Why peoples don't believe in Global Warming...

Post Reply New Topic

People who know about history, particularly mediaeval history, may be less likely to believe in human caused warming because they aware of the Late Mediaeval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age. There is science suggesting that the goings on in the sun have more to do with climate change and that carbon dioxide is insufficient to significantly change climate.

That said, the so-called deniers will always have a problem in that many of these people are funded by vested interests and so this helps to discredit them to many eyes. There's a think a certain "pollution is bad" idea, that we will pay dearly for pumping smoke into the air, and also this idea that if there is a chance that perhaps there is human caused warming that it would be best not to take a chance. I think that there are many who think that a more moderate use of resources would be best.

As for this left-right business, Alexander Cockburn, who is a decidedly left wing writer, he does not believe in human caused warming and has posted articles on his Counterpunch website arguing that case.

Mostly because you have idiots repeating idiots. By that I mean you take some science and give it to people that have political goals in mind and they give it to the media. So idiot politicians and idiot media screw up anything real.

It is easy to find examples of this. Anytime you have one side that says the sky is falling, and another saying everything is fine, the average person thinks both politicians are full of it, and the truth is in the middle somewhere. Al Gore and IPCC get treated like the greatest things ever but when you spend 2 seconds looking into them you find they are full of poop.

Gore likes to do things like blame the very powerful hurricanes like Katrina on global warming. By doing this he is showing that he hopes that the people he is talking to will be scared and ignore the fact that Katrina was a rather weak hurricane, most of the damage was caused by our wonderful infrastructure failing. He made a movie full of lies and halftruths, which doesn't help. He also says that global warming is the greatest threat to human life EVAR! Even nuclear war isn't as bad so says him. Of course he is ignoring the fact that global warming, although normally considered very bad, also normally isn't considered bad enough to kill all of us, just a lot of us. Nuclear war, we all die.

The IPCC report reads like something written by a politician. Lots of maybe, could be, probably, almost no going to, is. Also early on points out that 6 of 7 continents have experienced warming. pointing out that the one that didn't is Antarctica, and then shows pictures of the rest of the world and ignores Antarctica.

The IPCC and the chicken littlers also do something most of you probably haven't noticed. The exaggerate with color and it hurts them, and I don't think they even know they are doing it. Most people have seen a weather report and learn that color indicates temp. Reds and Yellows tend to be highs, Blues and Purples lows. Now for normal weather this is a range of 100 or more degrees. They use a similar color setup for the global climate maps, but those climate maps are only showing temp change from average, which is very little, 1 degree, normally less.

So when John Smith sees this climate map, he thinks there is no way there is that much of a difference. He is of course right, the climate change over last hundred years is so small that a person wouldn't even notice. He also does not understand there is a big difference between climate and weather.

There is also the issue PETA likes to point out. If we are serious about global warming why are we letting factory farms continue. They produce large amounts of Methane, which is a very powerful heater. So how serious can we be if we only worry about CO2?

I never argue for or against global warming, or climate change because if they are set on it you will lose. Here is a better way to go about it imo.


We know the world climate changes, with or without us. We know in the past it has been much colder and much warmer than it is now. We have no way of knowing how it will change things but we do know fertile land today could become a desert in 10 years. We have reason to believe that we are having an effect on the rate of change. We also know that our activities are filling the air, ground and water with pollutants that are killing us as well as other life. We can continue to argue over global warming and destroying our planet or we can ignore global warming and clean up our planet.

If we solve the pollution problem we have, we solve the global warming problem. It is possible using science to argue for, against and somewhere in between global warming. Climate is an insanely complicated system that we do not have a very good understanding of.

It is not possible to argue against the earth being polluted to the point it is no longer livable. The land, water and air is quickly becoming unsafe. Plants and animals all over the world are dieing off. We are 100% sure we did it, and 100% it will kill us if we don't fix it.

Personally I get upset by the fact that global warming gets all the attention it does while the rest of problems get ignored. For example, pick a pharmaceutical, and it probably has been found in drinking water and/or ground water in the US and Europe, 10 years ago. Now imagine how much bad stuff gets into water in places that don't have the rules the US and Europe have. I find it odd that at the current rate we will kill ourselves off by screwing up water long before the earth gets to hot and yet completely ignore it.

Here is a fun fact for you. Researchers have found fish is sun screen chemicals in them.

EDIT: I should have also pointed out that there is a large group of religious nutjobs that think the world is going to end soon and anything we do to destroy it will make that happen faster. These are the same nutjobs that support Israel and anything to cause trouble in the middle east. You will never win fighting that group of people, they want to destroy the planet.

Antartica is quite affected by Global Warming; The poles tend to be more affected by it.

Global Warming Hoax

I also read on another site (forgot the name, something like "somethingaweful.com") and it was found out that the experimentation for global warming was tested next to some sort of AC/Heating unit, so all the evidence was flubbed up from the beginning. "The ice caps are forming and splitting at a healthy rate," is what the real scientists are saying.

There are more polar bears today than there has ever been since their population has been recorded.

I read something that said that it was Margaret Thatcher who was the first western leader to adopt the human-caused global warming theory in order to retroactively justify shutting down the whole coal industry as revenge for the "Who governs Britain" fiasco of 1974 - when the Conservative government, during a coal miner strike, called an election with this slogan and they were defeated!