Why are people so contentious on the topic of climate change?
Because its a topical political issue right now... right wing / left wing. It's like abortion, you have to go one way or the other on how you feel. There's no in between in politics or people think your wishywashy.
Why are people so contentious on the topic of climate change?
Well this is a very important issue, like the future of planet earth depends on it. And since when was any type of political issue ever discussed like grown adults.
People don't want to believe it because their consciouses would compel them to do something about it. It is easier to tell your self it isn't true or possible that way you don't have to deal with the guilt. People use this same technique to pass lie detector tests. If you can make your self believe that some thing is true or false regardless of reality you can trick the system. So maybe these idiots think that if they pretend it isn't there it will go away. They can't open dialog and be open minded because that would leave the possibility that they would have to do something about it. Sounds immature and childish but it is true, people never grow up.
Because to the educated people with an open mind, who have studied and understand Global Warming and are terrified about how the Ice Caps and Glaciers are disappearing, the ocean is getting warmer and less salty and the water level is measurably higher than it was even 20 years ago..
it is so frustrating to see someone with a typical sub-standard education and no scientific background who is just parroting the drivel from FOX NOISE NETWORK and don't stop to ask any questions, and this attitude is so prevalent... it just get's to you at times and when you see the %26quot;Do you think Global Warming is real%26quot; for the hundredths time in a week... well... sometimes you just lose patience.
The point of contention is not about whether or not the climate is changing. The point of contention is whether it is a natural cycle, totally man made, or a some of each.
The main problem is that folks like Gore have chosen to politicize this issue, and the methods being used to spread the FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt) make a mockery of solid science and ultimately tend to water down the credibility of those shouting %26quot;the sky is falling..%26quot;.
Personally I think we will get a heck of a lot more accomplished by focusing on real science rather than buying in to the ridiculous notion that a particular political party is more likely to solve a problem spanning hundreds of years (if not hundreds of millenia) in a single election cycle.
For the younger folks in the audience, it is important to realize that environmentalism, not to mention the whole %26quot;we are doomed unless we take immediate action%26quot; play as a political maneuver is not exactly new. Remember the 70's and early 80's
It's sad that we have come to this point where a serious problem becomes polarized. Bottom line, one side believes that the problem is a natural based phenomenon where mankind should not shoulder any of the blame, and in that same thought, should not have to share the responsibility or cost to try and %26quot;fix it%26quot;. The other side sees the situation as clearly a man made situation, and puts full blame and responsibility on mankind to take action at any cost.
Let's face it, the Planet is fine. It will survive mankind no matter what we do to it. Basic physics shows us that. The focus needs to be on if we are going to make the planet uninhabitable for most of the species living here now. Mankind could easily wipe it's self out in many ways. No matter how we kill ourselves off, the planet will still be here. At least until the Sun does it's little super nova thing and disintegrates Earth.
I think the point of healthy dialog has passed. There are some - me included - who have kept an open mind and weighed what the so-called experts on both sides are saying, looked at the logic and the motivation behind the claims, and have concluded that man has had very little impact on global climate change. There is is just too much suggestion that the scientific alarmists are being motivated by something other than sound science. I'm not a scientist, per se, but my education is in Earth %26amp; Atmospheric Science and I don't buy the hype. Logic brings me to my conclusion.
Just for fun one day I did some calculations and there is something like 44 CUBIC MILES (I don't remember the exact number) of atmosphere for every human upon this earth. Given the number of people in the undeveloped nations whose biggest contribution to greenhouse gasses would probably be in the form of methane (if you get my drift), it just doesn't seem likely, based on this alone, that global warming is man made. Science alone does not produce disparity of opinions of the magnitude we've seen with global climate change. The motivation of money does, however.
because the believers tend to be religious zealots and the doubters r sick of fear mongering and utter ignorance.
love
