Why do some people choose to ignore the overwhelming scientific consensus on the greenhouse effect?

People are generally not well able to assess risks.As a result, they pay more attention to problems that now seem big, but which are not as important as climate change.

Look at the sea level rise.According to the worst scenarios, which assume that people will not act to counter climate change, the sea level may rise to 8 meters in the next 150 years. If that happens, it will be so expensive to keep the country, that we will have to give up a large part of the Netherlands.

For example, people are now busy getting things like culture preservation, they are afraid that the ‘ Dutch culture ‘ is threatened.Yes that is under threat, because it can be good that the Netherlands no longer exists over a hundred years. But that will not come by the Muslims or the Poles or Brexit, but by climate change.

Furthermore, people cannot really contain large sums.People still understand that 10,000 is a lot less than one million, but a hundred million and one hundred billion sound just as much. So when one talks about billions of tonnes of CO2 in the atmosphere, people soon wonder with their thoughts. People are very bad at containing scale in it. For example, if I say that 40 billion tonnes of CO2 are pumped into the atmosphere per year (and yes that is the official figure at the moment) then that for many people doesn’t record much further than ‘ oh that’s a lot. ‘ Just because there is no reference framework for this in our daily lives.

So, people underestimate or ignore it, because they are bad at estimating risks and containing numbers.Also, many people do not know how to read scientific research. This is partly the mistake of the media over the years, which has a hand to simplify any research that comes out to simplify and sensationally. Because of this, people have become worse in assessing whether a source is reliable or not.

And of course there are a lot of lobbying groups, starting with those of the oil companies, who benefit as much as possible disinformation to help the world in if they can.There is a huge amount of money involved in misleading people about the impact of the greenhouse effect. People are being lied to this, and they will also be inclined to choose the story that feels most comfortable for them, namely that there is nothing to change and nothing is going on.

Those are the main causes I think.

The fact that there are still so many non-scientists and politicians who are in the talk of climate sceptics means that the lobby of the old-fashioned fossil industry is still strong. In addition, it also plays that the warming prevented bad news concerns.Many people will have to leave things that are pleasant. That is not fun and so one denies that there is a problem. We want to drive, on air holiday, the air conditioning in the summer and the heating high in the winter. And preferably a bit affordable.

Some people do not want to change their behavior, and because it is not to be defended that you are not adjusting your behavior, you can only deny it all.

The words ‘ scientific ‘ and ‘ concensus ‘ cannot be used in the same way.
Science relies on systematically obtained, orderly and verifiable human knowledge.
It is not because some scientists-including historians, sociologists, Psychaters and politicologists-agree that human activity is changing the climate, that is the same.
This could be, but is not conclusively scientifically proven.
In the past, one was also a consensus about the fact that the Earth was flat.In the meantime it is clear that this is not the same.
What is certain is that many interest groups can benefit greatly from the climate hysteria.There is a lot of money earned with CO2 levies, subsidies for windmills and solar panels, overinsulation, and many other measures.
The cooperation between ‘ climate science ‘ (whatever this may mean) and politics is shocking.The first group pays the second to scare the population to be able to tax them afterwards.
The childish reasoning of the green movement is also irritating.”Renewable energy delivers X-thousand jobs!” They claim time and time again.
So I can do it too: let us ban all the tractors and reteam the fields by hand.This yields a million jobs!
In short, ‘ One ‘ does not know, but it is a nice source of income in the meantime…

Leave a Reply