Why do people continue to believe that global warming is not a real worldwide problem?

Question

It's obvious that we're emitting way too much carbon into the air, cutting down too many oxygen-producing, and killing off wildlife. Why can't people understand that we need to alter our way of life to ensure that all living things live comfortably? Is it so hard to ask that people walk every now and then instead of driving or take the time to throw a plastic bottle in the recycling bin, not in the garbage can?

Answer 1

Yes please give me your "informed" version of how CO2 works. You do not understand the science behind the diatribe.

Yes, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, but it is completely dwarfed by water vapor. Water vapor makes up about 95% of the greenhouse gases, CO2 about 4%. Of the 4% which CO2 contributes, we are responsible for about 37% of 4%, or .0148% of all greenhouse gases. It is not enough to drive the climate.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenh...

Also, as CO2 (think plant food) increases in the atmosphere, it's effect is reduced. So doubling CO2 will not result in a doubling of its effectiveness as a greenhouse gas. Eventually, adding additional CO2 will have zero effect on climate, but, the plants will love it. The following link deals more with the true cliamate driver, the sun, but on page 22, you will see the effects of increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

http://www.warwickhughes.com/agri/Solar_...

So, maybe you should revisit the 8th grade science class where they deal with the cycle of life. It is really interesting. You should study it.

Answer 2

I agree, but in America its all about what the people want, and people want luxery. The people on this planet act like a spoiled lil child, I WANT I WANT I WANT. I dont know what ever happened to caring about nature and the circle of life. The Indians lived that way but we dont all wanna live in tents now do we?There are just to many people saying I WANT. And not enough people with that caring heart saying, I WANT TO HELP.  

I think what it comes down to is the over population of this planet. In the future there wont be enough for everyone, food, fuel, everything. With the global warming making it flood in some places and dry out in others, we are lookin forward for some hard times.

ps i want to add that i cant stand people that say global climate change isn't happening. People are dieing because their crops are not growing, the rains havent come, they went and flooded somewhere else. and I for one live on the gulf coast and the hurricanes are getting worst and worst. Natural disasters are going to go crazy, mother earth is going to hit back. and when it finally dose in their area, maybe then they will see.

(non belivers wont get any pity from me, I told you so)

Answer 3

First of all, nothing appears different where most people live.

Second, most of the damage was done like 100 years before anyone alive now was born...  there isn't much we can change about our lifestyles.  We cant start destroying houses and letting nature restore itself (believe me, I would, I love the idea of reforestation, but it is unlikely we will forfeit living space for that).

Answer 4

Actually, the denial is here in the U.S. You won't find it anywhere else. Our denial is a result of profligacy. Just look at the size of vehicles you encounter on the road and some of the houses people live in. It's mind boggling to think of the waste our country generates, in energy and refuse.

EDIT - Joe says a lot, but doesn't back it up. As the old say goes..."c**p or get off the pot!"

EDIT - Sloegin Fizz, if you are going to reference NOAA data, you really shouldn't misrepresent their numbers! The actual data is below with an actual link. And, if you want to appear credible, try not referencing a British tabloid article.

Ice cover from NOAA...

January 1998: 14.8 million sq km

January 1999: 14.5 million sq km

January 2000: 14.4 million sq km

January 2001: 14.3 million sq km

January 2002: 14.4 million sq km

January 2003: 14.5 million sq km

January 2004: 14 million sq km

January 2005: 13.7 million sq km

January 2006: 13.6 million sq km

January 2007: 13.8 million sq km

October 2007: 6.8 million sq km

January 2008: 14 million sq km (just like Jan 2004, but less than Jan 2002 and 2003)

The data shows GW...

http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/archi...

Just change the dates via the drop-down menus.

Answer 5

Conventional people are roused to fury by departure from convention, largely because they regard such departure as a criticism of themselves. If there were in the world today any large number of people who desired their own happiness more than they desired the unhappiness of others, we could have a paradise in a few years.

It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly.

The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.

Answer 6

i live on a hill, who cares.

Answer 7

Global warming isn't about carbon in the atmosphere.  It's about carbon DIOXIDE in the atmosphere.  There is nothing wrong with carbon dioxide.

Like you say, recycling is a great idea. We should all do it, it just makes sense.  But there is no relationship betwen recycling and global warming.  

I don't believe in global warming, or climate change, or whatever they'll call it next.  But recycling is a great idea and we should all do it.

Answer 8

Maybe the Earth is warming..... or maybe it's not.  We really won't know the answer to that question until the means of temperature data collection is 'repaired'.  The temperature data that has been and continues to be used by climatologists for analyzing and predicting global climate has been shown to be flawed due to substandard monitoring equipment..... and the problem is getting worse as time goes by.  The result is that Earth's temperatures are being reported as warmer than actual.

