The more I read, the more evident it is that there really is no justifiable position for disputing it - the gainsayers seem to have obvious ulterior motives, every new argument gets quickly disproved (for example the whole cyclic theory disproved by a recent report showing the planet should be in a cooling period right now), and even the loudest and biggest dissenters (eg Exxon Mobil) are revising their positions from denying it to adaptive standpoints. So why do folks still treat it as a debate or deny it altogether? Each time I post a question on it folks - apparently intelligent, well-read folks - give references disputing the theory, and it takes about a second to find a huge number of seemingly impartial sources that shoot down each one. Anecdotally, the current floods, the drought in my native Australia, all this stuff seems a bit obvious to me.
So. Why do folks still dispute it?
2007-07-24
05:21:52
·
26 answers
·
asked by
johninmelb
4
in
Global Warming