I think Global Warming Is Nothing But Propaganda, do u?

Answer 1

Yes it is. The world may be warming, but any scientist who says he knows exactly why is not being honest. The only fact is the earth is warming slowly. Everything else these people say is THEORY. That means it's not proven and can't be for a long time and many studies. Most sheep hear these THEORIES and think they are facts like co2 casues global warming. That is THEORY and is not proven. Some respected scentist think that water vapor is causing theearths water to warm, therefore warming the earth. People who beleive global warming is man made beleive that because they want to beleive it not becasue of any fact. They are sheep without a brain of their own.

Answer 2

You are absolutely right! Not only is man's CO2 release into the atmosphere NOT causing "global warming", it has been proven that atmospheric CO2 lags global temperature changes! (Ref #1)

The world's oceans act like a big bottle of pop (soda if you're from Pitt). Like a bottle of pop, when the ocean temperature is cooler it can hold more CO2, hence, more CO2 in the oceans and less in the atmosphere. When the oceans heat up, they release CO2, much like a warm fizzy drink.

This is not the first time "experts" are wrong. I lived through the "global cooling" scare of the 1970's. (Ref #2)

Anyone who is not afraid to commit heresy against the church of Gaia (or Gaea) should read the articles listed on below. (Ref #3)

And last but not least, 67% of scientist surveyed DO NOT agree that man is causing global warming. (Ref #4)

SINCE WHEN DOES 33% AGREEMENT CONSITUTE A CONSENSUS?

---------------------------------------------------------

"I don't know what the point is except is how gullible people are on the Internet."
-- Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

----------------------------------------------------------

Trevor, where are YOUR references (especially the "first hand" ones)? Just as I thought!

At least I've used the Goff-Gratch equation during my 33 year career.

Answer 3

It is nothing but hand wringing and political maneuvering. The is not proof that there is global warming, no proof that man has anything to do with it. 20 years ago it was global cooling, the next Ice age. What was causing it? The same thing that they are saying is causing global warming. What are we doing fokes? cooling down? heating up? Get with it. Live your life, don't live mine. If I want to ignore the environment, respect it but not let it control my life so be it. You can go green, cut your soda rings, hug your trees, but don't require me to do it, or have my taxes pay for it. That's your baby not mine.

Answer 4

Of course it is propaganda!! There is absolutely NO TRUTH to all the hype in global warming. Gore is just getting his last fifteen minutes of fame by making it seem like a catastrophe.

"An Inconvienent Moron".

Answer 5

I would guess that much of the reason you beleive it to be propoganda is because you base much of your opinion on material found on the internet and other second hand sources. How much is based on information gleaned from first hand sources?

Some of the answers you have already received are perfect examples of this. Take Mark In Time's answer as just one example. To a skeptic it contains much ammunition to be used in their fight against global warming but the answer is nothing short of garbage.

Of course atmospheric CO2 levels have lagged behind temperature rises in the past but temperatures and CO2 levels are inexorably linked through the Feedback Effect and it's irrelevant which comes first - one always leads to the other.

The world's oceans are part of a larger natural carbon cycle. The seas, oceans, biomass and soil both release and absorb CO2 and whilst temperature does make a difference it's only a small difference. The natural carbon cycle is in balance, hundreds of billions of tons of carbon are cycled through it every year. As with many thinhs in nature, it operates within very narrow margins - a small increase or decrease in carbon levles throws the cycle out of balance. It has a 'surplus capacity' of 3 billion tons per annum, last year humans exceeded the natural limit by 26 billion tons. These emissions are not entering the carbon cycle, they're accumulating outside of it.

Reference is made to global cooling. Quote from Wikipedia "This theory never had significant scientific support, but gained temporary popular attention due to press reporting following a better understanding of ice age cycles and a temporary downward trend of temperatures from the 1940s to the early 1970s."

Point 3 links to a site containing links to other sites refuting anthropogenic global warming. The first three of these point to The Great Global Warming Swindle, one of the most debunked documentaries to have been aired. Further links are to documents of no relevance at all such as the size of Al Gore's electricity bill - how does a utility bill prove or disprove a scientific theory? Further links are to sites that use very similar discredited arguments to those Mark In Time has used in his answer. There are professional sites that question the validity of the sceince behind the theory of anthropogenic global warming, this site is one of the least professional.

He then goes on to claim that there's a 33% consenses but, as is a favourite trick of the skeptics, has deliberately distorted the truth, taken things out of context and distorted the facts. The source of his statistic is totally unrelated to their being a consensus...

"A survey of over 400 German, American and Canadian climate researchers conducted by the Meteorologisches Institut der Universitat Hamburg and the GKSS Forschungszentrum found that 67% of those surveyed either disagreed or were uncertain about the proposition that global warming will occur so quickly that lack of preparation could prove disastrous."

With people deliberately propogating such utter nonsense is it any wonder that people beleive it to be propoganda.

Question global warming by all means, have opinions, don't conform to the majority; but use intelligent reasoning to do so and not the garbage littering so many websites.

Answer 6

It is propaganda, to be more correct it is liberal propaganda. The demacrats are the ones who make a big deal about it. At least most of them time. Global warming is strictly politics.

Answer 7

I think there are too many scientists who think it's real. Some people demand absolute proof, but science is rarely able to provide absolute proof of anything. So I'm inclined to side with the dudes who have 20 pound craniums. There are 3 main reasons why I am willing to accept this with less then absolute proof.

1) Lowering air pollution certainly won't hurt us. If you look at the effort to lower sulfur dioxide emmissions to stop acid rain, there were doomsday predictions about how the economy would go into recessions and we would all be living in the stone age. Instead, we innovated and the economy exploded. As a business student, it's obvious to me that finding new ways of doing things and being efficient with resources will boost the economy, not slow it down.

2) All the insurance companies believe it. Those guys aren't given to flights of fancy, either. Go ahead and ask a Floridian what happened to his homeowner's insurance.

3) What if it's real? Skeptics who demand absolute proof won't believe it until their houses are under water and maybe not even then. I don't want to wait that long.

Answer 8

I whole heartingly agree, especcially the fact that people are buying "carbon credits" that "offset" your Co2 emissions. What kind of scam is that? That is like you paying me 50 bucks and I promise you that I will plant some grass to offset your daily commute. This is propaganda for money making.

Furthermore why do top climatologists, like Richard Lindzen, the top climatologist in MIT, and Timothy Ball, the top Canadian climatologist, are just two of the many climatologists, not just scientists, that believe that this "climate crisis" is occuring within natural range and is not human attributed.

Thank you for your opinion

P.S. Mr. Bob, when yo are trying to prove a point by including sources, don't use wikipedia for your information, because anyone can go and edit those files fyi.

Answer 9

Yes, but it's a lot worse than that, too. It's a GIANT LIE perpetrated by schemers to keep the money rolling in from the govt. and for profiteers just to make them filthy rich at our expense.
You can't stop, change or "fix" nature! algorey is a LIAR and a rabid profiteer!

Answer 10

No. Don't be misled by a few skeptics, many with political motives.

99+% of scientists around the world believe global warming is real and mostly caused by us.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

And any number of very distinguished people, too.

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

Here are two summaries of the mountain of peer reviewed data that convinced Admiral Truly and the scientific community, short and long.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

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

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics. Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point,You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/

http://www.realclimate.org

"climate science from climate scientists"