Why do people fail to see the ture science but instead only look at one side of the issue of global warming?

Question

I mean the alarmist always point out the science that says we will die when much evidence always says that we have no problem.

Answer 1

It's because most people paid attention in the science classes they took.  Some probably even took notes.  A smattering of science education, combined with even the most rudimentary logical skills, make it pretty clear that one side is essentially correct and the other side is not.  Other than that, I haven't the foggiest clue why more people don't instantly believe some random website that contradicts information found on the National Academy of Science website.  Why do you think that is?

Answer 2

I believe the consensus of scientists suggest that the problem of global warming is not that significant.  Perhaps they can get a majority to suggest that humans have had some input.  It is all too easy to find politicaly apponted hacks in charge of this organization or that that will suggest that humans cause harmful warming but they do not represent the rank and file as near as I can tell.   I certainly know of no fellow geologist that thinks humans have contributed to harmful warming.  I think any objective review of the facts could only conclude that humans will not be responsible for any significant harmful warming.

Answer 3

For the GW leaders, it is not about the environment, it is about government control of every aspect your life, and control of all business, and private property. Which happens to be the same agenda as the communist party. Just as the catholic religion has become the home for the pedophile, the environmental movement has become the home for the socialist/communist party.

Answer 4

we are in the global cooling phase because global ocean currants tell us so

Answer 5

Clearly global warming is only the vehicle to the true goal and desire of the alarmist.  The true goal is to raise taxes and to gain grater control over people's lives.

In 100 years the climate will be no different than it was 100 years ago.

Answer 6

It isn't only global warming, most people see everything that way. Politics, economy, traffic, medicine, art, everything.

Answer 7

Speaker of the truth, people spend billions of dollars looking at the science of global warming and it is now a proven fact. Accepting that does not make myself or anyone else an alarmist. You should ask why dont people that deny global warming dont look at the science

Answer 8

I fail to see the "true" science in your post. Maybe you forgot to post your links, or maybe you don't have any credible ones. Your argument resembles a last gasp of a dying movement. Your posts perpetuate ignorance of science.

Answer 9

there is much EVIDENCE THAT WE HAVE NO PROBLEM

must the understatement of the century,even ostriches with their heads in the sand don`t believe that.

Maybe you are part of the problem.

,

WE ARE UP TO OUR NECKS IN PROBLEMS

with out science

The biggest ones being ignorance ,complacency

and poverty as well as dependence on harmful technology.

Then there is a coming potable water shortage

Water, Air and soil pollution.

Animal extinction

Deforestation

Desertification

Loss of Arable lands

Harmful Corporate agriculture

Ethanol production

Overfishing of the seas and fish do not reproduce fast enough

Overpopulation in many poor regions of this planet.

Poverty,Disease and starvation for many,(these people are in no position to have green philosophies.)

Unwise and unhealthy living conditions (tall apartment buildings)

And yes governments are moving towards globalization so that humanity comes under complete control

watch what will happen with the money ,

from credit cards to micro chips

And probably soon WAR as well, to help the New world order along

too name but a few inter related items.

Oh yeah Global Warming also want to play.

Global Warming is true, there are Natural fazes but we are affecting that to a great extent ,with deforestation ,desertification and pollution., especially air pollution.

A few weeks ago one of NASA's top scientists concluded that the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free within five years, much faster than all previous predictions.

when the north pole is gone , you may have polar bears soon in America ,looking for a home ,

Calculations do not include the accumulative ,speeding up ,factor with time. the increase in water temperature will get faster all the time as well as the melting, when the ice is all gone the deeper cold Ocean currents will stop ,and the drag has gone with it ,also changing the higher warm currents,And only the moon will keep things moving

This will affect coastal climates ,world wide ,almost instantly. All aquatic flora and fauna will be affected,many dying off and others becoming invasive,

And recently In Chiapas ,and Tabasco in Mexico .more then a million people became homeless overnight with water coming up to their roofs ,because of rains from super evaporation from the forests,this had never happened before. Millions of animals died.

In India 3000 people died because of super storms .

.A few years ago in Europe 3500 people,died during a heat wave ,many of them in France .

Right now the average death toll annually is 150.000 due to Global warming

. these figures are already out of date and are expected to double soon.

In Northern China millions of people are running for their lives because regular dust storms so far have buried 900 villages under the sand and the whole of northern China is turning into a dessert.

The Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year all around the edges ,like a slow burning fire shriveling up their neighbors In the Kalahari huge rivers have dried up and thousand of species are gone due to their habitats disappearing .

