Why does it seem that more liberals believe global warming?

Question

Why does it seem that more liberals believe global warming?

Answer 1

Because liberals tend to be misanthropic and will buy into anything that supports their notion that human=bad.  That's why they also support the genocidal campaign to ban DDT, condemning millions of Africans to death from malaria.

Answer 2

Liberals:

Openminded

Open to change

Concerned with the well being of everyone, not just the rich and powerful.

Accepting of others

Not biggoted

Not swayed by religious fundamentalism

Loving freedom.  In fact all the liberties and freedoms that Americans enjoy are essentially liberal ideas, irrespective of party affiliation.

As far a predictions of global cooling in the 70s, this is just another of the urban myths that global warming skeptics cling to whether they are real or not.  And either way, it has nothing to do with liberal verses conservative.

There was a theory that included 7 scientific papers predicting global cooling.  One of the lead scientists recanted 3 years later, saying he underestimated the amount of CO2.

There was no consensus whatsoever that cooling would happen.  In fact at the same time, there were 42 scientific papers predicting Global Warming, AGW.   So actually, the  vast majority of climate science was leaning toward warming.

"Over time, William Connelly has been steadily

documenting 70's research predicting global cooling. It's a rich resource but as he admits, could be more accessible. Now he has collaborated with Thomas Peterson and John Fleck to publish The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus, due to be

published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society."

"The paper surveys climate studies from 1965 to 1979 (and in a refreshing change to other similar surveys, lists all the papers). They find very few papers (7 in total) predict global cooling. This isn't surprising. What surprises is that even in the 1970's, on the back of 3 decades of cooling, more papers (42 in total) predict global warming due to CO2 than cooling."

"So in fact, the large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. Rather than climate science predicting cooling, the opposite is the case. Most interesting about Peterson's paper is not the debunking of an already well debunked skeptic argument but a succinct history of

climate science over the 20th century, describing how scientists from different fields gradually pieced together their diverse findings into a more unified picture of how climate operates. A must read paper."

http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-197...

Case closed.  So can we put this myth to rest, once and for all?   Probably not.

"It's easy to refute all the contrarian arguments but that seems to have very little effect on how commonly they are believed. Refuted arguments seem to live on in the public imagination."

Michael Tobis Ph.D. - University of Texas Institute for Geophysics

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics".

Dr. James Baker - NOAA

NASA's Gavin Schmidt

"Regardless of these spats, the fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the AGU or EGU meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists (not the famous ones, the ones at your local university or federal lab). I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts at the Fall meeting (the biggest confernce in the US on this topic) that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

"Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point," said Mahlman, who lives now on a mountain in Colorado. "You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away." - The Star Ledger

Answer 3

If you spent time with well educated conservatives I don't think you'd be asking this question.

Those who read the scientific literature, know global warming is real, regardless of their individual political ideology.  For these individuals, the solution to the problem is a political/ideological one, but the reality is based on a mountain of scientific evidence.

Answer 4

Most liberals are naive and think that all social issues or even all scientific problems can be solved very quickly.  They also believe in the concept of "liberal guilt".  In addition, they are quick to believe in unsubstantiated science.  Liberals are the editors for "The Journal of Irreproducible Results".  Thy simply are bad scientists and generally they are alarmists.

Answer 5

because they are less sheep-like and more inclined to work things out for themselves than conservatives and labour followers.

oh, liberal means something different by you doesnt it? lol!

Answer 6

Because it gives them the excuse they need to control other peoples' lives. Liberals are arrogant enough to believe that THEY know more about what's good for YOU that you do yourself.

Wow. Even their answers are dripping with arrogance!

Answer 7

Businesses effected by the Global Warming theory are not run by liberals.

This means the deomcrats would loose money or friends by supporting global warming theory.

It also means liberal businesses will thrive when democratic rivals are shut down.

Answer 8

a better question is,

why do more liberals seem to be highly educated?

of

why is it that scientist generally accept global warming while non scientific conservatives don't?

Answer 9

I love how liberals preach acceptance and tolerance of differences and yet they pounce on the first chance they get to attack conservatives.

Answer 10

This "debate" has absolutely nothing to do with liberal or conservative as Bob points out.

Some of us do not believe the math, computer models, ground temp readings--- or statistical analysis involved with a VERY complex system like Earth's atmosphere. However as I have said before once the SAT data is in for another 15-20 years I personally would believe the numbers.

Answer 11

liberals are usually more intelligent that convservatives, and conservatives are the type of people who would not stand to gain well from less oil being used, or money being spent, as a lot of members of the republican party, including the current president (who wasn't very good at it) were, or are involved heavily in the oil trade.

