Need to find "respectable" anti-global warming argument for comparsion?

Question

I have to research someone with the "other side" of the global warming argument (i.e., it's not occurring). Is there anyone, hopefully academic, or someone in politics if worse comes to worse, who disputes it? Also, are there any anti global warming films in the vein of An Inconvenient Truth?

Answer 1

I don't buy it, but there was a recent column in the LA Times by Noah Goldberg, arguing that 1) it was too costly to fix global warming even if humans have caused it; 2) the activities that create global warming (if they do) create modern life and are worth it, and 3) history is full of dire warnings, and technology has always been able to find technological cures -- it would be foolish to destroy our way of life given that we'll eventually fix the problem (if problems there are) through technological means.

Answer 2

Not A scholar but I am a thinker and not a lemming. Glenn Beck Headline News is going to put a video of many Scientists who are stating facts that this is an over-hyped issue. Check u you-tube in the future. Global warming is at the fore front because politicians found how to use a new platform to get re-elected. The world leadersuse it because they found ways to make money at it. This is a made up problem just like Global Cooling in the 1970's. Wake up people. I agree we need to be more efficient with our resources, and we should fine and jail companies who are dumping into our rivers maliciously. I want to stop the raiforest destruction, but to say that global warming is a serious man made issue and we need to destroy the American economy and bow down to the rest of the world certainly does not float my boat. Follow the money on this one and you will see that it is all for political gain and grant money for those scientists who profit off of the government if global warming stays at the front of the issues. Look deep into the Keoto (sp?) Treaty, first of all they took jets to a non-central resort location. Not very environmentally concious. THen in the parameters of the treaty they have a clause that makes it so you can buy or sell polution credits. This is all about shifting wealth and breaking down the United States. This is painfully obvious, just look at peoples agenda. The earth's mean temperature has risen .6 degrees C in the past 125 years. Greenland's icecaps have gotten colder in the past 10 years. The Scientists who do not gain anything on their posisition will tell you that the earth has a natural progression and this is what we are seeing. The UN report is made up of POLITICIANS not a good spread of scientists. THere are as many or more scientists who believe that man in NOT the reason and it is over hyped, but their voice is not heard in the LIberal Mainstream Media. This issue is 99% political, and an attempt to make the USA a socialist nation, and eventually communisim. WAKE UP AMERICA, IT IS TIME TO BE AMERICANS. FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE. STOP THE LIES

Answer 3

There was what they call a mini-ice age starting somewhere in the 1600's and just let up back in the 1800's. Also google the "year without a summer" 1816. I don't remember much about it, I saw it on a documentary a few months back. When you find what period of time that was, look as to what the earth's temp was prior to. You can use the arguement that while were are emitting more and more green house gasses, that the earth may also be in a natural warming trend.

EDIT:

Actually nix the 1816, I just looked it up and it's attributed to a volcano erruption. But the Little Ice Age started early in the millenium and got it's coldest arount 1600-1800.

Answer 4

No offense Dana, yet the position is the information that the #a million eco-friendly homestead gas isn't the driving ingredient? so some distance no scientist has come out and defined the end results of water vapor on climate change noticeably because water vapor makes up a grand entire of ninety 5% of all eco-friendly homestead gases and in elementary words a million% of the ninety 5% is synthetic. also from my information each and every of the charts and information instruct that CO2, methane, and different eco-friendly homestead gases lag in the back of temperature change no longer pressure it. Can the synthetic crowd arise with any information that would not ignore previous climate historic previous, would not use workstation fashions that dumb down the Earth into one variable or few variables causing climate change? finally, how does the actual incontrovertible reality that guy's entire contribution to eco-friendly homestead gases is at maximum 3% driving the elements change off of a cliff? For the guy bringing up peer reviewed articles again, all which ability is that individuals agree such as your artwork, no longer that it really is precise or sturdy technological know-how. there's a distinction and the medical community has lengthy gone faraway from doing actual learn into doing learn that brings in the most funds. I easily have kinfolk that are into medical learn.

Answer 5

Scientists that work in the field of climatology are concerned about all sorts of global climate factors that humans have changed. Nearly all climatologists agree that there is a greenhouse effect and that greenhouse gases have increased from use of fossil fuels. But there are other factors besides greenhouse gases that influence global temperature and climate, and not enough is known about all of the factors to predict the outcome of the changes we have made. So the question that scientist are asking is what's going to happen from all the changes; they are not asking if there is or isn't global warming.

Most climate scientists are concerned because the potential magnitude and speed of climate change may be unprecedented in the entire existence of this planet, and we have no idea what the end result will be. Take a look at the scientific questions about climate change at the link below (all you probably need to look at is the executive summary). Right now, it looks like a warmer Earth is the most likely outcome.

Answer 6

Go to Michael Crichton's website and read his speeches regarding Global Warming.

Global Warming is nothing but a huge scam. Seriously, would you believe someone that is predicting global weather patterns 30 years from today when meteorologists can't even predict the weather 6 hours in advance?

And how about the rising sea levels? Hey, who wants to sell their ocean front property for 10 cents on the dollar? It all will be worthless in about 10 years according to the "consensus of scientists".

Go read Crichton's common sense arguments. You don't have to be a genius to figure it out.

Answer 7

Not sure about those arguing that it is not happening but two things I have looked at to compare/contrast were the mitigation of global warming versus the adaptation to it. Basically one side tries to prevent it or reduce it and the other says lets deal with it and see how we can live with it. Not sure if this helps you.

Answer 8

It doesn't exist. Lots of people here rant on about nonsense, with no good data to back them up. The facts are all on the other side. It's exactly like asking for a respectable argument that we didn't go to the moon.

The chief public deniers are a science fiction writer, a Senator from an oil producing state, and a journalist who previously said cigarette smoke was not harmful. A few out of touch scientists. If that's respectable compared to the people I quote below...

Global warming is clearly not natural. Here's some hard facts. The first report is the authoritative document, full of data. It's a 21 page summary, the 1600 page full report will be out soon with voluminous data as proof.

Lots of data here. For example, changes in solar radiation are 0.12 watts per meter squared, while changes due to man are 1.6 watts per meter squared, more than ten times as much.

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

The report also shows that the warming is way too rapid to be natural.

And this graph of CO2 is very enlightening.

http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/graphics_gallery/mauna_loa_record/mlo_record.html

The little teeth are the natural "carbon cycle". doing its' thing. CO2 goes down a bit in the summer and up a bit in the winter, consistent with plant activity. The large trend upward is us. We're digging up carbon the natural cycle buried over many many years, and burning it real fast.

Volcanoes are insignificant compared to the effects of man:

http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/climate_effects.html

Which is why most all scientists agree global warming is real and caused by us.

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

"there is a scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. Climate scientists have repeatedly tried to make this clear. It is time for the rest of us to listen."

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/nation/16620307.htm

"the question of global warming was settled years ago for all but a few holdouts in the scientific community"

The above is why all these people, who are not liberals or environmentalists, accept that global warming is real and caused by us.

"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."

James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.

"The overwhelming majority of atmospheric scientists around the world and our own National Academy of Sciences are in essential agreement on the facts of global warming and the significant contribution of human activity to that trend."

Russell E. Train, former environmental official under Presidents Nixon and Ford

"We simply must do everything we can in our power to slow down global warming before it is too late. The science is clear. The global warming debate is over."

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican, Governor, California

"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."

John McCain, Republican, Senator, Arizona

"These technologies will help us become better stewards of the environment - and they will help us to confront the serious challenge of global climate change."

President George Bush

Unfortunately, we're kicking nature's butt on this one.

Answer 9

try this:

http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html