Why don't people want to believe in the existence of climate warming?

Author: Zheng Ruolin

I have been frozen at home by the cold in Europe these days, and even the car battery is lying in the cold without electricity. It is reported everywhere that the heavy snow in the northern hemisphere is the biggest in half a century. Everyone is asking: where is the climate warming?

This seems to be a great irony to the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit: in recent days, Europe, America and Asia have experienced rare cold weather for half a century or even 60 years, and some parts of Britain have even issued extreme cold weather warnings to warn residents that they may freeze to death if they stay outdoors for a long time! Is it climate warming, or, as the French scientist Alleger said, "the global temperature has been falling for nearly ten years?" From Beijing to Paris, it is snowing everywhere, snowing, snowing ... this is the first time I have lived in Paris for so many years. Twenty kilometers away from Paris, the temperature dropped to MINUS twenty degrees! Provence, a rare snow trail in southern France, turned white! Global warming is a "scientific fact", which is really unacceptable.

Incredibly, some people say that the biggest snowfall in the northern hemisphere in half a century is the result of global warming? This is really treating people like fools! What does it matter if the consequence of climate warming is heavy snow? In fact, even climate warmers have to admit that the global temperature has been falling for nearly ten years. Some people say that the rising climate in summer is also true. The problem is that there is regional warming, but it is rare for the whole northern hemisphere to cool down and snow like today! French TV 5' s special program "C dans l'air" made a program today: "A cold blow to global warming"! When I hear people-even experts-saying that the climate is "warming", it makes people seriously doubt the relationship between today's news and the facts: maybe the snow is really rising in temperature, or people frozen by snow are crazy! In the program, I interviewed a Beijinger and asked him what he thought of "climate warming". He replied: it's good to snow, and it's a good year to snow!

Only a few days after the Copenhagen Climate Summit, it has already begun to produce the "Copenhagen effect": as long as people on earth are concerned, it can be said to be "climate change"! But the problem is that, whether in France, the west or other countries in the world, with the Copenhagen Summit opening a "climate stage" for the world, more and more people are increasingly aware that, in fact, the public not only knows nothing about what really happened, but also is likely to misunderstand, misinform and misunderstand a series of so-called "news" that are widely spread, resulting in "climate warming". Recently, there has been a considerable "rebound" in major French media. The network is very active. There are not many topics that cause such a big difference between the mainstream media and the Internet, and climate is one of them. In fact, contradictory or even contrary information is constantly transmitted to the public, which leads the public to ask: Who do you trust?

On the eve of the summit, the French news weekly Express published a poll of 27,000 netizens from 57 countries in the world, which was jointly conducted by Nielsen Institute and Oxford University. It said that only 37% people in the world were worried about "climate change", which was four percentage points lower than the same survey two years ago. Especially in the United States, it dropped from 34% to 25%. Only China, on the contrary, rose from 30% to 36%. However, almost at the same time, the survey results of 240,765,438+0 people in 23 countries published by French newspaper le figaro are just the opposite: 64% people are worried about climate change (20% higher than 44% in 1998), but this phenomenon has "regressed" in China: in 2000.

Not only the data, but also the two most critical issues "whether the climate is getting warmer" and "whether the climate change is due to human industrial activities", there are two diametrically opposed views! The reason why the theory of climate warming is widely quoted by the global media is that it originated from a very authoritative organization: the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (GIEC). This group was established in 1988, and published four reports in 1990, 1995, 200 1 and 2007 respectively. These reports have three parts: climate analysis, consequences of climate change and political countermeasures. In addition to thousands of pages of reports, there are 37 pages of "summaries" for politicians to refer to. The warmers claim that their report and conclusions are authoritative, because this organization is composed of 2,500 climate experts from all over the world. However, Paul Reiter, a professor at the French Pasteur Institute who is a member of this group, opposes this statement: "As long as you study the identities of some people on this list, you can know that many of them are not scientists at all." Richard Lindzen, another member of the team and a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also said, "Many of them are administrative and support personnel." And "many people have not been consulted. In fact, many experts disagree with the organization's conclusion about climate warming. " Professor Wright also revealed: "I know many real experts who resigned because they disagreed with the results of the group. But their names have always been on the list of 2,500 experts. " Professor John Christie, who participated in writing the report of the group, said, "The media often say that global warming is a science, but as a climate expert, I think this is a wrong view." Who do you trust?

