Why do people get so emotional when global warming is questioned?

1. 61

   JerryTillotsonposted 14 years ago

   Why do people get so emotional when global warming is questioned?
   
   As a high school social studies teacher, I find it necessary to present oppsoing points of view on all controversial subjects, including global warming.  But frequently people become very expressive in their objections to the consideration of any information that disputes the climate change claim.  Why is this?

   replyreport
2. 70

   Mr. Happyposted 14 years ago

   The World, Earth or Mother Earth ... whichever name you pick, is our home. Forget your mansion, little shack, apartment, cabin or wherever else you live - it is nothing! Non-important, compared to your "real" house: this Planet. I am not an environmentalist but common sense tells me that by polluting, testing nuclear weapons, drilling the ground (mining), clear-cutting forests, infesting the water, etc are all on the increase as the world's population is also on the increase.
     And it doesn't take a bloody genius to see the weather is messed-up. It's December and I have not even picked up the shovel yet; by this time of the year I should have invested in winter tires, I would have had my boots out of the basement and I would not have my balcony door open now because snow would be dropping in from my "snow-filled" balcony. This the new Toronto though: no snow past the middle of December and I feel that it's warmer.
     So back to what I was just saying: by our actions we are changing the 'face' of this planet and it's system called: Nature. And when Nature changes amigo ... we get Tsunamis, Katerina and 'stuff like that'. Keep "@%&$%^&" with the planet and as the saying goes: "When you think you're %#$@&!* them, they're $%@!* you!" We as humans will not last, not unless we integrate ourselves within the system of Nature smoothly without a "footprint". Didn't Pascal say something along the line that man is so weak that a drop of water can kill him/her ... Nature can wipe us out in minutes if its changes are extreme.
   So, do not question what is visible at least. First of all I get insulted when I see global warming take place and you question it ... More than that though, I take offense at those questioning it because this changing of the world's system (nature) is of categorical importance to our existence - we depend on this system. Questioning the importance of Nature and overlooking it's problems is like detonating several atomic bombs ... we all go down the drain. How can you even ask why people get emotional? We are talking about our survival as a specie ... wow ... are you suicidal!? Do you not care for your kids' future?

   replyreport
3. 61

   JerryTillotsonposted 14 years ago

   Thank you for making my point.  Asked another way, why do some people demand total toleration for their points of view but grant none to others.
   
   First, let me get a few things straight.  I do believe global warming is happening.  You can't argue with the evidence. 
   
   I am all for the environment, preventing pollution, opposed to overconsumption and waste, and yes, I am concerned about the future of our world and my grandchildren.
   
   I'm assuming from your expertise on this subject that you have examined the statistics regarding climate change on earth over the last 400,000 years.  A line graph that summarizes the conditions over that times span go up and down tremendously.  We have had climate change before.  Was it humans who brought on the end of the last major ice age 30,000 years ago?  What about the warming trend that helped to bring Europe out the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance?  Then the cooling period that followed that, and then another warming period.
   
   The earth has been through a good many climate changes and life is still here.  Our part of the globe may be warming right now, but once Mother Earth decides to cool off again, and it will, it would be naive of us to think we can do anything to stop that.  But then the eco alarmists will be crying "Global Cooling", and they'll find a way to blame that on humans.

   replyreport
4. 61

   Jay Sposted 14 years ago

   People believe they are right always, so if you don't agree with them, you are just wrong.
     I like the way you asked this question. You didn't question global warming or it's probable causes. You questioned why do people react the way they do.
      I will stick to my original statement. People don't allow themselves to view both sides of any argument. Once they form an opinion, they assume that they are right and nobody has the right to have a different view. Therefore , they must be wrong.
     Then again, I could be wrong. Unlike others I have known, I have been wrong before.

   replyreport
5. 81

   G.L.A.posted 14 years ago

   Because we are ALL responsible, and todays' society rejects the idea of accountability.

   replyreport
6. 60

   Robbert Blokposted 14 years ago

   I'd like to spread a message...
   
   We have an option, if all else fails, as the people of this planet to save the earth in a day and at the same time erase poverty all at ones, give everyone back their ability to make a difference and be a hero and finally save us all from slavery...
   
   It would be a bit weird, a bit scary, and new problems would instantly present them selves but this would finally be everyone's fight and everyone's chance to actively make a difference and be a real hero...
   
