If AGW is just another fear-mongering tactic of the left, can someone please give me an example of another . .

Question

fear mongering attempt, one that had a scientific consensus like AGW?

So obviously then you can't say global cooling of the 1970's (no scientific consensus--see below link), can't say Y2K (no consensus among computer experts), can't say cultic predictions of the end of the world (obviously no scientific background at all), etc. etc.

And if you disagree with me about its consensus status, send me links that prove me wrong. Newsweek columns obviously don't count. I want scientific data that proves a consensus. If you can't give me one I'll assume you don't know what you're talking about, thanks for strengthening my point.

70's 'consensus' a lie: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/environment/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm

scientists were more worried about global warming then, in fact, more than SIX TIMES as much.

Answer 1

Like Dana said, the hole in the ozone layer.  Even though we have fazed it out, it has not changed, and a couple of years ago it showed up bigger than ever.

The fact that is keeps changing sizes means that there is another factor at work.  If the theory was true we should be seeing a trend to a reduction.

I remember in the 80's I saw an interview were a specialists talked about the ozone hole.  He said that they still were not sure if CFC's were at fault because the hole keeps moving, and changing sizes.

But to those who says it is a fact, I suggest you do some research and find out when does a theory become fact.

The 70's cooling scare would have become scientific consensus given enough time.  But as soon the theory started to take off, the earth started to cool.  

Even the National Academy of Sciences supported the theory.  At the same time they also said that co2 might cause warming.  They then issued a statement to the government for money to research the problem.

Do you really think also that these organizations can announce to the public, that they were mistaken, and that global warming is not a threat, and not loose any credibility?  I do not.

Answer 2

Where to start?

Let's start with the one most deadly to the poor

DDT - Fear mongering caused the death of millions of poor people around the world. Finally, in the last few years, they are allowing limited spraying.

Asbestos - Yes it causes lung cancer, but not unless it is disturbed. Billions spent on removing asbestos to levels lower than found in nature (yes asbestos is a natural substance. Romans used it woven into tablecloths over 2,000 years ago.

Alar - No scientific evidence to warrant removal from shelf.

There are many others. I suggest you read "But Is It True?" by Aaron Wildavsky.

Y2K was a scare. I worked for a company which spent millions to alleviate the perceived threat. My wife was a project manager at the time and her sole job was to prepare for the "disaster".

ANd the biggest, most expensive lie - AGW.

Answer 3

nuclear winter

Answer 4

Very good question.  I'm pretty sure the '70's global cooling scare is all they've got, but I'd like to see if anyone comes up with anything.

Answer 5

I bet someone will bring up the hole in the ozone layer, except that was a real problem which we solved by phasing-out CFCs with the Montreal Protocol.  Same thing with acid rain and the various Clean Air Acts.

'Skeptics' seem to think that if we were able to solve a problem, it must have just been fear-mongering.

Answer 6

The evil secondhand cigarette smoke

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/se...

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statisti...

http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvL...

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/secon...

"There is no safe amount of secondhand smoke. Children, pregnant women, older people and people with heart or breathing problems should be especially careful."

Yet...there are perfectly acceptable levels of mercury, lead, PCBs, PaHs, Dioxins...and rat droppings people can ingest.

http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/dalbook.htm...

Apparently it's perfectly ok for dental fillings to contain 50% mercury...

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/na...

Edit:  Two others - SARS and (mutant) Avian Bird Flu.

Answer 7

Y2K was promoted as a coming disaster far more by the religious right than by any liberals.  James Dobson's Focus on the Family radio program was the first place I heard one of those scaremongers.  There were countless church meetings in my area on survival planning, etc.

Whenever the government would put out a report stating Y2K was under control and wouldn't cause any serious disruptions, the scaremongers would say things like "you can't trust the government...".  I'm always amused when todays AGW doubters make the same types of statements about not trusting government scientists :-)

Answer 8

Well! Every time someone posts a link, you discredit it as a "right wing" web-site. The same can be said of your links. Many believe they are "left wing" web-sites. SO where is the truth? I would say somewhere in the middle.

So there is no answer that you would be comfortable with just as your "Global Warming Theory" is not comfortable to the right!

Answer 9

Geographers used to teach that the world was flat.  Nobody believed otherwise...it was foolhardy to do so.  Sailors stayed within sight of shore so that they wouldn't venture too far and fall over the edge.  Though falling off the side of the earth wouldn't be as costly as the assumed dangers of global warming, the belief in it was every bit as real, and the results the same...it just never happened.