Why do people not agree with trying to stop global warming?

Question

If you want to live then try and stop global warming, recycle, walk and use less C02.

Answer 1

global warming is a cycle, in the 70s, it was global cooling, in michigan we got feet upon feet of snow with school closed for a week, now we are in the global warming cycle, then it will go back to global cooling

Answer 2

Well, I think that most people either have an over simplistic view of global warming which states that CO2 = global warming, which is not correct.

Also I think that most people feel that they can do nothing in isolation and them replacing their light bulbs is not going to make any difference.

The reduction of CO2, if that is what you are talking about, will only come about when the largest emitters, USA, China, Australia etc undertake to impose restrictions within their own countries, much as the UK did with the Climate Change Levy and the Emission trading Scheme.

This does not mean that people should not try to reduce their carbon footprint, I think they should, but they should also be a little more proactive in pressuring the government to pressure others into behaving responsibility. If the UK stopped producing any CO2 at all the saving would be gobbled up by China within a few months. The issue really is larger than us all simply walking to work. Decisions need to be based on good science and not people jumping on band wagons.

Answer 3

Manufacturers, power companies, and oil industry do not want to invest more money on reducing pollution.  They are afraid that other countries or less polluting competition will take business away from them.

But halting or slowing global warming is well worth the cost.  Almost every legitimate scientist (those not paid for by those same corporate interests) agrees that global warming exists.  But even if it didn't......reducing pollution is worth the cost.  Already people are dying of lung cancer, emphysema, asthma, allergies, etc. brought on by pollution.  The amount of money it costs to clean up our air and water would be more than made up for by lower health care costs resulting from cleaner air and water.

Answer 4

Lots of people do agree with it. Personally, I have only driven 3 times in the past year (aside from trips to the country side and out of the country)- compared to the 40 minute, each way, commute that I used to have in America. I take public transportation to work now - or walk on errands, because I live in a country that has convenient public transportation.

We also have convenient recycling spots within a two minute walk from our apartment for glass, plastic, paper, and metal products. There are also clothing donation bins right next to the recycling bins.

My family recycles all that we can. I don't eat meat... We are looking into getting a much more environmentally friendly car the next time we buy a car. I teach my daughter about recycling, global warming, and the necessity to reduce, reuse, and recycle.

My brother is a part of the Sierra Club - he recycles and does all that he can through his school and the club to educate others about environmental awareness. He is also studying how to become a solar unit installer.

I know that there is much more that can be done -especially in America, toward reducing the amount of strain that the human race is putting on the environment. Many people are doing what they can, personally, to help reduce their own impact on the environment.

Answer 5

Because some deny that it even exists.

Answer 6

The theory of man-made global warming is false.  Anyone who believes otherwise has not investigated the evidence or is purposely remaining ignorant to the legitimate opposition to global warming.  I have given up an one and a half hours to watch “An Inconvenient Truth” so I ask you to do the same and watch the movie detailing the opposition.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...  

Another general resource: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...

CO2 is not causing the globe to warm the opposite is true, the warming is increasing the atmospheric CO2.  When the world heats it gradually increases the temperature of the oceans which serve as the largest CO2 sink.  As the oceans heat up they release CO2 which is stored in them.  The information comes from the same data Al Gore uses, the temperature always goes up before the concentration of CO2 goes up.

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/artic...

CO2 makes up only .03% of our atmosphere.  Water vapor, another greenhouse gas, makes up 1-4% of our atmosphere, this gas is acknowledged to be the main greenhouse gas.  All human activities combined contribute only 6 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere each year.  Animals, through respiration, decomposition, etc contribute 150 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere.  So humans contribute only a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere which is already in very small concentrations in the atmosphere.

http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science.html This is where my data came from, it is an interesting site, it displays the same graphics as Al Gore in his movie but it tells how low the human contribution is.  So Al Gore is using the same data but coming to a different conclusion, who do you want to believe a politician with no scientific training or the NASA CO2 laboratory, a group of scientists who spend their entire careers studying CO2.

