Why Does the Us Have a Uniquely Large Population of Climate Change?

Upload and start working with your PDF documents.
No downloads required

How To Erase PDF Online?

Upload & Edit Your PDF Document
Save, Download, Print, and Share
Sign & Make It Legally Binding

Easy-to-use PDF software

review-platform review-platform review-platform review-platform review-platform

Why does the US have a uniquely large population of climate change deniers? What are the primary driving factors in the US contributing to this, compared to the rest of the world?

I think it is worth bearing in mind that in the present day we seek to criticise what our politicians do. We do so by analysing things which are going wrong in our lives and then seek to place a blame. Its a perfectly natural human response, and our view of government and politicians influences us when we decide that it is government policy that has us hard done by. This isn't just in the US, this happens in any liberal democracy. We are always critical of the present day politicians because we can identify something to be critical of with ease. Whilst when we analyse former politicians who no longer have an impact on our lives we do not think of them as badly as we did when t were in office. For example, there were many people who disliked Gordon Brown while he was PM in the UK (2007-2010), but now in hindsight people aren't so hostile. I believe this transcends borders and political systems. In conclusion therefore I would definitely suggest that we are more critical. US politicians aren't great, but if people understood the political context better then the sense of perspective t draw may endear them more to current political figures. For example, many political figures of the past advocated slavery or opposed female suffrage, and the fact that opinions like that have been removed from political discourse is a good thing. But fundamentally politicians were pretty bad in the past, however we just don't feel the ill effects of it right now, and allows us to be less negative about them, or even nostalgic.

PDF documents can be cumbersome to edit, especially when you need to change the text or sign a form. However, working with PDFs is made beyond-easy and highly productive with the right tool.

How to Erase PDF with minimal effort on your side:

  1. Add the document you want to edit — choose any convenient way to do so.
  2. Type, replace, or delete text anywhere in your PDF.
  3. Improve your text’s clarity by annotating it: add sticky notes, comments, or text blogs; black out or highlight the text.
  4. Add fillable fields (name, date, signature, formulas, etc.) to collect information or signatures from the receiving parties quickly.
  5. Assign each field to a specific recipient and set the filling order as you Erase PDF.
  6. Prevent third parties from claiming credit for your document by adding a watermark.
  7. Password-protect your PDF with sensitive information.
  8. Notarize documents online or submit your reports.
  9. Save the completed document in any format you need.

The solution offers a vast space for experiments. Give it a try now and see for yourself. Erase PDF with ease and take advantage of the whole suite of editing features.

Customers love our service for intuitive functionality



46 votes

Erase PDF: All You Need to Know

But here's a prediction for our discussion. According to an article today on my blog, that prediction may not hold up. The author claims that the models are showing more warming than IPCC predictions. However, it is important to remember that “climate sensitivity” (the warming that will happen if we double levels of GHG in the atmosphere) is only supposed to be below 1, with the real IPCC sensitivity being above 3 C. So it is impossible for climate models to predict more than 1 C of warming when that 1 C corresponds to the same CO2 and temperature in the atmosphere as the temperature in lava or the CO2/temperature in CO2 bubbles. Now of course that has been well established in science. Just today, a paper appeared in the journal Science confirming that the models were right. However, let's look at the article and the science. What.