Why don't the sceptics and deniers agree?

Question

You sceptics and deniers can't seem agree if global warming is happening, and you certainly can't agree with why you think climatologists are wrong.
Now why is that?

Answer 1

Because they're all wrong.



As they come to understand that solar influences and natural cycles have been ruled out as causes of the current warming, more and more are resorting to the "we don't know enough" argument. They basically conclude 'well if a brilliant mind like mine can't explain the warming, then surely nobody can!'.



The fact is that the AGW theory explains the scientific observations quite accurately. Deniers don't want the theory to be true, so they come up with a bunch of amateurish and illogical explanations which the scientific evidence easily refutes. Since no one alternative theory can explain the observations as AGW can, the deniers use the 'core dump' method.



When I was a physics TA, we called it a 'core dump' when a student didn't know how to answer a question, but recognized a key word and dumped all information he knew about that subject into his answer, hoping that he got the correct info in there somewhere.



Deniers can't explain the warming, so they dump all relevant info, hoping that even if their info can't explain the warming, at least they can establish enough doubt in the AGW theory to delay action.



Unfortunately for them, a core dump is worth zero points.

Answer 2

I imagine that the 'non believers' live in a little suburban bubble, and they have no idea of anything outside the trust fund, the SUV, and spending money on garbage that makes them feel successful and important. They probably also have a very limited imagination so struggle to develop any kind of 'world view' outside of their garden. I picture them as the sort of people who can talk about salad for 3 hours and just when you think you can not stand it anymore they move on to property prices.

I admit that it is hard to appreciate the destructive power of 6.5 billion people, but if you have never been outside suburbia it must be impossible. Send me the deniers, I would say that a month in the south pacific would change their minds about if it would be worth to take action or not.

I do not have room on the boat for all of them at once and I think the first week of listening to them talk such rubbish will be a bit 'difficult' but they will see the light after a while.

Answer 3

This probably isn't the answer you're looking for, but it's related. What I can't figure out is, asides from not being able to come to a 'conclusion', why is it that people are so focused on debating whether the planet is warming as a direct result of our activities, and not realizing that action will result in a win-win situation.



We are wrong about global warming and act = we end up with a cleaner environment, healthier planet

We are wrong and don't act = no dramatic consequences, Earth stays in same shape (which in itself isn't something to be excited about). However we're still in trouble if its the inevitable natural cycle.

We are right about global warming, and act = we avoid environmental, social, political, economical crisis, ensure a healthier plane

We are wrong and act = we spend a lot of money, and end up with a healthier planet anyway, since cleaning our activities will surely decrease air and water pollution, and be better for the planet in general.



To me, there is an obvious solution, regardless of how much people want to debate. There ARE changes happening on the planet, whether you believe or not (personally, I believe the planet is warming and it is a lot due to human activity).



It's just a matter of how much people are willing to change and swallow their pride or stubborness, which ever it is.



Happy New Year :)

Answer 4

To many variables. Today here is what we know: many of mankind’s advancements cause earth surface to warm, destroy the ozone layer, kill off endanger species and in some way cause more destruction. Blacktop (roads and parking lots) and buildings heat cities, air pollution (causes lung and other diseases), deforestation (causes duststorms which increase hurricanes and cyclones), fires (cause pollution, mud slides, and deforestation); Refrigerants like CFC's, solvents including benzene (destroy the ozone layer raising skin cancer rates); cars, airplanes, ships and most electricity production (causes pollution including raised CO2 levels). We need to fix our part! That is why I founded CoolingEarth.org a geoengineering web sight. The federal government needs to adopt a pollution surcharge to balance the field and advance new technologies. We must pay the real price of oil including global warming and for health effects. But with that we must understand we have never seen what is now happening before. CO2 has never lead to temperature change, but temperature change has led to increases in CO2. The models have to be made as we go along with little evidence! The result is: change is on the way. Even natural events are warming earth and causing destruction. The sun has an increased magnetic field causing increases in earthquakes (more destruction), volcanoes (wow, great destruction), and sun spots. Lighting produces ozone near the surface (raising air pollution levels). But humans have destroyed half of the wetlands, cut down nearly half of the rain forest, and advance on the earths grasslands while advancing desertification. The USA Mayor's have taken a stand and I believe are on the right track, we can have control and can have economic growth.

Answer 5

Your common sense is fallacious. in basic terms because i do not settle for the concept guy can outcome the elements would not propose that any one is professional toxins. Emission controls are a multi billion dollar corporation. i'd like slightly of that. businesses shrink toxins because it is the right situation to do. we can settle for that "international warming" is a scam and artwork for a extra constructive surroundings. both are not unique. Why do you imagine every person has to trust the scam, the fraud of international warming earlier they could care about cleansing up the ambience? verify this web site out as an celebration of a usual American corporation.

Answer 6

deniers base there evidence on there beliefs. just as the flat earth people they find it easier to just ignore the evidence.



sceptics on the other hand look at the data objectively and base there beliefs on it.



there are very few true sceptics still arguing that we are not causing global warming, most of the real debate was carried out in the 90s and currently scientists are arguing with deniers that will not accept eny everdence contery to there beliefs.

Answer 7

i'm not a skeptic or a denier i'm a truth finder, i believe climate change is happening but i don't believe we are warming, simply because we aren't, and i'm certainly not arrogant enough to believe man has the power to change the worlds climate.

If you really think about it. If the governments truly believed that global warming is happening and caused by mere little man, wouldn't they be making sure that from now on, all new cars made, must be eco-friendly, no more housing should be build over our green countryside, and trees should be planted planted planted everywhere. But no, 'unhealthy cars' are still being produced, gordon brown wants thousands of housing to be built in the next few years over our gorgeous countryside destroying the homes of defenseless creatures, and all they are doing about it is blaming us and getting us to buy dangerous 'green' light bulbs, solar panels and bird killing wind turbines. Oh and taxing us.

Answer 8

Because the average person is ignorant on the issues surrounding global warming. The skeptics and deniers are just parroting what they’ve heard on Fox News, or read on someone’s blog.

Answer 9

Here's one thing that absolutely everybody agrees on: Conservation is a job for other people. Those who think we need to burn less fuel for environmental reasons still drive, fly, heat and light their homes. Those who don't buy the environmental crisis feel the same. It's unanimous.

Answer 10

most people are stubborn and refuse to change their out look - or even to compromise a bit..



My bigger concern is WHO CARES ABOUT THE DETAILS... lets get our heads together and clean up the planet for the planets sake.. - we can all agree there IS air pollution, and pollution in general.. and stuff like that...

Answer 11

(gwens18a) This is for real, our weather man is a climatologist that doesn't believe in AGW or models.



By the way I would prefer to be called a optimist with a skeptical attitude.



EDIT: It's true ye of little faith.

Answer 12

We do agree that we need to reduce all pollution including ghg's.



It's just that the believers want others to believe in the myth exactly as they do, or they won't accept others.



How many times has consensus science been proven wrong in the past? Why would anyone believe the consensus now?



Why can't we just stick to objective science? Why does anyone listen to subjective science?

Answer 13

the people that make money off of oil pay those aholes to say that theres nothing wrong with the earth but we know and we can see and feel the climate change were killing the earth.

Answer 14

Many leading scientists disagree with the mantra that the earth is warming due to human activity. Can't you accept disagreement ?



CoolingEarth.org looks like a scam.

Answer 15

Didn't your mother ever teach you that using emotionally charged religious language is detrimental to civil discourse on any subject?

Answer 16

What about the people who just don't care? What about them.

Answer 17

I'm not sure because they are both right.