Why do people argue about whether global warming is man made or not?

Question

I think it doesn't matter if it's natural or man made it's still a catastrophic problem, it being one or the other doesn't make it exsist or not or be a problem or not, so why are people argueing over something so completely stupid? hurricanes are natural so are tornados and earthquakes, does that make them any less of a problem or make them exsist or not?

That's another false choice, because even if it is natural that's no reason whatsoever that we can't do anything about it, look at polio, small pox, mumps, a natural disease that we decided needed to be cured counteracted or that people needed to be immunized against, and we did it out, its the same thing, natural or not.

Answer 1

Why do they argue about it? Because there is an immense amount of money to be made by making people panic about it.

You'll note that Mars is also experiencing global warming - obviously caused by increases in solar output and slight perturbations in Mars's orbit. Yet the Goracle and his acoloytes feel that - even thoug the Earth is 43,000,000 miles closer to a gigantic solar furnace than Mars, increases in solar output is NOT causing global warming.

As they say, follow the money.

Now - you're referring to this as a 'problem'. Something to be 'solved' - Someone should DO something!! the people cry.

Why?

You're assuming that this is non-cyclical and that if we don't DO something we're all gonna die!! Um - back in the 1970s, they were afraid global cooling meant that we were all gonna die!! Someone should DO something! They even proposed pouring carbon all over the polar caps to melt them so that we wouldn't all DIE! Good thing we didn't do that, hunh?

Keep in mind we do not even have a working model of the climate - Nothing. The Global Warming nuts are using a model that shows global warming. Wow. Big shock. Plug in historical data and the thing doesn't work. I was part of a climate research project that used distributed computing to try to find a working model - None yet.

So - why do they argue? Money. One group stands to make a LOT of money by causing panic (the same group who wanted to make money in the 70's with global cooling).

Should we DO something? Not yet. Insufficient data and insufficient analysis - We don't KNOW what to do, or even if we SHOULD do.

Orion

EDIT: Once again, those shrieking that there are no reliable studies, dissent, etc are harming their cause - The Heidelberg Appeal is a group of HUNDREDS of legitimate scientists, including 72 hard-science Nobel Prize winners asking for more investigation into Global Warming and less dogmatic rhetoric. That qualifies as legitimate. When you are THIS ignorant about your pet theory, it's not a good sign.

Answer 2

Well, it's not so much that I don't believe in man-made global warming, it's just that I don't believe it...if you get what I mean. My problem is that there is little mention of the natural fluctuation of the climate throughout history. In the Medieval era there were periods of both global warming and global cooling. Furthermore, a middle-school student in a science class knows that in order to conduct an experiment and test a theory, repeated tests need to be done. The more data the better. Since we only have maybe 150 years of temperature data, how can we compare current changes to that of prior natural changes? By the way, mankind benefits more from global warming than global cooling.

Answer 3

Contrary to what someone has written, most, if not all, legitimate studies on global warming acknowledge that the warming and cooling cycles are natural events. Using proxy data, scientists have been able to trace the warming/cooling cycles back over 250,000 years...long before mankind had any input into it.

These are, indeed, natural phenomena...like measles, hurricanes, and such...but that doesn't mean we just ignore them if we can do something about them. But what if some aspects of this current phase of global warming are man made? Wouldn't that be even added incentive to do something about it?

By comparing that 250,000 years of proxy data against the data collected for this current warming cycle, most, if not all, legitimate studies conclude two important facts: 1. the current warming phase is coming on significantly faster than any of the previous warming phases and 2. the trend line for the current warming phase will take the degree of warming higher than ever before reached by any of the previous warming phases.

Bottom line, the current rate of onset and the predicted high level of warming are "off the charts." They are unprecedented...and that's what most, if not all, legitimate studies attribute to mankind's pollution of the air.

The only arguments I hear on this matter are in the political arena and, perhaps, some in the economic/business area as well. The legitimate studies, done by independent climatologists who have no political agendas, are no longer arguing...they pretty much agree, this current warming phase is coming on faster and stronger than ever before...and that's caused by mankind.

Answer 4

LOOK AT MY ANSWER

For those thinking there is a lot of money to be made by panicking people in global warming...

