Why is so hard for people to accept the fact that (mostly) man made global warming is proven science?

Question

The vast majority of scientists in the world say so.

EVERY major scientific organization in the US has issued an official statement that global warming is real and mostly caused by us.

These guys don't get their science from Al Gore.

Answer 1

I think you must be the Head Religious leader for this Global Warming fraud Bob. The good news is more and more people believe in less and less every day.

Answer 2

I favor this man's view, he is a thorough researcher.

"UNBEARABLE?

Few generations of young people can have been so betrayed by the adult world that their natural instincts lead them to trust, and which they depend on for security and guidance than those of today. If they're not in parts of the world that are being bombed, looted, or exploited for cheap labor, they are cynically manipulated to become wage and tax slaves on the consumer treadmill and force-fed a diet of scare stories and politically correct ideologogies designed to instill fear, conformity, and subservience. The latest emetic that I read told of children coming home in tears after being told at school that we're wiping out the polar bears. Well, sorry, but the world was as warm in the 1930s as it is now, warmer in the late medieval period, warmer still in Roman times, a lot warmer a few thousand years before that when southern England was tropical, and the polar bears came through just fine. Actual studies of present populations show that they're again managing to thrive regardless--maybe because they don't watch TV."

By James Hogan 2008

Answer 3

They can't win the science argument so they try to win with semantics.  Technically AGW can't be "proven" because it's a theory, just like evolution can't be "proven".  But they can be and are supported by overwhelming scientific evidence.

But people are very good at finding ways to believe what they want to believe.  If they need to use semantics to maintain their denial of AGW, they'll do it.

Answer 4

Because people don't want to take responsibility for their actions.

Answer 5

There's two reasons.

The first is that, thanks to the deplorable state of education in the US, most people don't realize that scientific facts are not dependent or decided by opinion polls. They are based on empirical evidence and no one's "opinion" has any bearing.

Second, there is a lot of misinformation put out by special interests. For example, w2 years ago the Royal Society (Europe's premier scientific society) documented that Exxon alone hasd spent $39 million in a single year (2004) to spread false information in an attempt to discredit scientists. The Bush administration claimed for years that "global warming wasn't proven"--while censoring scientists.

Those are the two main reasons--and it's no wonder that a lot of people are confused.

I'm not including the so-called "skeptics" like you see here on Y/A--these are mostly people who are either conspiracy theorists (that is, kooks) or paid posters for the fossil fuel special interests.

Answer 6

...Mainly because it is not proven.  

...And if it is, are you prepared to take the steps that Al Gore insists that you must take?

...It comes out as phony when the leaders of this movement do not lead by example (i.e., by getting rid of private jets, SUVs, and by changing to smaller, simpler living arrangements).

Answer 7

Because it isn't.

Answer 8

because those people are sooooo self centered that they dont want to think of themselves as a contributer to the damage of the world.. thats how some people are and it makes me want to bust a cap in their grill haha

Answer 9

- Increased CO2 concentration follows temperature rise, not precedes it

- Temperatures haven’t risen for 10 years

- It is no warmer now than it was 30 years ago

- It has been warmer (and colder) in the past

- There has been more CO2 in the air in the past and temperatures were lower

- No causal link has been demonstrated between Anthropogenic CO2 and global temperature change.

- Sea Level rise is not increasing

- There aren’t more tornado’s than before

- From 1940’s to 1970’s temperatures fell while CO2 concentration rose sharply

- The Antarctic is increasing its ice mass and... the North Pole isn’t going to melt this year but has done so before...

“Skate (SSN-578), surfaced at the North Pole, 17 March 1959.”

http://www.navsource.org/archives/08/085...

Answer 10

"Why is so hard for people to accept the fact that (mostly) man made global warming is proven science?"

Because it isn't. Theories cannot be proven.

"Making absurd demands on "proven" is simply nonsense. For example, it's been proven that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Yet some claim it's only 6000."

It has not been proven that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, and calling it proven, to me and many other scientists, is an assault on the scientific process. Sure, I agree that the Earth is very likely to be roughly 4.5 billion years old, but no objective scientist would call it "proven".

"That, to me, is "proven"."

Well, sadly, to the vast majority of scientists in the world, that does not mean proven, and AGW is not proven science.

Dana wrote

"They can't win the science argument so they try to win with semantics. Technically AGW can't be "proven" because it's a theory, just like evolution can't be "proven". But they can be and are supported by overwhelming scientific evidence.

But people are very good at finding ways to believe what they want to believe. If they need to use semantics to maintain their denial of AGW, they'll do it."

Oh come off it, Dana, Bob is wrong and you know it. Calling AGW proven science is about semantics, trying to give the strongest possible term to the status of the theory of AGW--a status that does not even exist in real science.

Answer 11

Because it is ALSO proven that the planet has been warming up for over 6000 YEARS.

ALSO, Antarctica, at one time HAD NO ICE PACK, and was a 'temperate' zone like most of the US today.

So much for all the bally-hoo about 'man-made' global warming.  We are probably 'helping' a little bit, but are apparently not a major source of planetary warming.

Answer 12

Bob, you always trot out the "every major scientific organization rhetoric". Skeptics like Galileo and Kepler were right when mainstream science was wrong or suppressed by religious leaders.  Environmentalism is no less a religion than Christianity, and takes on a similar role in suppressing science to forward their own agendas. This does not prove either of our points, but you have offered nothing.  Your burden of proof is "someone with authority said it is true, so it must be true".  