Answer 12

Because we tend to care about things other than money.  Conservatives seem to think that as long as it won't affect them in their lifetime, it's not worth fixing.  Rising temperatures are going to have a much greater effect than just making the world warmer.  We're driving species to extinction with the drastic rate of change in climate; there's not enough time for them to migrate or adapt.  Sea levels are rising, the oceans are becoming warmer and less able to absorb CO2.  The list goes on...but none of that seems to matter to some.  They will never see very drastic effects come from this, and apparently they don't care about their children or grandchildren's future.

And if you could never imagine a conservative saying that, then there's your answer.

Answer 13

Because Republicans spend too much time praying and not enough time in school learning science and other real important stuff. Republicans= stupid....Libs= smart. Thats why

Answer 14

Scientists generally agree that global warming poses  significant risks to people and the environment.   Don't think it is a liberal/conservative thing.

I think ignoring the science and promoting propaganda that "it's all natural", "volcanoes under the ocean", "sunspots",  and "solar activity" are all extremist red herrings to obscure the cause of the problem - HUMAN ACTIVITY.  I think neocons are more likely to do this.

Answer 15

It happened in the 70's as well only then the liberals were crying that we were doomed because of global cooling. Its just a matter of time before they move on to something else especially if we have a couple winters like we just had.

PS More and more climatologists are disputing the warming facts and the models they are based on. I was shocked taht even a UN scientist expressed doubts.

Answer 16

Plenty of thoughtful conservatives do too.  Some are annoyed at their conservative colleagues for giving conservatives a bad reputation for dumbness.

"Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"

"National Review (the most prestigious conservative magazine) published a cover story calling on conservatives to shake off denial and get into the climate policy debate"

"Pat Robertson (very conservative Christian leader) 'It is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a build up of carbon dioxide in the air.  We really need to do something on fossil fuels.”

"I believe there is now more than enough evidence of climate change to warrant an immediate and comprehensive - but considered - response. Anyone who disagrees is, in my view, still in denial."

Ford Motor Company CEO William Clay Ford, Jr.

"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."

James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.

This isn't a liberal/conservative thing.  It's a science thing.

Answer 17

Well that isn't the case, of course.  It's just one of the disinformation propaganda lines the lunatic fringe of the extreme Right try to palm off on the public.  They are an embarrassment to liberals and conservatives alike.  I think most people are way too smart not to be put off by the stink of their garbage.  It's almost as sad as the dingalings who try to claim that scientists predicted Global Cooling in the 1970's.  How intergalactically brain dead do you have to be to believe that one?

Answer 18

I think the extreme liberals treat 'Global Warming' more as a religion, rather than science.

Every religion is based on faith (the belief in something which you have no proof of, and know that you probably never will).

You believe what you believe to be right.

Usually this is instilled at a young age, and you not only believe your faith to be the correct one, every other faith is therefore wrong.

I am accused by extreme liberals of being conservative, and accused by extreme conservatives of being liberal!

When asked what my political persuasion is, I have always answered that I don't know whether I am a 'conservative liberal' or a 'liberal conservative'.

Extremes on either side are dangerous, intolerant of differing views, extremely selfish, and would much rather 'cut off their nose to spite their face' than to listen to another point of view, no matter how convincing, or how much supporting evidence was being presented to them.

I say trust science, not the special interest groups, or politicians who are only there to 'rip you off'!

Answer 19

because liberals are predisposed by their nature to accept non-traditional concepts.  That would be my general answer to your specific question.  Also, conservatives tend to be people who have a vested interest for whatever reasons in the maintenance of the status quo, and the proposition of global warming requires accepting a need for change (pretty well contrary to the defintion of conservative behavior).

However, you should note that numbers of believers don't make the concept correct-it isn't a popularity contest.  

Also, I question whether your assumption is actually true or not.  I find that a lot of the "believers" (a term I choose purposely) are young and actually quite ignorant, repeating what they have been told without the knowledge to actually interpret whether the information they have received is well founded or not (this is generally not behavior I associate with liberal thinking).  

There is actually quite a bit of the behavior normally associated with the conservatives in their actions and statements.  Smacks of religious fundamentalism in a way I find very disconcerting.  A lot of similarities to the religious right in my opinion.  

You ever see how many thumbs down are given to statements that present evidence (and not strictly opinions or flat out unfounded contrary statements) calling the global warming concept into question?  It's like trying to speak out against the mob only to be shouted down-they don't WANT to hear it.

Answer 20

Because progressives are not

simple-minded, ignorant, dogmatic, irrational, delusional, full of fear and loathing for anything unknown or different, obstinate, obdurate, hypocritical, cliquish, cultish, rationalizing, egotistical, suicidal, genocidal, ecocidal, maniacal fanatics obsessed with their fetish of narcissistic self-reinforcing ridiculous pseudo-intellectual nonsense.

You can block me now.