But then I thought differently - let us not assume any evil intentions of those who disbelieve or question the science behind this. Notice I didn't say "deniers". Deniers implies that they have moved beyond questioning to argue that it isn't happening - either for political or economic reasons.
.
But instead of attributing a motive, let's look at those who question the science. So, for me, it is a simple - the overwhelming evidence and scientific work in place backs the model of Climate Change. But the operative wording there is "for me". I studied a lot of this in College way back in the late 1970s. I understand the thinking behind it. And, it is playing out as I was taught in 1979. Why wouldn't anyone else believe it?
.
And THAT is the key question. Why wouldn't people believe Scientists about this? I can think of a couple of reasons. There is the political - "all Scientists are lefties" argument. But that would be more in line with the "deniers" arguments.
.
.
Not just bad advertising (like cigarette smoking doctors), but real medical treatments that caused permanent damage (Thalidomide babies), scientific consensus that allowed building a nuclear power plant in a Tsunami zone.
.
Maybe time has just shown that "scientific proof" is fluid. And if the cost of combating something is as high as it is trying to stop Global Climate Change, perhaps questioning is understandable.
.
Again, I have no doubts, but I spent years studying all this crap in school. And so, I shall try not to ascribe motive to those that disbelieve - or question how rapidly it will occur. After all, the idea of a "tipping point" (the point of no return) is NOT agreed to by a consensus of scientists. The problem is, when it comes - if it comes, it is by definition too late.