Is anyone skeptical about global warming?

Question

we are constantly told cardon dioxide is causing global warming yet the evidence to back it up isn't conclusive. We even have respected sciencetists in the field telling us that it is the sun instead that is driving the rise in temperture in the world. Why are we treating this theory that CO2 is causing globa warming as a proven fact and not discussing this?

Answer 1

because global warming is a complete fabrication . no more proof of global warming then there is that big foot was seen with Elvis at walmart yesterday

Answer 2

There can be little dispute that CO2 emissions cause the greenhouse effect which in turn causes global warming. It's a simple physical property of CO2 that causes this. To claim otherwise means the laws of physics need to be rewritten. The argument makes as much sense as claiming that wrapping up in cold weather doesn't keep you warm.

The evidence is conclusive, no credible scientist would claim othrwise; the only people that do are some skeptics with little or no knowledge of what they're talking about. Next time a skeptic tells you this ask them to provide you with the name of just one scientist that claims CO2 doesn't contribute to global warming.

If it didn't the planet would have very little natural global warming and would be so cold that life would never have evolved. Something else the skeptics copnveniently overlook.

Very few respected scientists tell us that the sun is driving the rise in temperatures. I was recently refered to a list of 'scientists' making just such a claim, there were quite a few names on the list but the majority were geologists, mathameticians and the like. Of all those who were qualified in the area of climate change there was just one climatologist, two meteorologists, one paleoclimatologist and one astrophysicist and none of them were disputing that the world was warming up only the significance of the anthropogenic contribution.

There are many things regarding climate change that are being discussed and researched, CO2 isn't one of them because it's role in global warming has been established conclusively for over 100 years.

Answer 3

I do understand the earth goes through cycles of heating and cooling and often propaganda can lead to public scares and false allegations (like asteroid impacts and gas shortages). However, I think it is best to get your information from credible sources which do not include TV programs, news sound bites and political rhetoric. Last week Thursday my area released the first "air quality advisory” of the summer. So my stance is this: yes the human impact on global warming is debatable and it may not have the huge impact some are predicting, because there is an infinite number of variables to consider. However, lessoning emissions, offering government subsidies, and decreasing reliance on a finite source of fuel will only promote better living conditions. I don’t want to suggest those who do not believe humans are impacting global temperatures are “'conspiracy theorists” but I do often doubt their motives. Looking for the easy way out that justifies a high consumer lifestyle is much easier then being part of a group that wants nothing more than to create a habitable environment for future generations.

Answer 4

We've been through this. It's not proven. The limits that the AGW proponents seek they've sought for dozens of other reasons over the years and this is the latest excuse. It may turn out to be right someday but so far they have bubkus. Lying and saying it is proven doesn't help their credibility, lying about past warm periods doesn't help theri credibility. A few of them admit that it's a political question - - they phrase it as "shouldn't we act now, just to be sure" and the answer is, if we applied that standard equally, to every limit that anyone else wanted to impose, we wouldn't be free to do much of anything.

Answer 5

Modest, i'm going to look back on your findings yet i think of you will discover the record falls into countless categories: Retired or ineffective. men are who not actively in contact with present day learn. IPCC skeptics, quite than AGW skeptic. Spencer is a competent occasion of a guy who's been skeptical of the IPCC and thinks nature could be in charge for an excellent part of the warming -- yet not inevitably all of it. (nevertheless he's now offering that the organic part of the warming is "random" so it incredibly is getting harder to take him heavily. The "solar" men who've long gone quite silent interior the previous 2 years while the earth did not initiate cooling as they envisioned. experts alongside with gray who argue with the particular predictions. gray's pink meat has been the predictions around hurricanes. nevertheless gray additionally fits the retired label. He seems somewhat miffed that he's not considered the international expert on hurricanes, and on a similar time as nonetheless very sketchy it does seem that the IPCC predictions are real (it is going to take extra warming to get the the factor that the predictions of more desirable hurricanes can incredibly be examined). The oil men. it is not totallly elementary to brush aside a guy purely through fact he worked for super oil, if the only learn the guy did exchange into pre 2008 while Exxon exchange into paying especially for distracting papers, then he could not likely be considered credible. upload Lindzen to the record. He believes our surroundings has computerized unfavourable feedbacks which will self-maximum suitable the warming.

Answer 6

Most scientists disagree with the Global Warming alarmists. It is extremely difficult for them to get a news camera or microphone in front of them to tell us about it.

This is not because of the scientists who disagree with them, but because of the news reporters and editors who practically worship at the alter of the Holy Environmentalist Empire.

If a scientist expresses his opposing view about Global warming, he is immediately accused of being in bed with petrochemical or coal industry businesses, right wing politicians, or is simply publicly dressed down like a first year smart mouth college student by his professor.

One of the saddest parts of the fact that the Global Warming Scammers are about to be exposed by a growing number of respected scientists who don't use grant money as the only real data for their research is, the entire environmental part of the scientific research community will end up paying for this scam.

If their liberal religious followers were not overseeing the murders of so many millions of 3rd world children by using GW to bully the leaders of their countries out of digging for their coal and drilling for their oil, it would almost be worth it to let these freaks continue scamming the 1st world out of its grant money.

Answer 7

Well look at some that are promoting the Theory and Especially the Sore Loose Inventor of the Internet Al Gore. Well I want to Know what ever happened to the Big Craze of the 1970's GLOBAL COOLING??? You see back then the Polar Ice Cap was steadily over taking Canada and Headed straight for MIAMI FLORIDA. But the Inventor of the Internet AL GORE saved the day... All Bow to Big Al!!!

Answer 8

I have just finished a scientific environmental college class and have read numerous scientific reports. I believe, judging from historical data, that the earth is going through a normal warming trend of 2-3 centigrades, so why the huge political debates?

Answer 9

Because only a very few scientists are skeptical, and the peer reviewed data proves they're wrong.

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

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

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

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

It's (mostly) not the sun:

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html


"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."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Answer 10

All this info is true go to youtube and type in the great global warming swindle this will give you all the facts.
O by the way no credible scientists go against it look at this
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=c47c1209-233b-412c-b6d1-5c755457a8af
Also CO2 only makes up .052 of a percent of our atmosphere. Volcano's emit 5 times more co2 then humans do so should we cap those?

Answer 11

i believe in the theory of global warming and want to protect the atmosphere....i believe there is a natural change always occuring on earth but i also believe we are speeding the process....