Skip Nav
2016 Presidential Debates
17 Fabulous Items For the "Nasty Women" of America
Romantic Comedies
101 Romantic Movies You Can Stream on Netflix Tonight
Books
20 Standout Shelfies That Are All Kinds of Book-Lover Goals

Do You Think Global Warming Is Exaggerated?

Well it looks like a backlash against green is upon us just in time for St. Patrick's Day Earth Day. According to a new Gallup Poll, a growing number of Americans think global warming is exaggerated.

Today, a record-breaking 41 percent of Americans believe the news hypes up the seriousness of global warming, compared to 28 percent who think the media underestimates the threat. And 29 percent of those surveyed think global warming is correctly portrayed.

Overall it looks like the sense of urgency surrounding global warming is melting away. So pretend you're Goldilocks' three (polar) bears — is news coverage of global warming too hot, too cold, or juuuuust right?

Source

Around The Web
Join The Conversation
CHOOCHOO CHOOCHOO 7 years
Exaggerated. If those who rail against it on a daily basis were that scared of global warming, they would be living in green huts, avoiding use of jets and polyester. I certainly don't see that happening...
beavis667 beavis667 7 years
I think by definition, a fairy tale is already exaggerated.
stephley stephley 7 years
"Worrying about pollution is a luxury of a developed country. The population of third world countries put a priority of feeding and clothing themselves and their children." I responded to this - if corn prices were the only issue I might have focused on that more, but it's something of a straw man in the big picture. If we simply consider environmental concerns a 'luxury', how many more tragedies like Bohpal can be inflicted on Third World countries? How many more Third World citizens will live with the dangerous muck and byproducts of mining that pays them pennies while slowly killing or sickening them ?
stephley stephley 7 years
"Worrying about pollution is a luxury of a developed country. The population of third world countries put a priority of feeding and clothing themselves and their children."I responded to this - if corn prices were the only issue I might have focused on that more, but it's something of a straw man in the big picture. If we simply consider environmental concerns a 'luxury', how many more tragedies like Bohpal can be inflicted on Third World countries? How many more Third World citizens will live with the dangerous muck and byproducts of mining that pays them pennies while slowly killing or sickening them ?
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
Stephley, did you even read the comment? Sometimes, the way you respond - it's like you ignore the comments and just go off on your own little cloud. Grandpa pointed out the NEGATIVE effects of our focus on pollution (ie, corn prices,) and you say it's a good thing. So I guess life is sacred as long as you're in a 1st world country with plenty to eat?
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
Stephley, did you even read the comment? Sometimes, the way you respond - it's like you ignore the comments and just go off on your own little cloud. Grandpa pointed out the <B>NEGATIVE</b> effects of our focus on pollution (ie, corn prices,) and you say it's a good thing. So I guess life is sacred as long as you're in a 1st world country with plenty to eat?
stephley stephley 7 years
Since the third world doesn't pollute to the extent that the industrialized world does, it shouldn't be the only luxury we're willing to share with them.
Grandpa Grandpa 7 years
Worrying about pollution is a luxury of a developed country. The population of third world countries put a priority of feeding and clothing themselves and their children. Turning corn into alcohol here in the U.S. drove up the price of grain related staples throughout the third world. Another example of the "Law of unexpected consequences".
Michelann Michelann 7 years
Wishful thinking, maybe, but that doesn't make it untrue. Either way, pollution certainly has an effect on quality of life and private property issues.
stephley stephley 7 years
Some people probably would think that climate stays the same, but it would be wishful thinking to believe that our pollution would have little or no impact.
genesisrocks genesisrocks 7 years
It really depends on the source you get it from. I would have to say that picture is exaggerated though.
genesisrocks genesisrocks 7 years
It really depends on the source you get it from. I would have to say that picture is exaggerated though.
leeluvfashion leeluvfashion 7 years
Underestimated. The earth is being neglected and trashed daily by people being careless. The changes and effects of of the pollutions is obvious; yes, the land naturally goes through adjusts and mountains may grow or tumble, however not at this rate of speed. In the last 30 years there is a drastic change in our planets ground formation. It scares me that such a large group of people think this extreme and very real problem is exaggerated.
Michelann Michelann 7 years
I wonder if people expect the climate would stay exactly the same if we weren't polluting so much.
stephley stephley 7 years
But we do know that certain climate changes can cause dramatic changes to life as we know it - flooding current coastal areas, turning current farmland into deserts. PERHAPS the changes would end up being better for humanity overall, but that's a pretty big gamble for all of us.
