How come all the "evidence" supporting man made global warming is merely appeals to authority?

Question

The last question I asked some guy said "I have been a blah blah for over 15 years, how long have you blah blah..."

Why are we expected to waste our time and resources based upon the fact Abu Al Gore or some other eco terrorist says its true. That is an appeal to authority.

The fact that 99.99999 % of the scientists say its true? Well, then it must be! How often has science been wrong? Come on... the truth is, we have NO idea what's going on... These guys are just grasping at straws.

Answer 1

The truth is MANY scientists do not believe it's true and they are being shut up by Al Gore, the media and their ilk.

There are many scientists that believe the warming trend we are experiencing is caused by increased solar radiation ie the sun is putting out more flares etc. As evidence I site that the polar caps of Mars are melting at the same proportional rate to Earth and Neptune's temperature is increasing at a proportional rate to earth. I guess they think we are causing that too.

However since there is nothing we can or should do about the sun - the chicken little, the sky is falling appeal is much more emotional AND political. I mean if they can blame the increase on republicans and say it enough to have the media believe it, I mean no democrats drive suvs or have stocks in oil, right? They gain political points.
And if they can get America and other countries to accept a false economy based in carbon credits which THEY create and they have investments in those options - Hey they are profitting off this scare! Al Gore would not be the poster boy for them if he was not gaining points politically and economically off this would he.

Now, If they said that humans were causing POLLUTION I would agree 100%. If they said - HEY we have no more oil - we need to switch to something else - I would agree 100%. If they said - we have millions more people on earth than earth can comfortable support - I would agree 100%, but they are not saying logical things like that.

Answer 2

Actually, there is quite a split in the "scientific community" as to whether the causes are man made. Closer to 50-50 or 60-40.

Answer 3

why haven't you turned on the word news to see what the worlds weather has been doing. reeking havoc. they have been saying for the last 30 years that the earth is being badly effected by mans disposable attitudes. and neglect to correct it. suppose you don't live in drought ridden Australia or tsunami effected Asia Pacific or drowning Papua New Ginnie. it is getting smaller by the day...

Answer 4

Well, scientists are so smart. That is why we have:

cures for cancer, AIDS, and the common cold
accurate weather predictions daily
etc.

Answer 5

NASA Chief Says Global Warming May Not Be an Urgent Problem ‘We Must Wrestle With’
Posted by Noel Sheppard on May 31, 2007 - 14:40.
It seems almost a metaphysical certitude that the following will not be raised in this evening’s nightly newscasts, or the headlines of tomorrow’s papers.

Regardless, Dr. Michael Griffin, the Administrator of NASA since April 2005, told NPR Thursday morning, “I am not sure that it is fair to say that [global warming] is a problem we must wrestle with” (audio available here).

As ABCNews.com reported Thursday, this has drawn “the ire of his agency's preeminent climate scientists,” in particular, global warming alarmist James Hansen (h/t NBer Sick-n-Tired).

More on that later. First, here are some of Griffin’s remarks as reported by NPR.com (emphasis added throughout):

I have no doubt that … a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change. First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown. And second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings — where and when — are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take.

How delicious. Wonderfully, he wasn’t done:

Nowhere in NASA's authorization, which of course governs what we do, is there anything at all telling us that we should take actions to affect climate change in either one way or another. We study global climate change, that is in our authorization, we think we do it rather well. I'm proud of that, but NASA is not an agency chartered to, quote, battle climate change.

Well, someone ought to tell NASA scientist James Hansen this. After all, as reported by NewsBusters Thursday, Hansen has made it almost his personal mission the past 26 years to use his position at NASA to advance global warming alarmism in order to impact legislation.

As such, according to ABCNews.com, Hansen wasn’t pleased with Griffin’s remarks (emphasis added):

Griffin's comments — released in transcript form by NPR — immediately drew stunned reaction from James Hansen, NASA's top climate scientist at the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York.

"It's an incredibly arrogant and ignorant statement," Hansen told ABC News. "It indicates a complete ignorance of understanding the implications of climate change."

Hansen believes Griffin's comments fly in the face of well-established scientific knowledge that hundreds of NASA scientists have contributed to.

"It's unbelievable," said Hansen. "I thought he had been misquoted. It's so unbelievable."

Nice way to talk about the head of the agency you work for, James.

Apparently, news of the upcoming NPR segment created quite a deluge of media inquiries at NASA. As a result, Griffin sent out the following press release Wednesday evening (emphasis added):

“NASA is the world's preeminent organization in the study of Earth and the conditions that contribute to climate change and global warming. The agency is responsible for collecting data that is used by the science community and policy makers as part of an ongoing discussion regarding our planet's evolving systems. It is NASA's responsibility to collect, analyze and release information. It is not NASA's mission to make policy regarding possible climate change mitigation strategies. As I stated in the NPR interview, we are proud of our role and I believe we do it well."

Think we’ll hear anything about this apparent difference of opinion on tonight’s news broadcasts or in the papers tomorrow?

I'm not holding my breath.


also try: http://naturalscience.com/ns/letters/ns_let07.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,275267,00.html
http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/climate/2001-05-23-warming-and-trees.htm

Answer 6

You need to back you "facts" up with sources. I would probably agree to at least 50% of scientist believing in "man-made" global warming.

Answer 7

newspapers have reported that its due to burning of fossil fuels

Answer 8

Is there a special linguistics course for oddball conservative rhetoric??

I'd love to know where you get your expertise from?

Answer 9

WTF? I think I missed an important part of this somewhere....