Insofar as a cleaner environment, I'm all for that.  I'm just not ready to embrace the 'man-did-it' cause for global warming until they get good data that actually shows me that.  For now, the AGW theories out there are....in my opinion....baseless.

Answer 9

Why are there so many people gullible enough to believe that warming is necessarily harmful.  All living things don't live comfortably.  Actually life is a struggle except apparently for those that have enough time on their hands to worry about things like global warming.  A bobcat doesn't have time to worry.  It is concentrating on staying alive.  If it gets hurt or sick, it will likely die.  A rabbit has to worry about being the bobcats next meal, etc etc.  There is no way to make everything comfortable and it would be silly to try.

Answer 10

Global Warming? New Data Shows Ice Is Back

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 11:55 AM

By: Phil Brennan

Are the world's ice caps melting because of climate change, or are the reports just a lot of scare mongering by the advocates of the global warming theory?

Scare mongering appears to be the case, according to reports from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that reveal that almost all the allegedly “lost” ice has come back. A NOAA report shows that ice levels which had shrunk from 5 million square miles in January 2007 to just 1.5 million square miles in October, are almost back to their original levels.

Moreover, a Feb. 18 report in the London Daily Express showed that there is nearly a third more ice in Antarctica than usual, challenging the global warming crusaders and buttressing arguments of skeptics who deny that the world is undergoing global warming.

The Daily express recalls the photograph of polar bears clinging on to a melting iceberg which has been widely hailed as proof of the need to fight climate change and has been used by former Vice President Al Gore during his "Inconvenient Truth" lectures about mankind’s alleged impact on the global climate.

Gore fails to mention that the photograph was taken in the month of August when melting is normal. Or that the polar bear population has soared in recent years.

As winter roars in across the Northern Hemisphere, Mother Nature seems to have joined the ranks of the skeptics.

As the Express notes, scientists are saying the northern Hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades, adding that snow cover across the area is at its greatest since 1966. The newspaper cites the one exception — Western Europe, which had, until the weekend when temperatures plunged to as low as -10 C in some places, been basking in unseasonably warm weather.

Around the world, vast areas have been buried under some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades. Central and southern China, the United States, and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. In China, snowfall was so heavy that over 100,000 houses collapsed under the weight of snow.

Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman, and northern Saudi Arabia report the heaviest falls in years and below-zero temperatures. In Afghanistan, snow and freezing weather killed 120 people. Even Baghdad had a snowstorm, the first in the memory of most residents.

AFP news reports icy temperatures have just swept through south China, stranding 180,000 people and leading to widespread power cuts just as the area was recovering from the worst weather in 50 years, the government said Monday. The latest cold snap has taken a severe toll in usually temperate Yunnan province, which has been struck by heavy snowfalls since Thursday, a government official from the provincial disaster relief office told AFP.

Twelve people have died there, state Xinhua news agency reported, and four remained missing as of Saturday.

An ongoing record-long spell of cold weather in Vietnam's northern region, which started on Jan. 14, has killed nearly 60,000 cattle, mainly bull and buffalo calves, local press reported Monday. By Feb. 17, the spell had killed a total of 59,962 cattle in the region, including 7,349 in the Ha Giang province, 6,400 in Lao Cai, and 5,571 in Bac Can province, said Hoang Kim Giao, director of the Animal Husbandry Department under the Vietnamese Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, according to the Pioneer newspaper.

In Britain the temperatures plunged to -10 C in central England, according to the Express, which reports that experts say that February could end up as one of the coldest in Britain in the past 10 years with the freezing night-time conditions expected to stay around a frigid -8 C until at least the middle of the week. And the BBC reports that a bus company's efforts to cut global warming emissions have led to services being disrupted by cold weather.

Meanwhile Athens News reports that a raging snow storm that blanketed most of Greece over the weekend and continued into the early morning hours on Monday, plunging the country into sub-zero temperatures. The agency reported that public transport buses were at a standstill on Monday in the wider Athens area, while ships remained in ports, public services remained closed, and schools and courthouses in the more severely-stricken prefectures were also closed.

Scores of villages, mainly on the island of Crete, and in the prefectures of Evia, Argolida, Arcadia, Lakonia, Viotia, and the Cyclades islands were snowed in.

More than 100 villages were snowed-in on the island of Crete and temperatures in Athens dropped to -6 C before dawn, while the coldest temperatures were recorded in Kozani, Grevena, Kastoria and Florina, where they plunged to -12 C.

