Why is it so difficult for deniers to reach a 'consensus' on why AGW isn't anything to be worried about?

Question

There must be a dozen or more claims being proposed on why we should ignore the problem. What's your favorite "claim?

Mine is the one about what would happen if CO2 was put in a jar,would it get really hot in sunlight? lol!

http://www.greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/global-warming-myths

Answer 1

For the same reason the doom sayers cannot reach an agreement as to how hot it will become.

Answer 2

"i'll be fine, i got no kids, i live 200m up and my grape vines will just loove Mediterranean weather."

oh, no, that *is* me. and i'm still worried. i just cant seem to raise the necessary level of selfishness to be so short sighted. or vice versa.

Answer 3

Because, one by one, their theories are disproven.  Eventually they have to fall back on "all the scientists are lying".

It's very much like New Earth creationists.  Confront them with any scientific proof that the Earth is way more than 6000 years old, and they say:

God faked that.

Answer 4

Personally i'll be quite happy if it does get even warmer, here in Scotland the weather has been much warmer for the last month than it usually is and i've not heard anyone complaining or wishing  it was as c**p as it usually is, so bring it on and let us enjoy the sunshine

Answer 5

the deadly severe weather is caused by much cooler temperatures,  if you look at the data you'll see that the avg temp is colder than normal.  It's the cold that triggers severe weather.  do some research and you will know this to be true.

Answer 6

Consensus is not synonymous with science.  If you learn this simple fact, you will have made a great deal of progress. Concensus ihas more to do with politics.  Instead of arguing with facts, the left always seeks consensus it seems.  There may be a dribbling of facts but they are very rarely put together in a coherent argument.

Note: I regret that I have just one down arrow to give to Dana, (paraphrasing the patriot Nathan Hale).  The child like logic is truly breathtaking and revealing.  Warmer is generally better to a point.  Since there is a very small chance the earth will explode in a ball of fire, unless you listen to closely to Al Gore, then I don't think we have to worry about temperatures approaching the sun's.  Colder is generally worse from the get go.  Alarmists fretting over a couple degrees maximum show that they are more concerned with other things and not climate or it is simple hysterics.

Answer 7

Most of the people denying AGW have little to no scientific background usually.  They try and make arguments that sound good but then someone comes around and easily refutes it.  Such as 'temperature sensors that measure global temperatures are near buildings which heats them up more'.  

Well this sounds good until you realize that even if something is initially warmer, an increase in temperature would still increase the readings to indicate a warming atmosphere.

Another argument is that these are 'natural cycles' but anyone that has taken historical geology or an atmospheric science course would realize that our current period of warming has a rate of increase that is much higher than most warming periods.  

Just like any other time a scientific discussion is not driven by science there will be people who refute it just because they have a certain ideology.

Answer 8

My favorite is 'warmer is better' because it's just so boneheaded.

If warmer is always better, then go try and live on the Sun.  If warmer isn't always better, then it's not necessarily true that 'warmer is better', now is it?  Seriously it's like grade school logic, but so many deniers make this claim.

Answer 9

My favorite form of personal astonishment is listening to someone go on and on about how CO2 can't be causing global warming and how we need to drill in Anwar or anywhere else to get more oil..... and then talking endlessly about how they are all for decreasing CO2 emissions. This sounds nuts, but I see this doublespeak all the time. It is revealing because it goes to show that these people really don't even believe what they themselves are saying. Perhaps they haven't even thought it through long enough to know what they really believe. They just get a paycheck to support a particular opinion.

Answer 10

What are you talking about?  We ALL agree AGW isn't anything to worry about!!!  Did you mean to ask why there's no consensus on GW?  Easy...man doesn't have enough data to determine the cause, yet.  With no data, one theory is just as sound as the next.

Answer 11

People who apply real science find it difficult to agree on things they cannot equate with a mathematical proof.

Is this what they are teaching people in science classes now.. the more people agree the more true it is? This sounds a lot like a democracy. Science I am afraid is a dictatorship ruled by an evil force that caused you to hate school. I call it Math.

Nice straw man attack though.

Answer 12

I believe that the 'warmers' have the same problem.  

Also, not to in any way diminish Iowa's recent weather experience, they have dealt with similar or worse decades ago.  The 'tornado belt' in which I live historically has experienced a lot of tornados.  Most of them do not effect communities, but it is only a matter of time before they do.  Those are the ones that get the media's attention..... especially nowadays.... with the AGW rage.  Until recently, the only experience that most folks outside of the midwest had with tornados was the movie "Wizard of Oz".

Answer 13

we don't think AGW is nothing to worry about. We believe AGW is complete bollox, when the globe was warming, it was due to natural causes, and now its started to cool it's still natural causes. maybe instead of blaming man for something man hasn't done and trying to predict an unpredictable mother nature , the authorities should be telling us how to prepare for what may happen

Answer 14

I never said I don't believe Global warming or climate change aren't happening. I just said I'm not afraid of change.

People talk as though a few degrees of climate change is going to be the end of the world. I under stand the science of how extra CO2 creates a little bit more greenhouse effect, But I fail to see how a global increase by a few degrees is going to end the world. I know the coastlines might flood, but people will find new places to live. There might be room for fewer penguins, but when I saw The march of the Penguins, those birds sure looked like they would welcome an increase by a few degrees.