I happen to be a consultant in Energy and climate change and the thing is... I could have made much more money if I had followed my initial plan of invading your country with more cheap chinese-manufactured goods.

I even had a much better opportunity to make money: fly 4 times a year to Gabon, get a fax and come back with a suitcase of money... 4 days of work a year for a 100K job...

I might perhaps be an idiot to have refused but I have ethics.

If you think that money is to be made, why do all those companies don´t make profit right now ?
The only people making big profits are the electricity producers who received carbon credits in what´s called allocation plan and passed the cost to the customer !!! It´s what´s called windfall profit and I would like them tp be stopped by market reforms to which I contribute.

Why is this market badly working ? because it was designed for the americans who anyway stepped back at the last minute from the Kyoto protocoll... and now the same people come back to criticize our modell in Europe which THEY designed... thanks.


Do you think people like investing in areas which future is not even sure ??? nobody gives me the warranty that Carbon credits will still be payed after 2012.. do you thins investors like that ???

And we don´t earn more to save the planet that those consultants who crashed several major US companies... in fact by far less.

I really think that with 10 years university, I am not over-payed at all. Money doesn´t come down from the sky and I spend even a large part of my Sundays working. I really don´t know why somebody who works hard to save the planet should not earn anything from it, in reasonable ranges.

Answer 5

I argue because it is toted as man made,and that we little puny things have the power to stop it.The fact that they have turned the arguement into a religion,with a utopia(heaven) a wasteland if we ignore it(hell) and the consequence if we dont believe were the cause(sin).It is meant to scare people and I think in the near future it will be put upon us as a tax,not to mention it is creating an elitist class(AL GORE in do as I say not as I do,while he uses jets,power etc but tells us to change,but he buys carbon credits from a company he owns and says hes off setting his impact.Hes still polluting,according to his preaching)
It also bugs me that its only about 18% of scientist(whom bothered to return a survey on global warming/if it exists)that they base there consensus(opinion,not fact) .(science is 100% not a vote)
Hurricanes,tornados etc have occurred here on earth(along with other atmospheric planets) for eons upon eons,and to think we can change nature is not only ludicrous,but arrogant

Answer 6

It's back to the leaders of the world acting like a bunch of 3 year olds....nobody wants to claim responsibility for their actions, and nobody wants to lose public interest or support...If people blame something on the environment, they're not responsible, an unstoppable force of nature is...But if it's man made, then it's their fault, and we wouldn't want that, now would we? ....I know, stupid, right?

Answer 7

It's being politicized by businesses with a financial stake in the status quo. Follow the money. Who will lose in the short term from policies that would reduce the use of oil or that might impact the profitably of such businesses as auto manufacturers and energy companies?

Unfortunately, they have lots of lapdogs, most of whom are currently right-wing commentators and their followers. So they try to attack, belittle, and demonize the concept and its (majority) supporters - typical political maneuver, not based on science or logic.

(To those who say that 'global warming fanatics' are egged on by un-named factions who stand to make a lot of money, I still haven't seen anyone point out who exactly will make money. Either way, it comes down to existing industrialists trying to maintain the status quo of their profits, even if it means widespread destruction of life.)

Answer 8

Well it comes down to if we're the cause of it, then we should do something to stop it. If the cause is natural, there is little we can do to change things. Since it probably is caused by us, we should take steps against global warming.

Answer 9

The thing is WETHER WE WANT IT OR NOT, WE CAN NOW CONTROL THE CLIMATE...

So we rather keep it stable since climate stability is what allowed human civilization to flourish for the last 8000 years...

I don´t know for you but I don´t want a nomadic lifestyle. But tody, we see the first environmental refugees.

Actually some former civilizations disappeard due to environmental problems... it´s really not something new. And I don´t want it to happen to us

Answer 10

The argument is between extremely well educated scientists with mountains of evidence pointing to human caused (pollution) caused global warming, and extremely stupid ignorant right wing greed driven blockheads who are against pollution controls because it is cheaper for companies to pollute than not to.

The carbon levels in our atmosphere are the highest in 20 million years. That is NOT caused by variations in solar output! Maybe its caused by the thousands of coal burning plants, pollution spewing factories and billions of vehicles pumping carbons and all kinds of other stuff into the atmosphere every minute of every day? ? ? hmmmmmmmmm.......I WONDER!