What similaries do Y2K fearmongers and AGW doubters have?

Question

I spent over 2 years and countless hours in the late 90's trying to convince people that Y2K would NOT be a serious problem. That, while real, it had been adequately addressed and overblown by people writing outside of their actual areas of expertise.

I see a lot of misinformation today, as well, coming from non-Climate scientists writing outside of their areas of expertise. Few non-scientists (and even many scientist in other fields) have sufficient time and background to properly separate the wheat from the chaff.

I also see in todays "AGW isn't real" crowd an unreasonable level of mistrust toward the government (or anyone associated with it, including NOAA, NASA, EPA, IPCC) similar to what I saw in the "Y2K will destroy society" crowd back in the 90's.

Have others identified similarities between these groups?

Answer 1

Many people didn't understand Y2K.  While it was certainly a big problem, we also put a lot of effort into fixing the computer code.  People were afraid that airplanes were going to fall out of the sky, nuclear missiles were going to be launched, etc. etc., and these were completely unjustified fears based on ignorance.

The reaction of those people now is 'I was scared of Y2K, nothing came of it, so it must have been a big hoax!'.  They don't understand that Y2K was a problem, and while some people (not scientists) blew it out of proportion, we put a lot of effort into solving it.  The fact that we solved the problem doesn't mean it never existed.  The same is true of acid rain, the hole in the ozone layer, and the '1970s impending ice age' predictions.  These were all problems which we solved.  The fact that we solved them doesn't mean they were never problems.

The same is true of global warming.  People display the same lack of understanding as they did with Y2K.  Some people think global warming is going to destroy the Earth or that it's going to kill everyone by 2012, other people think it's not a problem because we addressed these similar issues (acid rain, hole in the ozone layer, Y2K), so they've concluded that all such problems must be hoaxes.

The main similarity between Y2K fearmongers and AGW deniers is that in both cases they're ignoring the scientific experts.  In both cases the scientists are saying these are problems, but we're capable of solving them.  In both cases there was little time to fix the problem, but in the case of Y2K, the public perception had nothing to do with the solution to the problem.  In the case of global warming, unfortunately that's not the case.

Answer 2

There is a clear parallel between the "professional" skeptics like Lindzen, Ball, Singer, and the rest and the Tobacco industry's stable of kept scientists in the 50's and 60's.  In fact, some of them are the same people.  

FUD works if the message is what people want to hear.

As Firesign Theater said:  "The people, give them a light, and they'll follow it anywhere."

Answer 3

I couldn't have said it better than Dana.

I think you've pointed out the main thing: people trying to talk about things they don't understand.

I think a better analogy may be between AGW doubters and evolution deniers. In my years of battling creationists, I've learned that there is almost no amount of rationality that will make these people change their minds.

Answer 4

some people are really scared senseless of the future

Answer 5

I'm not a scientist.

But if a little fear inspires a little change, I don't see any problem with that.

Believing in Global Warming and taking precautions to prevent it isn't a negative process. If it doesn't save the world, then it'll make it a better place for us to live. But if we have the possibility of preventing our world from becoming unlivable, I don't see why we wouldn't.

Answer 6

those are pretty generalized statements

Answer 7

As you can see most AGW believers on this forum agree with you completely, except for the part about Y2K being overblown.

Most AGW sceptics on this forum will agree with you that Y2K was overblown.

Answer 8

Sorry to burst your bubble.  Y2K was seriously overblown.  Russia and other 3rd world countries spent very little resources on this issue and nothing happened.

The US overspent on Y2K because of fear of lawsuits.  

The claims of Y2K were much like the claims of global warming.  People actually believed that planes would drop out of the sky at the stroke of midnight.  This would never happen even nothing was done about Y2k, just like the seas will never rise 50 feet even if everyone starts driving SUV's.

Global warming is just like Y2K.  Too many exaggerated claims that will never happen no matter how much time and resources we devote to the problem.

Answer 9

Umm... Aren't they opposites?