Is the amount a person believes in GW inversely proportional to their education level?
- Anonymous1 decade agoBest Answer
Global Warming and the Faith of the Brainwashed
That global warming has continued to captivate the media, car companies, energy companies and so many more demonstrates how enormously brainwashed Americans are.
Still convinced that “the entire global scientific community has a consensus on the question that human beings are responsible for global warming,” like Al Gore purported?
For starters, in November 2005, Swiss researchers from the journal Quaternary Science Reviews overtly stated, “Whatever slight impact humans might have on the climate, it is too small to measure.”
Bob Carter, an environmental scientist at James Cook University testified before a U.S. Senate Committee, saying, “Lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements, if corrected for non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, show little if any global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 percent).” We’re obviously not causing the type of damage we thought we were.
And if you’re still worried about the polar ice caps melting, the National Snow and Ice Data Center has reported that ice caps are not shrinking, but have actually increased in size and concentration from 1980 to 2008.
David Evans, a consultant to the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005, shared in an article for The Australian that his initial reaction to the theory and buzz of global warming in 1999 was one of excitement, feeling “useful and fairly important; we were saving the planet.” He goes on to explain a few points:
“The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics . . . The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
“There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.
“The satellites that measure the world's temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year.
“None of these points is controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance.”
I probably have significantly punier scientific knowledge than Al Gore, but it is fairly obvious that Gore’s entire premise for his misleading documentary, that we are causing global warming, is questionable at best, and most likely false.
What is truly upsetting about all of this is not that so many of us were duped. It’s that so many of us are still duped.
American companies are still spending huge quantities in order to cater to this fraudulent belief. Instead of actually improving their products in ways that actually enhance efficiency and, hence, the strength of the company and the American economy, they’re catering to the brainwashed.
Judging by their “We can do this” campaign, Pacific Gas and Electric is still very comfortably convinced that global warming is inevitable, unless we all act quickly.
And in addition to the businesses, we have politicians who are either a) still clinging to empty threats about global warming or b) have seen the holes in the alleged global warming crisis but are too scared to take on the media. Is an alarmist theory that has been all but smothered really worth $6 trillion, which is what the proposed cap-and-trade climate bill is estimated to cost the U.S. by 2050? Does anyone else think this is crazy?
It smells a lot like a control issue to me, but who knows? Maybe there are a lot of ill-informed people who are just really concerned . . . and we elected them to represent us.
Feel free to reach your own conclusions about why so many are still convinced of a totally unconvincing theory. But it is imperative that those of us who have learned to question global warming have the courage to say so. Our country can’t afford a government that wastes absurd amounts of taxpayer dollars fighting windmills.Source(s): http://www.northstarwriters.com/ns125.htm
- 1 decade ago
The only sure thing is that the amount a person believes in GW is inversely proportional to their connection with oil companies.Source(s): In a similar way, the degree to which one believes passive smoking is harmful is inversely proportional to their connection with tobacco companies: http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/024783.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passive_smoking
- davemLv 51 decade ago
There's the distinction to be made between education and intellect. One can be well schooled but still lack the intelligence to deal with the information.
Those who believe in global warming may or may not be well educated but their intellectual skills appear to suffer.
- JimZLv 71 decade ago
No. I don't think so. Most peoples knowledge of science is pretty low unfortunately. They often look to others to fill in the blanks. If they are leftist, they are more likely to beleive theories that suggest humans, particularly industry and the west, are responsible for bad things. If they are conservative, they are more likely to be skeptical of leftists claims. It is clearly more proportional to politics than education.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 3 years ago
that could have some benefit. notwithstanding it quite is a fallacy to apply that as a controversy against faith. For the tutorial enterprise might in simple terms have an exceedingly slanted philosophy of existence that underlies its curriculum. I say that this is in certainty the case. extreme colleges and universities, by potential of and vast, are actually not coaching understanding, which looks on the totality of certainty, yet a definite philosophy of materialism underlies maximum of their curriculum. So quite than relatively coaching, skills of a only mechanical nature are given (even interior the arts), as something above guy is systematically programmed out of his concepts. ---
- 1 decade ago
depends what part of the country you're in and what political affiliation people have, which is ridiculous b/c global climate change is purely scientific and should have nothing to do with what people believe.
science is based on facts, not what people believe
- WeathermanLv 71 decade ago
Outside the USA the majority of rational people, irrespective of educational levels, understand about global warming, and know that we are a major factor in it.
In the USA it seems to be based on who you vote for.
- Dr JelloLv 71 decade ago
No, it's proportional to the level of popularity you desire. If you want to be popular, then you just accept, believe, and submit to the popular dogma.
If you don't care about being popular you think for yourself and can't even imagine how anyone can make the argument that "Global Warming" doesn't actually mean the planet is warming (Ouch, that hurt my head) or that since 97% of 'scientists' believe that it's true (Ouch, Ouch!) then it is.
They don't care about fitting into the popular group, because they know people will enjoy them for who they are, and not what popular mantra du jour they believe right now.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
No, not necessarily. There are a lot of over-educated people who learned lots of propaganda and few thinking skills.
I think there's a huge age factor involved. There are very few people over 40 years old who remember the great global cooling panic of the 1970's who buy into global warming much.
- Ben OLv 61 decade ago
It seems to be inversely proportional to age.
I think a lot of the believers in AGW will be sceptics of the next big scare campaign.