2007-02-03 12:55:02 · 17 answers · asked by King of Zen 1 in Environment
Among scientists in general, about 95%. Among climate scientists, about 99%.
2007-02-03 13:08:14 · answer #1 · answered by Keith P 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I wish I had a dollar for every time this question has been asked here. The Earth has its cycles and warms and cools with, or without man being here. We weren't polluting the Earth when the last Ice Age ended. It is in a warming trend, although in the last 5 years the Earth has actually cooled by .035 degrees c. Do we as man kind pollute and contribute to the warming? Yes. Can we stop global warming? No. Can you stop 3000 volcanoes from polluting the atmosphere? Or cosmic dust that enters the atmosphere every day? The scientists that are crying the sky is falling have an agenda. If you take a closer look at these people you will see that. As far as the inane idiots that blame Pres. Bush, grow up and quit doing drugs. It has made you totally stupid. Just in the rift in the Congo pollution happens and it isn't caused by man. Nature contributes more than man does. Now, if you want to look at some countries that pollute way more than we do, look at China and India. By the way, this is where the Kyoto agreement was a joke. The biggest polluters of mankind weren't even in the agreement. No matter what we do, cooling and warming are going to happen and there isn't anything we can do about it. Eventually we will have another Ice Age. When that happens people will be hoping for global warming. As far as the number of scientists who cry out that the sky is falling, it is spit down the middle. There are scientists that aren't funded by grants to make them biased in either direction and all of them say that this all is a bunch of crap. They do say the Earth overall is in a warming cycle and that we do contribute to it, but if man weren't here it would still happen. Just the volcanoes on land, there are 3000. Underwater volcanoes, who knows. They only have a chart of most, but not all of the underwater volcanoes. Just in the Pacific Ring of Fire, there are hundreds of underwater volcanoes. So, really it is a waste of time to go crying the sky is falling. Should we be more responsible with the Earth? Of course. We are lousy care takers. But that also does NOT mean that we should go back to horse and buggy days. Should we look at alternatives? Most definately. But let"s do it in an intelligent manner and quit doing stupid crap like blaming a president because of your political agendas. These same things that cause pollution give you the very cars, homes, food, clothes, phones and the computers we all use. That is reality. Cars are a small part of the big picture.
2007-02-03 13:10:12 · answer #2 · answered by celticwarrior7758 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Scientists worked out that human activity would cause warming back in the 1800s. The majority have agreed that this is happening for many years now - I would say at least 95% if not more.
Sometimes you will hear people argue that global warming is occurring due to natural cycles. This is true too. The world does go through natural cycles of warming and cooling and we are currently in a warming phase. This does not mean that manmade warming is not an issue - it actually means it's more of a threat because we are adding artificial warming on top of a natural temperature increase. Not only will this amplify climatic change and increase the chances of its effects being dangerous to life as we know it, but it risks unbalancing the whole cycle.
Scientists may debate aspects of human influence on climate change, but no one of any credibility denies it.
2007-02-03 13:14:48 · answer #3 · answered by duckofdarkness 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
A good deal less than one third, about 28% of environmental scientists believe that Global warming is caused by humans. A lot have gone to great lengths to argue the case but the media does not give them space.
Most of the research money is tided up in green groups and research units such as Suzuki. It is crap to be shown cooling towers on TV and told that this is pollution. It Is steam.
The battle for the almighty dollar is nasty with the disreputable pro human interference groups being supported by idiot green movements. Are you aware that the fastest growing number of people becoming millionaires are green group leaders such as in green peace.
2007-02-03 18:52:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I'm no scientist, but common sense tells me that humans are the cause of an accelerated global warming.
The Earth's temperature has been rising forever, but we're speeding up the process at a dangerous rate.
2007-02-03 12:58:23 · answer #5 · answered by T Time 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Since you can't call the people who only give media interviews scientists, the answer is 100%.
You will not be able to find a paper in a peer reviewed, scientific publication that denies global warming or its causes.
2007-02-03 12:58:24 · answer #6 · answered by Lisa A 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
i don't be attentive to the numbers or possibilities yet in actuality if the scientist works hands on in a laboratory or does field examine they're maximum in all probability to be exceptionally skeptical of all components of the AGW pogrom. in the event that they spend their careers in library's reviewing papers others have written and writing compilations of others papers they're regularly in prefer of the AGW supposition.
2016-10-01 09:32:51 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A better question would be "what real proof can anyone show that man has any effect on climate?"
In answer your quest; that depends on how many are making money as long as you the public are scared.
2007-02-03 14:00:49 · answer #8 · answered by jack_scar_action_hero 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
last I checked it was like 900 to 3. the reason the naysayers don't get space in the media is because they are not scientists.
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
2007-02-05 07:11:36 · answer #9 · answered by gymnastics_twisters 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
at least 90%. It's 100% of scientists who are not shilling for Fox news
2007-02-03 12:58:36 · answer #10 · answered by der_grosse_e 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