   Our panic button...
   
   Drop
   all
   the
   money 
   
   Forget about it
   and start taking care of yourself and the rest of us.
   
   No more power. No more depth. Real leaders. Everything on this planet is ours. No more pollution. Only the laws of nature and truth. No one to tell us what to do but our hearts.
   
   Think about it. Are we gonna let the real world leaders, who's faces are hidden, stir us straight to hell and kill our earth? What are we? Drones or humans?

   replyreport
7. 61

   GNelsonposted 14 years ago

   Part of the global warming issue is population.  Both sides of this argument should at least agree that the Earth can not support unlimited population growth. If we start with population and work out from there, we can do some good things.  Water, for instance, is becomming a survival issue in some parts of the world.  Hunger is also an issue.  By the way both of these are issues within the U.S.A. as well as around the world.  We can not continue to treat this planet like we have another to go to when we are done with it.

   replyreport
8. 60

   It's just meposted 14 years ago

   Experience the answer for yourself move up here to Alaska for a year and find out!

   replyreport
9. 74

   Jeff Berndtposted 13 years ago

   I imagine that it's because people are lazy. They like simple things, that can be explained simply. Global warming tends to get reduced to either, "It's only a cyclical change, and human behavior has nothing to do with it." or, "We're killing the planet! zomg!!!1!eleven1!"
   
   Both extreme ideas are elegant, simple, and almost certainly, imo, wrong.
   
   I expect that the current warming trend is both cyclical and being intensified by human activity. Is the human activity enough to push the warming trend over the proverbial edge? Dunno. Possibly.
   
   But people get mad about it because they put a lot of stock into whether their idea is right or not. It's an important question. If the cyclical folks are right, then there's no point in spending all the money and effort to curtail pollution. It will be a big hit to the economy for zero gain. If the human-driven folks are right, if we don't stop with the pollution, our planet will be uninhabitable--game over.
   
   But it's a lot easier for people to get emotional and angry than it is to examine the data, try to understand it, and maybe discover that we might be wrong, or at least not entirely correct. Also being wrong is embarrassing to most of us, and we have an emotional need to be right.

   replyreport
10. 60

    Island Hopperposted 13 years ago

    It is because instead of looking at the issue objectively, people lump this issue together with religion and politics. Many people think they can't have concern for the environment because it makes them a bad Christian. For example, if they believe there is global warming, they think they have to subscribe to all the beliefs of a certain political party and that doing so puts their salvation at risk. Silly hypothesis, I know, but seen it at work too often.

    replyreport
11. 56

    J.Dizzleposted 13 years ago

    I think one problem is that people are not open minded about things.  People get set in their beliefs and most never actually learn about the other side of the fence.  They get so set in their beliefs that they don't even listen to the facts they may change their mind.  The problem is that as with everything there are always two sides to the debate when in reality there is only one side...the truth.  Too many people don't want to hear the truth because it would mean they are wrong.  As far as global warming goes the evidence seems to say that global warming/cooling is natural and it has been happening for millions of years.  The issue should be are we negatively effecting this natural process and if so how do we fix it.

    replyreport
12. 59

    andydurlingposted 13 years ago

    In my experience, it is the people who question human-induced rapid global warming that get so emotional about the issue. The fact that there is an overwhelming scientific consensus that dangerously rapid global warming is occurring, and that a large part of it is caused by human-induced fossil fuel emissions, seems to spark off a strong denial of the evidence, as well as fierce personal attacks upon climate scientists and all who support the findings of those scientists. The scale and the intensity of the denial is both irrational and extreme in many cases, so I feel the question should be: why do people get so emotional when the scientific evidence for global warming is made the basis for forming policy initiatives that would help protect all of us from the potentially catastrophic consequences of global warming?

    replyreport
13. 93

    Faceless39posted 13 years ago

    Because the media has systematically programmed us to have that response.

    replyreport
14. 60

    lime light powerposted 13 years ago

    Hmmmm. Having read through most of the posts here, and diverging from the original question slightly, but helping perhaps to address the global warming debate. Oddly enough I just posted a hub about this very issue the other day. For those of you who are not familiar with Greg Craven and Global Warming as risk management take a read: http://hubpages.com/hub/Global-Warming-Risk-Management

    replyreport