Why are there so many climate change deniers on the internet?
Well you really nailed the details in your question. It always amazes me that these deniers think they know better than the scientific experts, when clearly they don't understand the very basic fundamental physics of climate change. They say things like 'the planet has warmed before' as if this is some sort of amazing fact that climate scientists haven't considered. No duh! In many of the answers we've seen one common denial tactic - claim global warming is "just a religion". That way you can dismiss it without having to address the science, because it's not science, it's "just religion". A total cop-out, but very effective way to maintain denial. So why are so many of these deniers on the internet? Because they're in the vast minority in real life, but here they can congregate and pretend they're a large and important group and spread misinformation to try and fool people into thinking they're right. There really aren't many of them in reality, however. The few deniers simply feel the *need* for man-made global warming to be wrong. They're afraid it will result in some sort of carbon tax which will make gas prices go up and maybe they won't be able to drive their gas guzzling SUV anymore and it might result in *gasp* government regulation! The other day I posed a question to the deniers asking "what if you're wrong?". I can't link it because they got it deleted for a BS reason (not a question my butt), but roughly 20 deniers "answered" the question, and not a single one was willing to consider the consequences if the experts are right and they're wrong. Not one. Most of them just said "I'm not wrong" or "why don't you consider that you're wrong?" (which I do). That question proved that they're not true skeptics, because a skeptic questions all information equally. When you're not willing to consider the possibility that your position is wrong - that's the very definition of denial.
How much do you know about climate change?
Well I'm horrible at math and know very little about physics though I am trying to learn more. I only started studying climate change about a month before the climategate fiasco as I got bored of debating evolution with people who had their anti-science heads stuck in their you-know-what so I decided to look into climate change instead. In highschool, which was a long time ago, I took various courses in Geography and Geology and I did the same in college but my main points of study in college were both anthropology/archaeology and psychology. I do find it funny though that I've been accused in the past of working for the green industry in these forums based on what I've posted. I fully accept that the planet has warmed in the past century and I refuse to believe what opponents state if they use many of the deceiving tactics I've seen them use in the past, such as showing a graph of temperature variation where the medieval warm period was warmer than today yet the graph stops in the 1930s/1940s which I've seen posted on this site before to support a belief. Heck they even used the same technique on 'The Global Warming Swindle', a video posted by one of the users in these forums as a backing for their argument. Another reason I delved into climate change is because of a local tourism based website I'm currently building that will have an emphasis on green forms of transportation and energy production. The area in which I live prides itself on renewable sources and has plans on becoming the greenest city in the world by 2020. On the site I'm making I'm also writing a multi-chapter article concerning the reality of climate change and what it means locally.
Can you give me good arguments why climate change doesn’t exist?
Climate change exists. It happens every day, every week, every year. It’s primary driving force is the sun, not CO2, since it’s largely mitigated by the second most important factor, water. Most of this gas falls suspended in raindrops as carbonic acid, polluting the earth where it falls in sufficient quantities. Ocean acidification is a problem, but it isn't a significant climate factor. It is a pollution problem.When we expierence an extreme weather event like a hurricane, tornado, or ice storm, it’s because of this very quantifiable and factual relationship between a sudden burst of solar radiation and it’s absorbtion by the earths oceans. This energy is imideately translated into huge amounts of water vapor suspended in the atmosphere. This creates massive weather system in a few hours or days depending on the sun's activity. Never has any expert suggested that this has happened because of CO2.The increase in water vapor in the atmosphere indicates a higher carrying capacity for the air and a corresponding increase in temperature. Over long periods of time increases in solar radiation, which has been quantified by the likes of NASA and other agencies, corresponds to an increase in air temperature for the earth as a whole.This also means more water constantly suspended in the atmosphere, rather then being frozen somewhere, or creating a huge change sea level. I know this is exactly what’s happened, as opposed to the huge increases in sea level predicted by the AGW crowed. This coincided with the rebranding of global warming to climate change, as the previous iteration had been proven wrong by its inaccuracies.Human beings have a pollution problem, that’s clear, but to think we’re effecting the earths climate is a hubris of a much higher order. It’s a problem we can't solve, while lowering pollution is.It would be shame if people gave up on that when it becomes clear the climate is just like the wind, because it is, and it will go where it must, and never where we will it.I could explain in more detail, but others have, and in much better detail then myself. You need only look for it and think critically, putting the fear AGW evangelists deliberately invoke aside.