The massive body of scientists agrees that rapid climate change is happening, and that global warming is a serious issue which is being caused by human activities. However, there are still a few people who are in denial, claiming that global warming is non-sense, and that Earth is just undergoing a normal change that is not influenced by humans. Unfortunately, most of these rely only on cherry picking and on selecting only the facts that suit them, disregarding the overwhelming evidence of human-induced global warming.
Who are the deniers of global warming?
It is peculiar that, despite 97% of climate change experts being certain that global warming is happening and that we have contributed to it, there is a lot of debate going on, especially over the internet. But who are these deniers who dispute the overwhelming amount of studies and data confirming human-induced global warming?
In the scientific community, there is no debate, as these facts are taken as what they are – science. The deniers who are causing all the disputes across the internet are usually politically-biased, media trusts with conservative views, or pseudo-scientists who prefer to show only the facts that seem to contradict global warming as being caused by humans.
All these seem to disregard the 97% of strong scientific evidence that needs no further confirmation. Apparently, biased newspapers seem fixed on amplifying the opinions of only 3% of scientists and non-scientist contrarians. These contrarians start backwards, all their arguments being rooted in their opposition towards climate change solutions, and going all the way back, picking only evidence that confirms their ideologies and predetermined conclusions.
What should be done about it?
Contrarians saying that the majority of the scientific community is wrong all fear that money will be wasted on methods of reducing CO2 emissions. But what is there to lose? Are making our air and water cleaner and moving beyond using fossil fuels which are already limited not worth every cent?
The sad truth is that the climate debate is not at all about science, but about politics and people who are opposing solutions that propose to mitigate gas emissions by pricing them and letting the free market solve this by itself. The scientific evidence is very clear about it – we are causing the global warming. Denying it only makes it worse. Not contributing to a solution means we are part of the problem. So what is there to argue about anyway?