The biggest changes are invisible at micro biotic levels species are becoming extinct ,others are multiplying ,

This affects the insect populations that follow ,and changes in that ,affect all that follows in the food chains ,

All life is interrelated of both flora and fauna, And since we are on the top of the food chain ,

we are always the last to know.

So Global warming has its toll there are incidents all over the world ,

then many religions and ancient civilizations are predicting ends of the world and Armageddons ,so the Gods are also in the game .

Now we can consider science ,but that seems to be your area ,

pray tell what is ture science,

this must be an advanced version

because i have never heard of it

so

your turn.

Answer 10

Practice what you preach... where's this "true science" that you're refering to?

Look up Dana1981's questions... she asks for science supporting a skeptical viewpoint every couple of days, and gets rants in response instead of links to science.

For a comprehensive overview putting the skeptical aguments in their proper historical context (relying on what was not known at the time), the progression in scientific understanding of climate change is explained in detail on this site:

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.h...

Most skeptical arguments seem to be rehashes of old misunderstandings that have since been clarified by additional scientific research.  It's fascinating that oil industry propagandists find them useful to reintroduce via news outlets such as Fox News.

The author Spencer R. Weart is Director of the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics (AIP) in College Park, Maryland.  His own informed conclusions regarding global warming are posted here:

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/SWnot...

Here is the outlook that you are advocating for us, intentionally or not, by claiming that anthropogenic global warming theory is not "true science":

Impacts of Global Warming

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/impac...

Here are summaries of some of their latest research into carbon cycle science and what to do to mitigate the damage, which is being conducted across more than a dozen federal agencies:

http://co2conference.org/agenda.asp

http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sa...

So if you know more than the thousands of scientists who have built our current understanding to its current state, where is your alleged science?

wahoo10001 -

It's frustrating that you can't find a single link, that science does not support your choice of beliefs, isn't it?  So throw a tantrum.  I'll simply respond to your name-calling in a way that you might understand... "I know you are, but what am I?"

Edit -

Go ahead, give this answer a "thumbs down" if you're threatened by well-documented science and history.  Let's get a count of all of you who denounce science!

Answer 11

Bob - I think you're wrong.  And not only with the misspelling of "ture" science.

So far, 11 different national academies of science -- Including the National Academy of Sciences here in the US. - have concluded that the evidence for GW is real, and that yes, we do have a problem with it.

The British Antarctic Survey, looking at the effects of climate change on the Antarctic continent, recently has issued warnings about what GW portends down there.

The Lamont - Doherty "Earth Observatory" at Columbia University, in a recent research paper on global warming and the spread of deserts, also has recently warned that continued warning of the climate is likely to mean more and more desert-like conditions in Southern California, Arizona, Utah and New Mexico.  

Other researchers also have pointed out that GW, by heating up the high mountains of the Sierra Nevada, is apparently already causing mountain snows to melt earlier in the year, which means the spring and summer snow melting that feeds the major rivers of California is drying up.  The obvious risk is that this will cut off California's water supplies during the dry summer months, causing a big problem for agriculture and maybe for the residents of California cities.

A number of researchers and international aid groups also have concluded that continuing climate change is likely to cause more droughts in parts of Africa, and more flooding in other parts, and that this is going to make it even harder than ever for African countries to feed their growing populations.

In Australia, meanwhile, some scientists believe global climate change is responsible or partly responsible for the recent 7-year drought that until recently was drying out some of the richest farming areas in Australia, and forcing some of the farmers into bankruptcy.  

Now in Eastern Australia, in New South Wales, the long drought has apparently given way to serious rainstorms, and some areas that were drought-stricken a year ago are now suffering from dangerous floods.

Whether we're talking droughts or floods, however, the examples of Australia and Africa point to one of the main risks with "global warming" that has long concerned many scientists -- the risks of "extreme weather" and shifts in wind direction and rainfall patterns interfering with global agriculture.

Speaking of global agriculture, freak weather conditions last year, in 2006, spread serious drought conditions across the American southeast, seriously hurting farmers in Georgia, Northern Florida, Tennesee, Alabama, Mississippi, and North Carolina.

Meanwhile, East Texas and parts of Oklahoma were hit with disastrous flooding.  

It's impossible for the climate scientists to say that these particular "extreme" weather events were definitely caused by global warming, but the people who build big computer models of climate and climate change have long been warning that "extreme" weather events are one very likely effect of GW.  

And some are saying that as the earth's climate continues to warm up, more extreme weather events like the 2006 droughts and floods in the USA are likely to become more frequent.

