IF human carbon emissions causing global warming is not proven, in whose interest is it to prove that it IS?

Question

Despite what we are told by politicians and the media - and that is where most of the stuff is coming from - how many scientists have you heard? - the link is far from proven and MANY eminent scientists are 100% certain that there is no link.

Are we being threatened with Armageddon as a means to keep us compliant with and to stop us questioning wisdom Government? Why does the media give little publicity to those equally eminent scientists who question the religious fervour that goes with the "Inconvenient Truth"?

There seems to be a total manipulation of the news on this extremely important issue which, IF they are right, is the single most important issue facing the Earth. Yet, if they are wrong, vast amounts of money is being wasted and huge amounts of tax is being raised on the back of it.

Al Gore's house has between 8 to 10 times the size of the average American's carbon footprint? If it was really true – if he REALLY cared - would he live like that?

Answer 1

Al Gore is and always has been a liar and a fraud. Taking his word on anything is tantamount to asking the fox to guard the hen house.

The climate is changing. The reasons for the change are unclear. What is clear is that the liberal politicians and the media are using it as a tool to manipulate the general public. Go back and watch 'An Inconvenient Truth' again. There is very little in the way of scientific fact associated with the statements made in that movie. Instead they use scare tactics and unrelated data to make wholly unsupportable claims. Any time that process is used to try to win an argument you can safely assume that you are being lied to and the entire issue is fraud.

Good science never supports claiming a theory is a fact and good science always looks for contradictory evidence. If contradictory evidence cannot be explained within the body of a theory, the theory is wrong. Simply discarding that evidence because it does not fit the model is fraud. Failure to explain and encompass contradictions demonstrates the theory is not valid, regardless of what you want to believe. Want has nothing to do with this, only scientific facts.

Facts are in very short supply in the entire global warming theory. What they have done is taken a few data points, left out masses of related data points that didn't fit, then used propoganda to convince millions of people that there was some truth to their claims. The typically gullible public buys into this tripe and runs around squawking and flapping their arms waiting for the sky to fall. you'd think after all the times they've been fooled they would learn to do their homework and not believe a politician or special interest group.

Answer 2

One question at a time please.

1. I have never heard of a tree or animal paying a scientist to prove something, therefore it must be for our interest.

2. You say that most of this "stuff" is coming from politicians and the media. That is because YOU get your information from those sources. That is YOUR choice. When I want to get unbiased information I go to many sources and do my own research. I have been reading environmental science and geological science papers regarding this topic for almost 30 years. I suggest you do too.

3. Government wisdumb, threatened with Armageddon. Wow! Quite the conspiracy theory. You must be in that 10% of paranoid schizophrenics who think EVERYONE is out to get them. Sorry, the world doesn't revolve around you.

4. The media gives more than equal time to the "eminent" scientists who deny "imminent" Armageddon. They know that dissenting sells. But eventually, usually through polling, they recognize that the majority are leaning one way or the other and in order to maintain market share they pander to the majority. That means the majority of people agree there is a problem.

5. The Inconvenient Truth is just a movie, there are many other sources of information out there than the idiot box.

6. I see no manipulation of the news other than the presentation of false or misleading information by eminent scientists paid by oil companies to add fool to the fire; like comparing global warming to seasons on pluto.

7. "If they are right, if they are wrong" ... doesn't matter one iota. You can hope for the best, you must prepare for the worst. Your survival depends on it no matter what the situation. Indecision will kill you faster than wasted money.

8. If you can show me that 100% of the money you earn you have not wasted I'll listen to your opinion on government spending.

9. The size of a house is like the size of a bus: it depends on how many people use it. Public transit is a waste if the seats are not filled. If Al Gore is using the space in his house fully then it is more efficient than you living in a two bedroom apartment without a room mate. Unless you know what goes on inside Al Gore's house it is not your place to judge how he lives.

And it has nothing to do with the issue, it is an excuse for not facing it.
.

Answer 3

Most all scientists who believe in man caused global warming have no interest in the issue other than scientific.

This site proves with data that the vast majority of scientists believe in man caused global warming.

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

There is a huge amount of data supporting man caused global warming, summarized in this report. It is the definitive statement from thousands of scientists, not politicians or the media.

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

The full report will be out soon. It will be about 1600 pages long, crammed full of data and references.

Data shows it is not the sun. Solar warming is 0.12 watts per meter squared, man's is 1.6 watts per meter squared, more than twice as much. Page 4 of the report.

Much more data here:

http://www.realclimate.org/

http://www.pewclimate.org/

http://aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm

It's amazing to me that deniers claim there is a lack of data for global warming, when there is plenty of data. There is a serious lack of valid data from the deniers, who mostly rely on hand waving arguments.

Al Gore is unimportant. He's not responsible for any of the science behind global warming. To focus on Gore in the face of this threat is silly.

As is the "Swindle" movie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Durkin_(television_director)

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313pure_propaganda_the.php

Man caused global warming is proven and we really need to do something about it. The people below are serious people. They don't get their science from Al Gore, they get it from the best scientists in the world.

"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, Republican, 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

Answer 4

Al Gore is an example of a "hypocrite." He goes around scaring everyone with his stories about global warming. He tells everyone we must change our ways or the Earth is doomed. Yet he lives a life of luxury using 100 times as many natural resources and energy as the rest of us. He should lead by example - not by mouth.

Answer 5

Air conditioning salesmen are responsible for spreading global warming propaganda.

Answer 6

"IF human carbon emissions causing global warming is not proven, in whose interest is it to prove that it IS?"

In short: socialists

socialists want greater government access to taxpayers' pockets.