Why are liberals lying, saying that just about every scientist believes in global warming?

Answer 1

I was going to answer this question but Jade beat me to it with a very simple, factual and common sense answer to the alarmist all over the world I was around in the 60's and we had the same alarmist but the only difference it was global cooling. I don't know where it was written that the earth should have no deviation in weather or temperature change. The earth history shows just the opposite weather and temperature change is the norm.

Answer 2

Simple - it fits their agenda. Its works for what ever their far reaching goals are - whatever they may be. For most run of the mill liberals they really believe it because for the most part their hearts are in the right place. They are concerned for the future. But remember that the weakness with most liberals is that they have a tendancy to believe that "the ends justifies the means". This is why they never really get ahead because their methodology and loose standards always foul them up even if their arguments are correct. A couple of years ago the rage was Global Cooling - now its Global Warming. I think that for every scientist that believes in it you probably have another that doesn't. Not all can speak out though as their grants of positions can be put in jeopardy as they do tend to operate for the most part in a particularly liberal college environment. The problem with the whole debate is the small sampling of data. When looked at on the whole history of the planet there isn't enough data. We have been fluctuating all over the place. They can't even predict today's weather with any certainty. Are many of their arguments taken singly points of contention - for sure! But when they aggregate them is the conclusion valid? Maybe but their predictions keep coming out wrong - there a simply way too many variables. This year was supposed to be a brutal hurricane season like last year because of global warming - they were wrong. So now they say next year's will be really bad. It might but then again it might not. They'll eventually be right though and give a big I told you so. There's plenty of argument on both sides but neither side will look at the other sides points - they just ignore each other. Maybe they are both right or both wrong. Open minds are needed not those with preconcieved ideas.

Answer 3

Not every scientist; just the smart ones. Global warming is an issue that cannot be passed over. You can sit there and tell me that pollution does not exist, that our ozone layer is not dissipating at an incredible rate, that nuclear fallout is not the direct cause for several diseases in Russia and Japan. Who will believe you, though? It is there, in our faces, every day. Global warming is not something to be taken lightly. And it is not just liberals who feel this way. You just like to label them liberals because we have free-thought, unlike neo-cons who do what they are told and do not question it (Sorry, that's a Nazi; I get them confused sometimes). Bash liberals because it's easy to do. It's easy to say that someone who thinks for themselves is "evil" or "non-Christian", but let them say what they want. If you were a real American, you would realize that our First Amendment rights allows us to say anything without recourse or punishment. If we so choose to question the ethics of the White House, then that's our choice. I know, that pesky Constitution gets in the way of the Fourth Reich that America is becoming, but dangit, that's what we implement it for. So bash a liberal, it's easy. But it won't make you right.

Answer 4

Gee... when I was a little kid in grade school (back before Independence) they taught we were just coming out of an ice age, and the glacial melt caused the Great Lakes... then in high-school (shortly before electricity) they taught that very same thing... now Voila... we have... 50 years later an all new and improved reason for the warming... (groan)
Global warming IS happening, a given, but not for the reasons our leftist liberal science sources, politicians and socialist press are reporting. The majority of scientific studies are now discounting Carbon Dioxide emitted by motor vehicles (burning of fossil fuels) as the major cause. Geological history indicates natural solar cycles are the culprit, something politicians have no power over so they ignore. The real short-term danger is in fact a buildup of greenhouse gas in the atmosphere, but not the buildup of Carbon Dioxide. The real culprit is Methane, a far more potent greenhouse gas, being released into the atmosphere by the (natural) decay of Methane Hydrate occurring (naturally) frozen on the ocean floors, due to the gradual (natural) warming of ocean water by (natural) solar cycles, another item our politicians have absolutely no control over and the liberal media will never mention. Follow the money trail... They promote revenue and power by promoting fear. "We just have to do SOMETHING...You know"? So they continue to promote cars as the culprit, people… cars… which do we get rid of first, (sound like something from the Pol Pot generation?)
No matter how you smear peanut butter and jelly on it, burning of ANYTHING for our energy needs will create Co2. Electric cars? Where does the electricity come from? To reduce our energy use by even a few percentage points will destroy our already shaky economy (Unless of course we go to 100% nuclear power...hehehe)

Answer 5

Why is there such denial between human beings on worldwide warming.? fortuitously it particularly isn't any longer all human beings however the present administration supporters ! is far cheap gasoline and great autos greater significant than the destiny our youngsters...?. i'm unsure how many of scientist have self assurance in worldwide warming purely to declare a majority do...? you do no longer ought to be a liberal to be subject relating to the way forward for our international !

Answer 6

There are a few things that I have learned that liberals do. They lie very well and they always take things out of context. If you don't believe me, just study Michael Moore, the leader.

Scientists (my sister IS one-true story) don't collectively think one thing or another, but there are many theories. Everything is a theory until proven as a fact.

Fact: The earth appears to be having a warm cycle
Fact: The earth has had cold cycles (ice ages and mini ice ages)
Fact: The polar ice is melting on mars as well
Fact: There is a hole in the OZONE layer of our atmosphere
Fact: The earth has been going through cycles of warm and cold for thousands of years.

My theory is that no matter what we do here on earth, there will continue to be natural disasters such as comets and volcanoes that will continue to affect the ozone layer. We will also continue to have cycles of cold and warm.

In the event that I am wrong, I hope that global warming hurries up, because it's mighty cold here in Minnesota!

Answer 7

What kind of idiot thinks that a multinational scientific consensus is actually politically biased? This is scary. I hate the way ignorant and superstitious people call themselves conservative as if it's only bright people who are liberal. I'm right wing, pro science and I hate the dumb people who are trying to hijack the term conservative.

Answer 8

Please, prove to the world that Scientist are lying by moving next to a Chemical Company

I bet all liberals decided to become Scientist mainly for this reason

Answer 9

Nobody says EVERY scientist believes it.

But 98% of scientists in the field do.

Why do cons not believe the vast majority of experts?

Answer 10

Because they do.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has expressed that this is scientific consensus. And I quote, "IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements."

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686


First, a tiny bit of science:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/hockeystickFAQ.html
http://www.ecobridge.org/content/g_evd.htm#graph
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/08/13/scientists_find_new_global_warming_evidence/
http://www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org/
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/carbdiox.html (graph)
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html#Q2
http://www.motherjones.com/news/featurex/2005/05/globalwarming_map.html (map)
http://www.climatesolutions.org/pubs/pdfs/gwih.pdf (Nice pdf)
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/science-of-global-warming.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm (co2 highest in 800,000 yrs)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/science_co2_dc (may be outdated)
http://www.livescience.com/environment/ap_060502_global_warming.html (low vs. high level temps)

Then, there's the fact that even Bush has admitted it's true.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2023835.stm
http://www.nrdc.org/bushrecord/articles/br_1945.asp?t=t

And next, here's info on how Bush (contrary to his own belief) has worked to supress scientific findings in the field.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6341451
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/resources/climate/2004-10-27-hansen_x.htm
http://www.space.com/news/bush_warming_041027.html
http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0926-bush.html (hurricane report)


Next, a debunking of the myth that scientists were recently predicting global cooling:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/01/the-global-cooling-myth/