Why do GW deniers have to resort conspiracy theories to reject the scientific consensus?

Question

All the well established scientific organizations involved in geologic, climate, and meteorologic research support man made global warming.

Their argument usually goes like this:

1) All these scientists are purposely lying because they are socialists and trying to destroy capitalism.

2) All these scientists are purposely lying because they are capitalists and want more grant money.

They are both ridiculous but let me address the 2nd one.

Bush and the Republican Congress had been running the government for the longest time (prior to 2006 when Dems took congress). Even then, government scientists like James Hansen from NASA have been supporting it.

TOP NASA SCIENTISTS SAYS BUSH ADMINISTRATION TRYING TO SILENCE SCIENTISTS

http://www.abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1555183

If scientists were just in it for the money, they would have recieved more grant money by pushing for studies to reject man made global warming.

Answer 1

The true science says that it is the Sun that is causing most of the recent warming that we have been hearing about.

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is only accountable for less than 5% of greenhouse gases and we only make about 5% of that. (About 90-95% of Greenhouse Gases is Water Vapor)

The reason for increased CO2 is because as the oceans become heated, they cannot hold as much as they could if they were cooler, so the oceans release the excess into the atmosphere. From what I hear, the oceans can hold many times more energy and heat then the air. This meaning that the atmosphere should have very little effect on the oceans and that the sun or perhaps the Earth itself is heating up the surface since those are two of the only things that could heat our vast oceans.

Also, the Earth hasn’t warmed in nearly a decade but has actually fallen and it has fallen greatly within the past 2 years. Many scientists believe we are about to go through another little ice age.

http://www.dailytech.com/Solar+Activity+...

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20060825/531436...

Many scientists are skeptical about Anthropogenic Global Warming.

These are some resources:

http://sepp.org/policy%20declarations/he...

http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/Ar...



Al Gore had a chart in his movie "An Inconvenient Truth" that showed the similarities of Carbon Dioxide and temperature. The thing that he doesn't tell you is that there is a gap in which the temperature rises before the CO2 which should be the exact opposite if his theory is correct. Watch “The Great Global Warming Swindle”

Polar bears are NOT being endangered but actually the exact opposite.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/north/story/200...

That is my point of view on the issue and I strongly encourage you to watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle" (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=... all the way through even if you don't want to. It is a great source of information and if you want to know the truth, you need to see both sides of the story.

Another great resource is http://z4.invisionfree.com/Popular_Techn...

Answer 2

Just to start, I would like to say that I do believe global warming is happening, also I do believe that human contribution has played a roll in the release of C02 gases. I also believe that C02 gases are strongly correlated with the temperature of the earth.

I would like to point out what most credible people , who are arguing against global warming, are stating:

1) There is not enough data to prove that this is not a natural occurrence in the earth's cycle.

This is true, in the 4.5 Billion years the earth has been around it is hard to talk about what has and has not happened.

2) That the human contribution is minimal if not insignificant in the contribution. This is again hard to tell what affects humans have on the environment and that can effectively claim this since clear objective evidence on a scientific experiment would require many trials with controls which we do not have the luxury of testing.

4) The effects of global warming is not clear. This is some what true, it seems like many climate event is now being suggested as a result of global warming.

3) Our ability to change the environment is not going to work. This one is quite weak, however, it is hard to determine what is needed to revert the damages that we have caused, along with the natural warming of the earth.

This being said, I think the other point that needs to be more clear is that the risks we take in not taking action would be very costly on a global scale.

If the Americans are willing to go into Iraq on some half fabricated link to a war on terrorism they should definitely be willing to take action against Global Warming.

The biggest barrier, in my opinion, is in our economic competitiveness we see global warming as a responsibility (liability) where more people need to see it as an opportunity. If more people saw the advantages of taking a risk in creating a business that were to solve this "pain/need" we would have more investing in convincing people of changing their habits.

The thing is that the easiest way is to start would be to reduce production/consumption and to businesses that sounds like suicide.

This is not always true - for a good example read "A Geography of Hope"

Answer 3

its a fraud - a means of economic (wealth) redistribution -

Answer 4

Because the scientific evidence supporting AGW is overwhelming.  This is what the scientific consensus is based on - if the evidence weren't overwhelming, it wouldn't be possible to form a scientific consensus.  It's not easy to get scientists to agree.

Because they can't dispute the science, global warming denial is becoming no more than a conspiracy theory, akin to claiming that the government is holding aliens at Area 51.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Answer 5

Why do GW proponents have to resort to the language of religion in an attempt to discredit those who are skeptical of the hypothesis?

Answer 6

You have some really, really good answers here...  Simply put, if global warming or global cooling....  whatever flavor of the day crisis mongers wish to adhere to, if it were so well established and well proven, there simply wouldn't be ANY need for Gore or any of his other people to lie about it.  

As far as Bush punishing scientists???  That is totally not true!  Bush loves it when liberals speak!  That is what got him elected for the second term and I saw those annoying billboards in Los Angeles from the Republican party that thanked the likes of Whoopi and many others for their contribution to his re-election.

The only conspiracy is global warming enthusiasts trying to extract tax dollars.  However, with all jobs gone, production exported to China, then who will foot the bill after that?  Definitely not the 'enthusiasts.'

Answer 7

Watch the great global warming swindle, i bet most of you global warming junkies haven't because you're frightened it might actually make sense.

Answer 8

Because the scientific data shows all their other arguments are nonsense.  Take the "It's the Sun" nonsense.  Refuted here:

"Recent oppositely directed trends in solar

climate forcings and the global mean surface

air temperature", Lockwood and Frolich (2007), Proc. R. Soc. A

doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1880

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/pro...

News article at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.st...

Answer 9

Because the scientific consensus is that the sun drives Earth's temperature changes.

Some scientists get their grant money by supporting the conclusions desired by the grant-payers.  So, they ignore the facts listed below and form a 'consensus', rather like n**i scientists formed a 'consensus' regarding the superiority of the Aryan race.

What fools ye be to trust in 'consensus' when the truth-speakers may be the silenced minority.

Answer 10

WHAT SCIENTIFIC CONSENSES??

AGW is real, then why do we see exagerated reports, cherry picking data, etc.

And to use ABC as a source?? That's rich. Next you'll be telling us, "The only true reality is media reality."