If global warming gets any worse we'll all freeze to death.

© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Answer 11

Not trying to pick on you, but as an example Chucha, do you have any idea how much damage you have done to the environment by your asking that question?  The materials used to make the computer you typed it on, the toxic metals used to make the circuit boards that will end up in a landfill, the exploited labor used to mass produce it, the cost in fossil fuels to transport everything overseas, the end result when your computer ends up in a landfill.  And the energy/power used up, etc. etc.

I don't think humans have an adverse effect on the environment because we are evil, or inherently unstable.

I think that mainly we just don't realize what it takes to produce and support our current level of civilization.  CAN we live without air conditioning, fast food, cars, makeup, bug sprays, computers?  Of course- will we?  Not until they pry our keyboards and car keys from our cold dead fingers!

Answer 12

The two main causes of AGW denial are closed minded religious zealots,and oil company "sock puppets" paid to spread deliberate misinformation and childish insults of scientists!  Other than them,all the REAL scientists are in agrrement of what the data represents.

Answer 13

I don't believe in global warming. I don't believe because of the shaky foundations its based upon. They compare current temperatures to those found in the past few hundred years, roughly 1700 through to 1899. This period is known as part of a mini ice age when global temperatures were unusually cold. Their argument is inherently flawed. Another reason that I don't believe is because I'm an automotive technician. I know exactly what a car throws out the tailpipe. A well maintained vehicle will give off  C02, 02, and H20. We're finding that many newer cars actually give off that and nothing else.

I'm not altering my life to suit some Washington lunatic. I love my Hummer, Cobra, Scout and Ranger. I'm not giving them up for anything.

Oh, and that plastic bottle you recycled will probably still end up in a land fill. They don't recycle most of what you put in the recycling bin.

Answer 14

No, it is not too much to ask; I take recycling seriously. But when business interests are allowed to make public policy We the People lose out. Power doesn't care because it doesn't have to, and there is little demand for acountability. The millionaires and billionaires will not tolerate any interference with their chance to make unlimited fortunes, whether it destroys the planet or not.  Why do you think that even now, seven years after 9-11, chemical and munitions plants in the U.S. still do not have even minimally-adequate security?  Because it cuts into their profit margins, so safety be damned.  Greed, arrogance and me-first-ism dominate our society from the top down, and the other 98% of us live out the consequences.

Answer 15

The fact that co2 is a greenhouse gas and causes temperatures to rise is not in question.  The question is how much have temperatures risen by co2 and how much by natural forces, and how much will they rise in the future.

The measures you say people should take will not have any affect in co2 levels.  There is serious concern that measures taken to cut back co2 levels will have serious effects on the economy.

That is unless we  shut down our coal fired plants and open nuclear power plants.  That will reduce co2 levels substantially.  While there are many environmental groups that are coming on side on this issue, the extreme environmental groups are against nuclear power.  If politicians announce plan to open nuclear power plants, the extremists will cry murder, and people will take the attitude I am for nuclear power but "not in my backyard"

Answer 16

Put plainly... people are ignorant.  They either:

A) Reject concepts they don't personally understand.  (Some of these people then spread their own simplistic misunderstandings of the concepts)

B) Don't understand the science and hence, misinterpret the data.  You've already seen this in the answers to your question so far.  Yeah, it's been roughly warmer in the past (maybe*)...  The problem is that we're experiencing a warming trend in the middle of what's supposed to be a cooling trend.

The science is pretty clear.. CO2 lets heat energy in and keeps it from leaving.  The data only matches up when accounting for human CO2 emissions.

It's just sad that people don't understand it and mistake their own misunderstanding of the concepts for the concepts being wrong.

I also love how people accuse scientists of trying to profit from this and then recuse the oil companies of any bias...

Answer 17

"Global Warming" is purely a political scare tactic.  The fact of the matter is that only a very small percentage of the carbon dioxide emissions is the product of of human activity, and, therefore, there is little that mankind can do to effectively impact the amount of carbon dioxide produced.  Well over 90% of the carbon dioxide production is the product of "Mother Earth" herself, resulting from volcanoes and earthquakes, etc.  On top of that, the fact that so much of the emphasis is on changing the way things are done in this country diverts attention from the fact that the nations with the heaviest per capita production of pollution are nations like India.  Now, if your concern is concservation of resources, well, that is totally different issue.  Yes, we should be conscientious about taking care of the resources that we have.  However, deeper study of the science will show you that we are still in the process of warming after the most recent Ice Age.  Just as the are seasons, the earth goes through natural warming and cooling processes.

Answer 18

They are unfamiliar with the amount of data supporting global warming and with the degree of scientific agreement on the issue:

http://norvig.com/oreskes.html

The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.

