Al Gore has talked alot about a consensus on mans impact on Global Warming. Since when does science involve a consensus? How about peer reviewed studies that can be duplicated.? Not only is the debate not over, it has never really taken place.
2006-12-13 03:34:44 · 5 answers · asked by CHRIS W 1 in Environment
Well if your decideing something on true science words like agree, think, and consensus do not apply. Real science is based on real facts that are proven and have the data that suports it over and over again. If we where to go on agreement or consensus, then science would never move forward. Consensus is not real science case in fact. If consensus where real science then then world is still flat, the sun revolves around the earth all concidered at there time by science consenus to be fact, Galileo was charged with being a heretic because he disagreed to consensus. Today his facts, data tested over and over are fact.
Facts proven with data that can be tested over and over become real science. Because there is not a enough data and proven method yet to say that this is a fact or just normal earths progression that all science can test and retest in the exact same way, the idea of global warming which is not a theory (by true scientific definition) Is basically just a agreement of many to what the data they have seen and coming up with a guess as to the cause, possiblitys, and outcome. This topic is still not a scientific fact, theory or law by any scientific definition.
2006-12-13 04:42:43 · answer #1 · answered by S N 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What ARE you talking about? There have been hundreds of studies on the various effects of the polluction in our air. If most scientists doing these various studies agree that global warming is an issue, it does not invalidate the findings, in fact, it increases it validity. The studies HAVE been peer-reviewed...and the majority of peole in the scientific fields agree this is a serious and real issue that needs to be addressed. it is not be addressed because the US government is more concerned with 'profit' than with environment. The governments of Sweden and other countries, on the other hand, take this issue very seriously. Do some more research before trying to discredit an individual who is doing nothing more than trying to get the word out to the ordinary person that this problem is real and it will take everyone working together to solve it.
2006-12-13 03:41:23 · answer #2 · answered by harpertara 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How dare you assault Saint Al this manner! He buys carbon credit (from his possess corporation) to offset his carbon use so he is well and you are dangerous. I'm certain he'd promote you a few and you then would be well like him and believe larger approximately the tip of the arena. I've regularly determined it an unusual twist of fate that the first actual Earth Day geared up within the US simply occurred to fall at the a hundredth anniversary of Vladimir Lenin's beginning. Not to mention that the majority environmentalists are not honest however I query the objectives in their leaders on account that they look so exceptional from what they declare to consider. And inimical to the values within the US Constitution as good, i.e. freedom of speech so long as we adore what you are pronouncing, and so forth. The Left has by no means obvious a socialist or communist they did not recognize and the Greens are facet of the Left so that can be a traditional development or they'll simply wish the equal matters. Central making plans and manipulate on the cost of character liberty. One supposedly for the advantage of the men and women through the State, the opposite for the advantage of the planet through the State, however the approaches and propaganda of the AGW motion are acquainted come what may.
2016-09-03 13:56:52 · answer #3 · answered by mesidor 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A "consensus" is often used in the scientific community. There are many peer reviewed studies that show Global warming is occurring ... I took a seminar course in grad school several semesters ago and our topic was global warming each week we studied one paper so that is at least 18 published peer reviewed papers on the topic. The debate (at least in the scientific community) is over.
2006-12-13 03:46:57 · answer #4 · answered by ecogeek4ever 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably around the same time that he invented the Internet... What he (and most of his followers fail to comprehend is that "Global Warming" has been going on for centuries and anything manhas contributed to its effect has been and will be almost insignificant in the "Big Picture." But, what the hey?! People need to feel like their doing something worthwhile.
2006-12-13 03:46:32 · answer #5 · answered by Doc 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