What can science do to convince people that global warming by human activity is not significant?

Question

There is a great deal of hype from some who claim to be environmentalists about human effects on global warming. A few years ago the same community was raising money to fight global cooling. Few of the scientists who preach human guilt over global warming are climatologists. Those who are are not at all in agreement over the level of human contribution. Astronomers, geophysicists and others point to very large scale and time scale activity involved in past earth climate changes. There is great suspicion that the current enviro-science monologue is largely induced by socio-political agendas and not hard science. However, the voices of hard science opposed to the correct enviro-speak agenda are seldom heard. Is their voice shuffled to the back pages to make room for the dire news on the front page? What books andresearch work with a level-headed view can be presented? The wrong conclusion will lead to economic, health and political distress worldwide due to misallocated funds.

Answer 1

An excellent book that answers many of the questions factually and sanely about global warming is AFTER THE ICE (A Global Human History, 20,000 - 5,000 BC) by Steven Mithen (copyright 2003) Havard University Press.
Cut to the chase in the Preface and Epilogue if the basic contents of the book don't actually attract you (........you are weird though, if so....).

There's a couple of things related to the earth orbit about the sun: the glaciation cycle for earth is roughly every 100,000 years,with the last glacial maximum occuring only 22,000 years ago in which North America is covered in a glacier down to about the northern Tenessee/Arkansas border (they figure the total homo sapiens population worldwide was reduced to about 10,000 people by that time---what population numbers would be needed to have put us on the ready for extinction list???---we only started warming up at around 7-9000 BC.
Part of it's due to our Earth's orbit around the Sun turning from ellipsoidal from circular every 96,000 years (makes earth climate cooler when elliptical - - - more regularly warmer when circular), then changes every 41,000 years in our orbital tilt by about 3 degrees, on top of changes in the earth's wobble around the axis of rotation every 22,000 years (exacerbates or mitigates the basic cycle effects above).
The sun also has regular heating cycle changes (sun's been much hotter this past 130 years).
The warming (thank whatever 'great god-optional' you want here) which ended the last Ice Age amounted to about a 7 degree C hike in Temp (over 50 years) and a 120 meter increase in sea level.
The global warming spoken about today may mean as much as a (whopping?) 3 degree C rise over 100 years in Temp (disputable as to whether this is part of the warming cycle we're already in or on top of it due to Greenhouse gasses) which may lead to 32 cm (over the next 50 years) or 88 cm by 2100 rise in Sea level.
.....Me....hate being cold...am all for global warming......;_)

Answer 2

To me, science involves developing a hypothesis that is testable, gathering data, quantifying the data, then presenting evidence to make predictions on the recurrence of events. Science isn't necessarily about "facts".
Let's look some of the possible changes. Certain gases do prevent longwave radiation from escaping to space. Certain gases do alter the atmosphere in photochemical reactions. These gases are expelled from human and natural activities.
Global warming is still under investigation. Temperature has been measured only recently, the other data to suggest temperature change has been inferred from other means. A hard trend may be seen occurring within the last century.
You indicated the crux - the scientific study is a relatively recent discipline and long term observation is needed to differentiate between what we can control and what we can't. So we need to continue studying, observing, and quantifying the data.
Personally, I would urge the development of carbon-alternative energy sources and, meanwhile, utilize the most effective emissions control measures.

Answer 3

Science is never a cause, as such it can do nothing.
What you and I can do is vast!
A perfect example is your loaded question here. Enviromentalists will look in horror, how dare the unwashed masses question our conclusions about GW etc?
When idiots with a 'soft science' Phd. pontificate there opinions in the paper and other media, we can counter it with hard scientific facts to expose their fraud. Write letters to the editor based on hard evidence that refute GW, as you ask what the motive could be of the GW advocates who spread falsehoods.
You may earn the position of Op-ed if you are printed often enough.
Back when I was in Canada, David Suzuki did a weekly spew in local newspapers. This natureNAZI was a sitting duck! When I had the time, I blasted his 1/2 truths and political agenda that was covered by enviromental causes. This caused debates in the highschools, table talk and eventually caused one of the papers to drop David Suzuki! I am proud that I helped to deplete his income, and start active minds questioning the motives of the GW advocates.
So, thank you for the qusetion, lets hope others answer and learn, as those of us that do understand do what is needed in the name of man!

Answer 4

Science can only convince people that global warming by human activity is actually a real and important phenomenon. As others have noted science deals only with facts and that is unfortunately the fact.

Sorry I couldn't come up with more references, but I only had about a minute and a half to answer this question. ;)

Answer 5

quiet down. we will not administration the temperature of the planet. IF, and that's a good sized IF, we've a warmth wave such as you have imagined, we can adapt the way our infantrymen in Iraq have. I extremely have a brother in regulation, who's 51 years previous that has been residing in Iraq for the previous 2 years. this is been over 115ºF already and interior the process the summer, it gets over 135ºF. we've skilled worse warmth waves interior the Thirties than we've interior the previous few years. I labored exterior in 1980 whilst interior the helpful component to the U. S., we had over a month of consecutive days over 100ºF. the folk who do no longer stay hydrated and/or over exert themselves will go through. you need to pay interest to the climate and take precautions.

Answer 6

Nothing because science only deals with facts.