According to the theory of climate warming, the climate has been rising continuously for nearly two hundred years, reaching 0.76 degrees in the last century. If left unchecked, it will lead to the earth's climate rising by at least 2 degrees in the next century. The consequences are disastrous, such as rising sea level and melting glaciers. Experts who oppose the theory of climate warming suggest that the earth's climate is actually changing all the time, which has nothing to do with human activities. The reason why the climate has been warming for nearly 200 years is that the earth experienced a period called "Little Ice Age" by climatologists and geographers from 15 to 18 centuries before that. Before that, the climate of the earth was much hotter between about 1 100 and 1500, which was called "the best period of the Middle Ages". Climate warmers describe today's climate warming as a "doomsday disaster", while Philip Stott, an emeritus professor of biogeography at the University of London in the United Kingdom, believes that in fact, the highest climate in the Middle Ages was when Europe became rich. Go back to three thousand years ago, when the climate was higher than today. Who do you trust?

Climate warmers believe that human industrial activities lead to excessive carbon dioxide emissions, which leads to global warming. Patrick Mike, a professor of environmental science at Virginia State University, believes that in the past 150 years, when industrial activities were still confined to a few European countries, the climate rose most obviously, reaching 0.5 degrees. Maximum climate 1940. However, by the time of the fastest development of global industrialization in World War II, that is, the "glorious 30 years" in the West, the climate had been declining continuously until 1975. In the same period (1940-70), the carbon dioxide emissions are rising. Moreover, the anti-climate warming faction also believes that in the atmospheric composition, CO2 only accounts for 0.054% of all components, which is insignificant and the influence of human beings is even smaller; 95% of the carbon dioxide that causes the greenhouse effect is caused by the evaporation of ocean water vapor, not by human industrial activities. The carbon dioxide released by the earth's volcanic eruption alone exceeds the total carbon dioxide released by all human industrial activities plus cars and planes. Even animals emit more carbon dioxide than 6.8 billion people themselves ... so climate warming has nothing to do with humans. Who do you trust?

The strongest evidence of the climate warming faction is to drill ice from the Arctic ice layer and study the changes of carbon dioxide over the centuries. The conclusion is two curves described by former US Vice President Al Gore in famous environmental protection movies: CO2 is related to climate change, and the more CO2 is emitted, the higher the temperature is. However, the anti-climate-warming faction suggests that CO2 is indeed related to climate change and rise, but by analyzing the curves of the two, it can be found that the temperature rises first, and then CO2 rises; It takes 800 years for the climate to rise, and then CO2 will rise, not the other way around! Who do you trust?

There are many similar controversies. If the above disputes are mainly concentrated in the scientific field, there are also serious differences in the political and social fields. Climate warmers blame each other, and opposing climate warming is irresponsible for the future of mankind and a crime against our home planet. They asked politicians to take action, not only to limit the carbon dioxide emissions of countries, but also to establish a strict inspection mechanism and impose sanctions on countries that do not abide by the agreements adopted in Copenhagen in the future. The anti-climate-warming faction believes that this is a disguised restriction on the industrial progress of developing countries, and it is a disguised way to "collect money" through an area that human beings do not understand or influence (referring to climate): the carbon tax is used to kill two birds with one stone, which not only limits the possibility of underdeveloped countries and developing countries catching up with developed countries in Europe and America, but also makes huge money from it. The anti-climate warming faction believes that human beings should invest a lot of money in scientific research and practice, such as preventing desertification, preventing air pollution (including dust and harmful gases ... but excluding carbon dioxide, because carbon dioxide is a gas beneficial to human beings, not pollution), anti-deforestation and renewable energy research, which are beneficial and likely to succeed, and have obvious practical benefits for human beings, rather than taxing carbon dioxide ... Who do you believe?

The mass media is not an expert. Only climate experts can answer these questions. Climate science is a new discipline, and its vitality and uncertainty are very distinct. Everyone should ask whether it is a democratic and scientific way for Copenhagen Climate Summit to embark on a controversial topic in a supranational form through political coercion.