More frequent and more extensive wildfires and forest fires are another problem that some climate scientists think will become more common as climate change continues.  The reasoning here is pretty simple:  as climates become warmer, and as forests and grasslands get warmer in the hot summers, it becomes easier for them to burn.

Generally speaking, a warmer world should be a wetter world, since warm air can absorb more water vapor through evaporation and hold it in the form of rain clouds, then release it.  

But in places like southern California and Utah and Nevada and Arizona, where changing circulation patterns of hot air from the tropics is likely to push the deserts farther to the north, GW should mean DRYER weather conditions in the summers.  And when you get hotter and dryer summers, forest fires and wildfires become more common.

There's also a danger of GW causing people to die in heat waves, because of hotter summers.  

Some climate scientists suspect that this problem has already begun to appear - in Western Europe a few years ago, an unexpected and mammoth heat waves killed tens of thousands of people, particularly in Spain and France.  And as the Earth's climate continues to heat up, at least on the average, more heat waves like this are expected.

GW also is expected to cause the spread northward of certain kinds of diseases and insect pests that until now have been confined to the tropics.  The reasoning here is simple: some microbes and some kinds of destructive insects are killed by cold winter weather, and when the winters become warmer, more or them are likely to survive from one year to the next.  

The risk is that big populations of these nasty organisms will build up and cause sickness among human beings and destruction to crops and forests.  

Some scientists say this already is happening in Alaska, which is heating up a lot, and where an infestation of Spruce Bark Beetles has recently killed off thousands of acres of trees.

The Hurricane Katrina effect -- Some climate scientists, notably Dr. Kerry Emmanuel of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), also expected a warmer climate to generate more destructive hurricanes and typhoons.  

The reason is that these tropical cyclones can only form when ocean temperatures are at about 80 degrees F or more, and they get a lot of their energy from warm waters at the surface of the ocean.  

When GW or any other factor causes there to be hotter ocean water in the South Atlantic or in the Gulf of Mexico, then, the hurricanes that cross these areas should be able to get bigger and more destructive -- as Hurricane Katrina did in 2005, of course, as it traveled across a relatively hot Gulf of Mexico towards New Orleans.

Kerry Emmanuel and some other climate scientists have predicted that this should mean more highly destructive hurricanes and typhoons as the climate warms.  Other scientists, notably the hurricane forecaster Dr. William Gray, strongly disagree.  [For a look at the debate, try reading "Storm World," by American science writer Chris Mooney.]

This is just a sampling of the many reasons why many climate scientists have concluded that global warming is a big, big threat to our civilization.  

Of course there's also the question of GW causing a melting (either rapid or fairly slow) of the Greenland and West Antarctica glaciers, which could raise average sea levels around the world by 10 to 20 to 30 to 60 feet, which would drown many of the Earth's most important cities.

But the controversies over GW and sea level rise, and over how fast sea level rise is going to occur, are a whole other area of debate I don't want to get into right now.  To many scientists, the combined risks of GW-related droughts, floods, hurricanes, wildfires, heat waves and disease outbreaks offer plenty of reasons why we need to take strong action on GW now - before it's too late.

Answer 12

Because some people like you are brain washed by right wing spokemen with a political agenda.

They have even managed to convince you of these ridiculous ideas that somehow the environmentalists are out to get you through raised taxed or some equally absurd scenario.

I think I'll trust the consortium of hundreds of scientists from all over the world who have been working on this for close to 20 years and have now completed their 3rd assessment of the data accumulated over those 20 years or so.  

Environmentalists are not part of any conspiracy for a one world govt.,  socialism,  higher taxes or any of the rest of the nonsense that is so prevalent here.

Unlike you, they are intelligent people who are truly concerned with the fate of our beautiful earth.

You have bought a bill of goods, sold to you by the ones with the most to lose politically, economically when we change our ways for the better.  From what I can see, most of the skeptics here are 90% politically motivated.  They aren't motivated by the same concern for the environment and are not smart enough to see that we are destroying every ecosystem on earth, Regardless of global warming.  We have already inflicted a nearly fatal blow to the earth, without global warming, and the solutions are exactly the same as they are for global warming.

Are you a climate scientist? No I don't think so and neither am I.  I have read the IPCC report, but am smart enough to realize that my understanding is far from enough to debate with real scientists whether they are right or not.  So I will continue to believe the vast efforts of IPCC are more informed than the politically motivated opinions of others.  At least they are motivated by concern for the environment instead of by the propaganda of the oil companies and the right wing talk show screamers with their obvious agenda of painting environmenalist as communists or whatever absurd theory is popular today.

And don't give any weight to the thumbs up thumbs down count because this board is dominated skeptics like you.  Means nothing.