Why do people claim that a 0.7°C global warming is unimportant?

Question

Recently I've seen several people say that the planet has warmed less than 1°C over the last century, so global warming is nothing to worry about.

1°C may sound small, but the planet only cooled about 0.4°C from the Midieval Warm Period to the Little Ice Age, and it took 600 years to do it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

We've warmed 0.4°C in the last 30 years alone!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

How can anyone argue that this global temperature change is unimportant, particularly in such a short time frame?

Answer 1

Because you have to really spell out what that temperature means in a context they can understand.

To give you an example, if the temperature changed by 1°C would it mean that the salmon no longer spawned? You give the example of cooling of about 0.4°C from Medieval Warm Period to the Little Ice Age and that it was over 600 year time period, but to many people what does that REALLY mean?

People find understanding time scales and 'big' numbers difficult to comprehend. It is no good saying In the last 18,000 years the world has warmed by 9°C. For many it is hard enough to comprehend that 1°C rise would mean a 10% global loss in grain production?????? how much grain is that? Ok so it would affect people in developing countries who already have food shortages, but what would that mean to developed countries?????

What are the likely consequences of 0.4°C warming? Even more risk of frequent flooding, increased drought and lessening potable water? Cereal crop yields decreasing in low latitudes? Changes in insect populations in some places? Sea levels rising? Coastal flooding?

Spell it out, put it into a real context, explain the numbers and what they are likely to mean. Maybe then people may realize that Global warming IS happening and really IS something to worry about.

EDIT:
Grizz: Correct 'they don't realize how much energy it takes to raise the temperature 1degC or that it takes 80X more to melt ice'. BUT you do. So explain it. Do an idiot's guide put it in context for people so they can understand, compare it to a kettle, whatever. Explain the numbers so that people do understand what a raise in 1°C means and how it relates to melting ice. What difference it can make in context of their lives, in the Western World.

Answer 2

First, so far global warming has been nothing but positive. The increased atmospheric CO2 is plant food causing the planet to green and agricultural production to increase. Is it possible global warming could cause problems later? It is possible, but the chances are very slim.

Second, the amount of warming the IPCC talks about comes from the Climatic Research Unit of University of East Anglia and Phil Jones. Jones does not conduct real science in that he does not release his data, methods and source code. When a researcher pretends he is doing science but contravenes the scientific standard of testability, it is pseudoscience. The IPCC's conclusions are based on pseudoscience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_sharing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

Third, researchers are finally putting the claims of Jones and the CRU to the test. Anthony Watts is leading an effort to photograph and document the quality of weather stations in the GHCN. He started in the US and now about 1/3 of the US stations have been photographed and graded from CRN1 to CRN5. Only 15% meet CRN1 or CRN2, the acceptable levels for a quality station. 85% of stations are poorly sited and have a warm bias. Some of them are even on top of parking lots! This artificial warming bias exaggerates the true warming by about double. In other words, the globe has probably warmed about half as much as the IPCC says.
http://surfacestations.org
http://gallery.surfacestations.org/UCAR-slides/index.html

Fourth, the alarmists, Gore included, drastically overstates the rate of sea level rise.

The reasons go on and on but I am out of time. I suggest you do a little reading in the links I provided. You might also want to check out:
http://climatesci.colorado.edu
http://climateaudit.org

Answer 3

Because your saying it in Celsius!!! Obviously people aren't going to take decimals of anything seriously! With Fahrenheit you start getting into whole numbers.

Ha ha, just kidding.
People just know what a change of 0.7 degrees feels like, in their homes for example. The human body isn't sensitive to it, so they assume nothing is.

Answer 4

From the peak of the medieval warm period to the bottom of the LIA, the planet cooled over 0.7° C.

From 1910 to 1940 the planet warmed 0.45° C., is that thirty year period any less phenomenal than the last thirty years?

And is a globally averaged surface temperature compared to a proxy dataset, a legitimate metric to evaluate Earths climate by? Averaging high/low temperature readings from selected surface locations, and combining them with some type of adjustment applied is not the same as a proxy dataset. From a statistical point of view averaging northern hemisphere and southern hemisphere temperatures to derive a single value defined as a globaly averaged temperature seems fraught with problems. Has that procedure passed peer review?

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-Spencer-on-global-warming.htm
.
.

Answer 5

Small temperature changes like that are certainly more beneficial than they are harmful. You should stop focusing on tiny islands and the Artic and view the world as a whole. So it is 30 below in the Artic instead of 35 below. It is still cold. So it is 101 in Egypt instead of a hundred, so what. So the growing season in Canada is a few days longer on average. For everything there are benefits and costs. First man didn't cause all the warming. Second, the warming is mostly good and Third, there is very little that can be done to reverse it and no good reason to.

Answer 6

Cause its not important to them and dont care or understand the consequences of our global warming but 1 day they will see the need to be concerned and cut down on pollution if its not to late already

Answer 7

Because they don't realize how much energy it takes to raise the temperature 1degC or that it takes 80X more to melt ice. I have answered this question so many times it disappoints me that you are phishing for people to agree with you. You are using the same tactics as the deniers. I thought that was beneath you.

Answer 8

Global warming is important to me but some people rather be peace bout it than being affraid. This this is going to happened and their is not much to do about it.

Answer 9

How exactly did it hurt you over the last 30 years?

Answer 10

the fact is that how do you measure this small change? the earth' temperature is average one and not absolute.