I have some questions. Why do people wish to deny the human contribution to the global warming problem? Why such rabid arguments? If you choose to not do anything in your personal life to alleviate the situation, that is your choice. Many state that people are getting rich off the hysteria. How? As for the hysteria, that terminology is coming from the people denying there is a human contribution to the global warming. There is a combination of natural and human contributions to the issue and the ultimate outcome is unknown. The practice of living a “greener” life is only common sense on many levels and contributes to more than just global warming. So why the backlash of incensed denial?
My theory is that most people would rather not take action to better the treatment of the Earth and continue their lives as they always have. To attack the messengers is easier than trying to create a situation that is more beneficial to the earth overall. I don’t want to encourage a “fight” I would like to see people working as a cohesive unit to keep earth healthy and working to be informative on all issues.
I’m not a scientist but science fascinates me. I encourage respectful discussion and have seen the film about the global warming swindle as well as An Inconvenient Truth. There is always new scientific information coming in on all sides which is the beauty of science. In science there is always an ongoing discussion on the theories and evidence being presented. There is a constant, daily, refining of information and changes being made by scientists although there is nothing that discredits the human contribution.
The denying public chooses to take advantage of the inherent debate of science and since there is discussion, they don’t really know what they are talking about so it must be false. But that’s just it.
Scientific evidence and data is constantly evolving and the stifling of that discussion because you don’t like the results (as our current administration has done) is a sin.
Check my blogroll for more information.