Carrie-Sue Carrie-Sue 7 years
I don't think that's what he meant Stephley...I agree with Grandpa - we can't know that this is the perfect climate for our world, no matter what the "experts" say.
stephley stephley 7 years
"What the heck makes the current climate the optimal climate for mankind any way?" So we should start playing around with climates to see what works best for the majority? That's just not an argument I'd repeat...
stephley stephley 7 years
"What the heck makes the current climate the optimal climate for mankind any way?" So we should start playing around with climates to see what works best for the majority? That's just not an argument I'd repeat...
Grandpa Grandpa 7 years
If we end up in a "little ice age", what then? A demand that we all change to coal?, that we mandate at least one cow,for every quarter acre of property people own? What the heck makes the current climate the optimal climate for mankind any way?
hausfrau hausfrau 7 years
I think the bottom line is that we should all be conserving because its a good thing to do.
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
Hmm. Jillness, I'll admit that I don't watch cable news anymore, but I really don't remember FOX ever using Global Warming as a <b>topic</b>, let alone for propaganda purposes. They certainly don't do months at a time rallying against GW, like MSNBC does rallying <b>for</b> GW!And that's exactly what I said. We changed it from GW to "Global Climate Change" so we can bitch even when it isn't warming. ;)Frankly, I have a difficult time taking the topic seriously. The main proponent of it uses GW <b>exclusively</b> for profit and self promotion, while completely disregarding the ideas of respect for our planet in his personal life.I think that society today is <b>extremely</b> self-important. I'm all about respect for the planet, I take the bus when possible, all that jazz. I think pollution is disgusting, and I chose to live in one of the cleanest air cities in the country for a long time. But to assume that we have such an effect on a world which existed for millions of years without us is extremely arrogant. There have been periods of time of great cooling and great heating over a (relatively) short period of time. From about 1100-1400, there was <b>intense</b> climate change. Global cooling, which caused population shifts throughout North America. The earth hasn't recovered from that, so to assume that it's all us, nothing about the earth's natural shifts in surface temperature seems a bit self-important to me.
chatondeneige chatondeneige 7 years
Hmm. Jillness, I'll admit that I don't watch cable news anymore, but I really don't remember FOX ever using Global Warming as a topic, let alone for propaganda purposes. They certainly don't do months at a time rallying against GW, like MSNBC does rallying for GW! And that's exactly what I said. We changed it from GW to "Global Climate Change" so we can bitch even when it isn't warming. ;) Frankly, I have a difficult time taking the topic seriously. The main proponent of it uses GW exclusively for profit and self promotion, while completely disregarding the ideas of respect for our planet in his personal life. I think that society today is extremely self-important. I'm all about respect for the planet, I take the bus when possible, all that jazz. I think pollution is disgusting, and I chose to live in one of the cleanest air cities in the country for a long time. But to assume that we have such an effect on a world which existed for millions of years without us is extremely arrogant. There have been periods of time of great cooling and great heating over a (relatively) short period of time. From about 1100-1400, there was intense climate change. Global cooling, which caused population shifts throughout North America. The earth hasn't recovered from that, so to assume that it's all us, nothing about the earth's natural shifts in surface temperature seems a bit self-important to me.
amybdk amybdk 7 years
"So when people say "They just readjusted the data on the artic ice", it is so important to know who the "THEY" is. "I completely agree, Jillness.
amybdk amybdk 7 years
"So when people say "They just readjusted the data on the artic ice", it is so important to know who the "THEY" is. " I completely agree, Jillness.
Jillness Jillness 7 years
People say it is exaggerated and used by the media...but both sides are using it for propaganda. Fox News, for example, really pushes the idea that people are exaggerating. The problem is that you can quote scientific studies, but who funds those studies? I don't trust extremist green groups, but there are also groups formed by oil and gas companies who are pressured to find a counter argument. So when people say "They just readjusted the data on the artic ice", it is so important to know who the "THEY" is. Realistically, I think we can see evidence of pollution severely impacting our planet in a negative way, so we should do something about it. Whether it is true "global warming" is irrelevant, IMO. Oh, and someone mentioned something about global warming and a really cold winter...."Global Warming" means more extremes in temperature, not just that it will get warmer. The title is not the definition.
A DIY Tree That Doesn't Drop Needles
Affordable Solar Panel House
How to Keep Lemons Fresh Longer
Cute Office Plants
Homemade Drain Cleaner
DIY Cleaning Products
Homemade Carpet Cleaner

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds