http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AtM5qNcIdcZJ6JdPjc_pwAnzy6IX?qid=20061102105938AACv16r
2006-11-02 06:27:30 · 12 answers · asked by Dastardly 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
To the dude; I guess that means you can't answer it eh? Still waiting...
2006-11-02 06:31:03 · update #1
To sparhawk; Since you posted this; "for every report that you display 20 can be found to debunk it. so what is the real truth ?" It proves you didn't read it. Of 928 papers published on the topic in a ten year span NONE contradicted the consensus. Get it? NONE.
2006-11-02 07:30:19 · update #2
Sorry, above comment was for angels. To sparhawk; they researched ALL published papers on the topic. ALL. How could they go into it with a conclusion already made if they comprehensively surveyed ALL papers published on the topic?
2006-11-02 07:32:43 · update #3
To roch cop; Cite your sources then. Or can you only post insults in response?
2006-11-02 07:33:57 · update #4
To jcwhite; Care to reference your source? Other than just typing "internet" LOL?
2006-11-02 07:35:34 · update #5
Conservative do not nor canot answer real questions.
Spend 10 minutes in this section and you'll see what I mean.
2006-11-02 06:33:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
this has been said for years now. the real problem is that the scientist are not even sure of what is happening. they put out all kinds of reports that say yes some say no others say we don't know. how is the average person supposed to make an educated decision if the educated people can't even make an average decision. the scientist just don't know. for every report that you display 20 can be found to debunk it. so what is the real truth ?
i guess time will tell. do you own some type of hybrid car ? is your home 100% electric. do you burn any fossil fuel ? even the scientist that put out these reports drive suv's.
2006-11-02 14:34:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I am not a scientist but as a conservative I will try to give you an intelligent answer. You might not like it but it is supposed to be factual. I didn't answer before as I had not seen your question.
A Gallup poll found that only 17 percent of the members of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society think that the warming of the 20th century has been a result of greenhouse gas emissions -- principally CO2 from burning fossil fuels.
More than 100 noted scientists, including the former president of the National Academy of Sciences, signed a letter declaring that costly actions to reduce greenhouse gases are NOT justified by the best available evidence.
While atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased by 28 percent over the past 150 years, human-generated carbon dioxide could have played only a small part in any warming, since most of the warming occurred prior to 1940 -- before most human-caused carbon dioxide emissions.
Reputable scientists, including those working on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations organization created to study the causes and effects of global climate warming, reject the theory of human-caused global warming argue that it is causing and will continue to cause all manner of environmental catastrophes, including higher ocean levels and increased hurricane activity..
2006-11-02 14:48:24 · answer #3 · answered by Akkita 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Here's an answer for you from a conservative. I think your source is full of crap. I can quote equally reliable sources as saying that the Earth cycles between ice ages and periods of warming and that RIGHT NOW we are finally coming to the end of the last ice age. An end, by the way, that was slowed down by comet strikes in 7647 BC and 3100 BC which caused a lot of trees to burn and put a lot of CO2 in the air creating a greenhouse effect, AND HUMANS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. You should step away from the bong once in a while and read a real book instead of your wacky liberal websites that are patently full of crap.
2006-11-02 14:40:37 · answer #4 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tell everyone here how many of the "scientists" were actually climatologists. That paper was put out by a group that went into the "research" with the results in hand before they wrote the paper. If have evidence to the contrary please post a link.
2006-11-02 14:34:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
no one argues this. just ask yourself, before i throw another can of red paint on an H2, what about all the slash and burn in Africa, or the fact that one private jet flight from NY to LA uses the same amount of fuel as putting 12000 miles on an H2.
its all about the details bro. get on the level and check this stuff out.
2006-11-02 14:33:43 · answer #6 · answered by vituperative facetious wiseass 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
1. You give a site to go to and not say anything about it.
2. If you are asking a question WHAT IS IT?
3. I do not go to any site that people put on here because to many of them have virus's on them!
2006-11-02 14:30:23 · answer #7 · answered by fatboysdaddy 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
A noble fight my friend, but why hack away at the limbs on the tree of evil when you can hack away at the root. The limbs will always be replaced or grow back.
2006-11-02 14:30:32 · answer #8 · answered by Jared H 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I didn't because I haven't conducted a poll to determine the answer I choose not to take a wild guess.
2006-11-02 14:31:11 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
well conservatives take a while to answer im one though
2006-11-02 14:40:38 · answer #10 · answered by Luis 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