There have not been virtually no skeptical papers published in any peer-reviewed journal.

However, you will see frequent quotes and articles from these folks:

"The risks of passive smoking were disputed by some global warming skeptics and related institutions, including Richard Lindzen, Steven Milloy, Fred Singer, Fred Seitz, Michael Crichton..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...

Fox News is happy to run their material for them, since controversy drives ratings and revenue for them:

At Fox News, a Pundit for Hire

http://www.freepress.net/news/print.php?...

"Objective viewers long ago realized that Fox News has a political agenda. But, when a pundit promotes this agenda while on the take from corporations that benefit from it, then Fox News has gone one disturbing step further"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_Mill...

Answer 19

An abundance of new peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and data error discoveries in the last several months has prompted scientists to declare that fear of catastrophic man-made global warming “bites the dust” and the scientific underpinnings for alarm may be “falling apart.” The latest study to cast doubt on climate fears finds that even a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would not have the previously predicted dire impacts on global temperatures. This new study is not unique, as a host of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast a chill on global warming fears.

“Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust,” declared astronomer Dr. Ian Wilson after reviewing the new study which has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Geophysical Research. Another scientist said the peer-reviewed study overturned “in one fell swoop” the climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore. The study entitled “Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth’s Climate System,” was authored by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz. (LINK)

“Effectively, this (new study) means that the global economy will spend trillions of dollars trying to avoid a warming of ~ 1.0 K by 2100 A.D.” Dr. Wilson wrote in a note to the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee on August 19, 2007. Wilson, a former operations astronomer at the Hubble Space Telescope Institute in Baltimore MD, was referring to the trillions of dollars that would be spent under such international global warming treaties like the Kyoto Protocol.

Answer 20

The earth is warming...but it may be natural!

First, I believe in conservation and becoming more efficient in using natural resources and a promotion of new technologies to reduce our dependence on oil and reducing pollutants... with that being said I DO NOT beleive in exclusive MAN MADE global warming.

Most global warming zealots will point to graphs that show a warming trend from the 1800's through today. They cite that the last decade has been the warmest on record...on record of less than 200 years. What they don't show you or refuse to acknowledge is that Europe and NA were in a mini ice age from before 1600 through 1800. Just watch the History Channel for the special. In these times, rivers were icing, snowcaps were increasing in size, and George Washington crossed an icy Delaware River. We started coming out of the mini ice age in the 1800's. So YES, the earth has warmed since the 1800's as proven by the graphs but it is taken out of context.  In reality, perhaps we are just getting back to normal.

From Wilkipedia:

"

1250 for when Atlantic pack ice began to grow

1300 for when warm summers stopped being dependable in Northern Europe

1315 for the rains and Great Famine of 1315-1317

1550 for theorized beginning of worldwide glacial expansion

1650 for the first climatic minimum

In contrast to its uncertain beginning, there is a consensus that the Little Ice Age ended in the mid-19th century. "

See the graph representing temperatures over the last 2000 years at:

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index....

You will see that we are cooler now then 1000 years ago...

Interesting study from the Univ of Michigan and Greenland Ice core Project show that temperatures were 3 degrees higher 3000 years ago then they are today as seen on the graph on page 3 of their study. They conclude that before man could influence climate, natural warming and cooling trends existed.

http://www.geocentricity.com/ba1/no115/g...

http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:VSV...

Should we not look to the Sun and realize that it is a potential cause as well?

In my opinion:

Many  scientists and researchers make their living by grants for their scientific studies. So, if someone wanted to prove man made global warming existed, they would fund a grant to a research team to prove it. You can make any research fit to a desired result. If I were a researcher, wouldn't I want to make my client happy and make the data "fit"? If the research presents contrary information, those researchers would be out of a grant for the following year.  As I read somewhere, I could prove that 10 year olds with large feet are smarter than those with small feet. All I have to do is take a survey and work the data to make it fit.

In conclusion, I do not believe that we have the knowledge to understand the earth and should not take a "the Sky is falling” approach. Further study on global warming is needed and we need to be made weary of the "religious crusade" that so many people follow where you are either for it or against it. I am leery about those who ridicule those scientists who question the scientific "fact" of global warming. Isn't that what it is all about...questioning? When we thought technology was at its peak, "scientists" thought the earth was flat, the sun revolved around the earth, nothing is smaller then an atom, newtons law of gravity (doesn’t work on a large scale)...all these "facts" have been disproved and although technology advances daily, we need to humble ourselves and accept the fact that we will NEVER know everything. We will continue to grow and learn and discover.