The answer to this question isn't surprising -- people resist science that doesn't fit their views for a reason, it means uncomfortable changes. Let me list a

The answer to this question isn't surprising -- people resist science that doesn't fit their views for a reason, it means uncomfortable changes. Let me list a few reasons some people may doubt/resist: 1. If this were true, I would be wrong, and since all my experience suggests I'm right, the evidence is probably wrong. 2. So many times people have been sure of things, especially scientists, yet they were shown to be wrong, so they are probably wrong again. 3. These studies are being picked or even conducted because there is an environmental agenda, I don't believe it because I'm sure we could conduct a "study" that would reach the opposite conclusion, but all the scientists are biased that way (just like global cooling in the 70s, or how Vioxx was deemed "safe" by FDA scientists). 4. If this is true, its proponents will cram a political agenda down my throat, since I don't agree politically, but have no counter-proposal, I must disagree with the evidence to avoid the politically losing confrontation. 5. There are no viable plans to fix the problem, accepting the evidence would put me in a psychological bind since there really isn't a way to solve it -- not recycling, driving less, nuclear, there is NO known solution right now, so we must say this is false. 6. People who say "just believe science" don't seem to believe science on other fronts (e.g. gender differences), or have beliefs I see as obviously wrong, so I can't believe they'd be right about this single item but wrong about so much else. 7. The people who are most pushing this agenda are obviously politcally, not scientifically motivated, so I question the evidence due to "motivation". 8. Overselling and shouting make me disbelieve your claims. Usually a calm and reasonable approach sells, but you're telling me "change now or die", and Al Gore said that 20 years ago and it didn't happen.