We know the greenhouse effect is real it is a necessary effect to keep our planet at a habitable temperature.  However if our current warming is due to greenhouse gasses it would cause warming in the troposphere , but the troposphere is actually getting cooler.

http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature... That points to other explanations to our current warming.

So what is causing our current warming, it is the sun.

http://web.dmi.dk/solar-terrestrial/spac...

http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2003/s...

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/06...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/...

The fact that only the earth’s surface is warming points to direct heating from the sun rather than heating due to greenhouse gasses.  Also other planets in our solar system are warming pointing to a common cause of warming, that common cause being the sun.

http://www.livescience.com/environment/0...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/sola...

http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/sola...

The global warming crowd says our glaciers are melting and animals will suffer this is another false claim.

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2Sci...

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA235.htm...

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/

the global warming crowd also claims a scientific consensus on the issue, this is wrong in two ways.  One, there is no consensus, this is a false claim to make you believe in global warming by suppressing the opposition.  http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

Second, even if there was a consensus it would mean nothing, science is not politics, you don’t vote on theories to determine their legitimacy.

The IPCC is the main supporter of global warming, their statements are defended blindly by people who don’t want to admit that global warming is not real.  People will claim that they took into account natural sources of CO2, they didn’t.  Take a look for yourself:

http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/srccs/index....  That is the latest IPCC report, read the entire report, do a search of the documents, there is absolutely no mention of natural sources of CO2.  The natural sources have been completely ignored.  Also people will claim that the IPCC took the sun into account in their report, this is not entirely correct, while the sun is mentioned the report it’s effects have not been accurately represented.

http://www.john-daly.com/forcing/moderr....  The IPCC did not take into account the Svensmark factor.  This would greatly reduce the effect of solar radiation on the earth.  Look back up to the solar resources to see the effect of the sun correctly represented.

Also allegations have been by IPCC scientists who disagreed with the IPCC statements.  They say that their research was censored or taken out of the IPCC report.  This is not the first time the IPCC has lied, they forged the famous “hockey stick” graph, which later resulted in a reissuing of the IPCC report.

Quotes form politicians, CEO’s, and others are not proof of global warming, they issue these statements to get votes and customers.  Scientists are able to get published and get time on the media by supporting global warming.  The IPCC continually lies and misrepresents data so they keep their jobs.  

In regards to the precautionary principle that says we can only help if we switch over to alternative energy, this idea is not correct.  While this may seem legitimate it only helps the first world, third world countries can not afford to switch to the more expensive energy options.  Also the US currently spends 4 billion dollars a year on global warming research which could be better spent on research for disease or to fight poverty.  For an excellent example of how the precautionary principle is harmful you do not need to look further than DDT.  This pesticide was cheap and incredibly effective but it was banned because of it harmful effects on egg shells.  Now thousands of people die every year in third world countries because of malaria, a disease that could be easily controlled with DDT.

I hope anyone who believes in global warming they will take a look at the resources I provided.  These resources should convince you that global warming is not man-made, it is caused by cycles in the earths climate.  If you are not convinced I hope you at least take a new look at global warming as an unproven idea.  Remember that global warming is big business for anyone who aligns themselves with it.

I could not go this entire post without mentioning global cooling.  In the 1970’s it was claimed that there was a consensus on the fact that the world was headed into an ice age.  We have seen once before how damaging a false claim about our climate change can be to our world.  Most of the global warming crowd does not want you to know about this scare because it is so similar to the scare today.  Government panels were formed and claimed the world was headed to an ice age, evidence poured in supporting the claim, a consensus was claimed, then the whole issue just faded away.  That is what will happen with the false scare of global warming.

Answer 7

Maybe it's because the poison in the air, water, food and seas will kill us all before we suffocate from the heat.

