlled by greed.