Check the actual science: Historically the Earth has heated and cooled according to sun spot cycles.  When the Earth heats up due to increased solar output, the oceans warm causing CO2 to be released because it is less soluble at higher temperatures.  Again: An increase in atmospheric CO2 followed an increase in temperatures, not the other way around.  We are currently in an unusually active solar cycle that has been going on for the last 70 years http://cc.oulu.fi/~usoskin/personal/natu...  The logical person would see that the earth is warming just as it has in the past and will again in the future.

Even if it is warming, so what?  What evidence is there that global warming (aka climate change since it has been cooling for 10 years) will be catastrophic?  Warmer temperatures and more CO2 are good for plants, which in turn is good for animals.  The most biodiverse regions on earth are between the tropics.  Extending the tropics will simply increase biodiversity.  All the doomsday scenarios are simply made up  non-sense.  Climate models cannot be trusted to predict future climate because they cannot even predict todays climate accurately http://www.inscc.utah.edu/~reichler/publ...

Even your statement of proof from the National Academy of Science is ridiculous.  "...taking steps to prepare for climate change and to slow it."  How can you prepare for something that is already here, has always been here, and will always be here?  How can you slow climate change?  Have they found a way to control the sun?  Have they found a way to regulate the Earth's orbit?  If not, we cannot effect climate change.

Answer 13

NOAA on their website says humans MAY cause as much as 1/2 of global warming. That means we are not causing most of it because at least half is caused by nature!  Surely you have heard of NOAA, a major scientific organization.  Stop say there is consensus when none has been reached.  Read all the data.  I'm glad science requires real proof.  GW is real, yes.  "Human caused", or part of a natural cycle, or both is still open for debate.  If you insist on stopping that debate your as bad as those that believed the Earth was the center of the Universe and imprisoned Galileo.

Answer 14

i'm sorry, but if i listen to foxnews, and listen to rush Limbaugh, it's just not true.

the problem is those liberal scientists are using this scam to collect research money.

the government is using this scam as an excuse to raise gas taxes.

and make cars smaller.

and probably raise my fees when i go to register my SUV.

you may believe those liberal TV stations you like so much, like PBS, but they just want to take away all our freedoms.

you know they want to take away people's right to own guns.

they've raised the taxes on cigarettes to ridiculous heights.

they've raised alcohol taxes.

pretty soon, they're going to try to re-institute the national 55 mph speed limit.

and today, nobody even keeps their speed down to 65.

yeah, you're going to point out those NASA and NOAA and NSF studies that claim CO2 is the problem.

but guess what, if they didn't do that, they'd be out of a job.

it's not like you pay people to say everything's fine.

<<That, to me, is "proven".>>

okay, and to me it's not.

what's the famous quote?

you can fool some of the people some of the time,

but you can't fool all of the people all of the time.

(or something like that.)

hey, if you're worried, cool.

cut down your carbon footprint.

pay for your carbon credits.

i'm fine with that.

i'm not trying to tell you what you should think or do.

i'm not trying to change you.

i don't care what you do.

the question really is,  "Is this a free country or not?"

obviously you don't want it to be.

why is it so hard for you to understand that?

really, this is  A Modest Proposal,  isn't it?

Answer 15

But Bob...who has proven it?  It's still in the category of being a theory.  Scientific organizations rely on funding to carry out their studies, don't they?  Don't they have to be mainstream for now?  What about the Oregon petition, or the Manhattan Declaration?  I've seen you say something to the effect that they aren't acceptable.  But are any of the scientists who signed these part of the organizations that support global warming?  I'm sure they are.  They don't get their science from Al Gore but they support his thesis for more funding.   How can they ignore all the data that goes against the AGW theory?

Answer 16

Personally, I think it's great for this "global warming" movement to take place since many people use natural resources selfishly and recklessly. This is definitely good for all of us if we can cut down the materials we use nowadays; however, I think the belief of global warming is a fraud. I think it's mostly due to the fact that we need a new trend in the market since everyone is now have to claim that they are the greenest and most eco-friendly of all. Consequently, they could just raise up the price for the same thing by only putting a green tag saying "organic" or "eco-friendly."

If it's real, then so what? The earth is going to live for another millions of years and human will expire soon anyway. I think George Carlin makes his (and my) point clear.  

Answer 17

nobody wants to admit that they are contributing to global warming, and they also don't want to believe that global warming is happening in our world.  

Answer 18

nothing is proven.

not by science. last year bacon would kill you. then only if you didn't microwave it.

a few hundred years ago the eath was, according to the 'vast majority of scientists' FLAT.

the problem with scientists, bob, is that they are so convinced of their own superior intellect that common sense is discarded as ignorance by them.

the national academy of science issues Only what consensus tell it is acceptable. its called peer review, and it destroys original thought. it's part of the arrogance.

and not every major science organization agrees. furthermore, even if they all did, it would only serve to prove that lemmings will be lemmings.

Answer 19

People will search out any information to support what they be live in and in that they will always find what ever they see to make themselves feel more comfortable about the position they hold. Now if your in the minority you always going to be in a uphill battle no matter how factual your data is for example the sky is blue, we all know the sky is blue but if a large group gets the popular kids to believe that is it really yellow, and then you get the heard mentality going safety in number and all those folks cant be wrong type crowds, they you have it the sky is now reported to be yellow because so an so who is a popular figure said so.

The question I want to know bob is why do you believe some one because they have the all mighty PHD at the end of their name? Many so called the smart have been found out to be ultimately wrong on all counts due the fact they enjoyed their position of authority and the perks that came wit it. SO in the effort of self preservation these so called scholars say and backed up what ever they were told to do. The earth is flat because the scientist said so.

If we give up the freedom of discernment and doubt then we are selves are without freedom to be wrong or right.