Answer 8

I have no objection to it! But some people do I don't know why though. I can't believe they don't care about Global Warming!

~Hoped this helped!

Answer 9

There are many different opinions and some people think that this may be a natural cycle that has happened before.  Before man became the pest he is.  ;-)

Answer 10

People genereally like to rebel or go against what their superior's tell them or told them. Global Warming is not argued

any more. Its CAUSE is argued. There are scientist's whose voices have been shut out do to what they prove.

Welcome to the fascist world in which we live in.

Answer 11

A lot of people don't think it is happening, because yes the earth does go through periodic warming and cooling, however unlike the above answerer believes these periods do not occur in such small spaces of time such as mere a decade.  They last for millions of years, and one of the last major cooling periods was in the last ice age, and technically we are in a cooling period now.  Also scientists have not been able to definitively prove that there is a link between humans, rising CO2 levels, and rising global temperatures, and this is what the skeptics use to try and convince us there is no global warming.  That is not to say scientists don't believe we are contributing to global warming, the problem however is before they would definitively be able to prove it we would have a runaway greenhouse effect on Earth.  The good news is that if we start working to reduce emissions the Earth self-regulates CO2 levels, that is to say CO2 is "scrubbed" by the Earth's oceans, and would be able to return to "normal" levels.

Answer 12

they have been brainwashed into believing that nothing is wrong

for government to admit that there is is problem means huge changes that are very expensive .

and many rich people will loose a lot of money.

regulating factories ,car engines ,way of behavior ,contaminating factors

to go on as usual is far cheaper ,and profits continue to rise,

so an ignorant public saves a lot of money and trouble ,it is much easier to get them to accept death and prepare them for it ,

that is why there is such a boom in evangelism

the masses are getting ready for death ,

whilst we against all hope are still looking for ways to prolong life in a beautifull world as possible .

people whose eyes are turned towards the heavens . who are focusing beyond life ,cannot be expected to give a d**n as to what happens arround them ,

only those who considder an Earthly Paradise whilst alive ---------------Do

Answer 13

Ill keep it simple,since Mc gave you the best answer...There is a GOD,and we are not him,its arrogant to think we are causing it and that we can fix it

Answer 14

The world is a giant ball and for some reason it is going to role over u and u say stop . The CO2 is not a problem ,Co2 is heavy .Methane is light and u cannot measure either one.

Answer 15

The idiocy of the American people fails to see the truth about global warming because they don't want to face up to it. "It's cyclical," they say, failing to recognize that the "cycle" has been derailed because of our industrial revolution over the past 150 years.

"We had snow in Michigan this April. How can they say there's global warming?" they ask - in mock surprise and complete ignorance. That has nothing to do with global warming, or global cooling. The consequences are far more dangerous than a few isolated weather conditions in various regions of the world at any one time.

People are too d**n lazy and uninformed to do anything about it. And, like everything else, nothing will be done until a catastrophic incident forces a reaction.Taking pro-active measures isn't something Americans - and their leaders - ever endorse.

So, our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will suffer the consequences of our squanderous selfishness, all because we refuse to recycle our refuse; we refuse to stop driving $60,000 gas-guzzling SUVs; we refuse to lower our thermostats and bundle up in sweaters; we refuse to stop filling landfills with non-biodegradable trash; we refuse to stop polluting our fresh air and water supplies; and we refuse to close down smoke-belching factories or drive cars with lower emission levels. Our descendants will surely look back and harshly criticize our excesses, wondering why we failed to try and save the planet for them.  -RKO-   04/22/07

Answer 16

Because I don't want to spend 4 hours walking 12 miles to work every morning and another 4 hours every day walking 12 miles back home. And I don't want to spend $800,000 dollars to buy a house within walking distance of downtown when I can live in a much nicer and bigger house 12 miles away for $200,000. I am simply not willing to pay 8 hours of my time every day, or $600,000 dollars of my money to reduce global warming by 0.00000001%. It isn't worth it!