A Question For the People! ALL PEOPLE! Not bots! REAL PEOPLE!?

Question

why do you belive or not believe the "Global Warming" Consiracy?

Answer 1

Depends. Is the globe warming? Yes, that is a fact.

Now, is it warming because of humans or is it warming due to other factors?

The Earth's axis wobbles just like the motion of a spinning top. The axis makes a full revolution every 20,000 years, which happens to coincide with our ice ages.

Also the Earth's orbit is not a prefect sphere. It's eliptical and constantly changing. As we become closer and closer to the Sun, we heat up.

Also, increased CO2 in the atmposphere creates more cloud cover. Increased cloud cover would keep a lot of the Sun's radiation from ever reaching the surface of the planet.

And increased CO2 would make vegetation grow bigger and more dense.

(no, your eyes are not deceiving you...i'm a liberal who's not convinced humans are to blame for global warming. It happens frequently and usually warms and cools quite rapidly when it does)

Answer 2

I'm not sure, but I suspect it's not true. I've heard some convincing statements about flaws with the theory. For example, how a volcano can emit more carbon dioxide in one day than humans can over several years, yet that doesn't cause global warming. I did some internet searches to try to find people who believe in global warming who disputed those arguments, but I couldn't find anything.

I think conservatives should offer to do whatever the liberals want about global warming, but only if liberals all resign from the government and let conservatives do what they want about other things. If global warming is real, liberals would be smart to take the deal. But they probably won't, because they know it isn't real, and they aren't willing to make real sacrifices to deal with it.

Answer 3

Belief doesn't enter into it. Belief is the realm of faiths and religions. Belief has nothing to do with science.

Science is about establishing hypothesese and conducting experiments and research to either validate or invalidate them. If a hypothesis is verified and tested based on peer reviewed results, then it becomes a theory. This theory is then tested and retested. It's used to make predictions. If at any point it fails, then it is either discarded or altered to fit the new results.

You can believe anything you want, like your car is powered by magical fairies. Science describes reality, like your car is powered by explosions caused by rapid oxygenation and ignition of gasoline.

In the case of climate change, there isn't a conspiracy. You can download the models NASA and others use from the web. You can also get the data they use for the models. You can download weather records. You can read the published research. It's all out in the open for anyone who wants to review it.

Belief doesn't enter into it. The results support the theory. Just like they did with acid rain, and the ozone hole. It's been researched and studied by researchers across the globe.

The only time belief enters is people who are politically blind or don't understand the phenomenology. That's on both sides. But these people don't have Ph.Ds in atmospheric physics and climatology, They either support or refute the scientific findings based on their "feelings" as opposed to the science.

Some on here even go so far as to post links to articles that "support" their position, without mentioning that said sources have been widely discredited, taken deeply out of context, outright false, and/or not peer reviewed.

Believe whatever you want. Belief did not stop acid rain, nor the depleting ozone layer. Human action stopped/reduced those based on scientific evidence. The same applies here.

Until I see a scientifically vetted paper with a reproducible model to explain what is happening now without anthropogenic causes, I will continue to support the current research. There's no logical or factual reason otherwise.

~X~

Answer 4

I think that the earth evolves and replenishes itself through change. This is shown over countless years to be true.

For the record, it's been cooler this year than the last 3 where I am . . .

I don't doubt that the earth is warming, neither do I doubt that the other planets in our solar system are also warming.

I don't disagree with a cleaner earth, but I insist that it be on terms that do not infringe on freedom, and that it be financially viable.

Is there a contradiction in the belief of evolution, but refusing to allow the earth to evolve?

Answer 5

I didn't realize that global warming was considered a conspiracy.

I believe that global warming is a fact and not a "conspiracy" because many scientists and other experts in the field have stated that global warming has been happening and will continue to happen. It seems that Republicans scoff at it simply because the one talking about it so much is Al Gore. Maybe if a prominent Republican joined him, the rest would at least admit that it exists.

Answer 6

I don't believe that Global Warming is human caused. I know that the Earth has heated and cooled more times in its "life" than this debate has. Right now, we are getting a little on the warm end, whoop-dee-doo! It'll cool off just like it did 100 years ago. We had ice ages when man was in his infancy of "reporting" such instances and we survived its heating than the cooling and on and on. When I was in 6th to 9th grades I had to worry about Global Cooling and using CFC's, now I can't cook a freakin' steak over propane because I might burn it and create a carbon footprint!? Insanity. I was and am very knowledgeable in science and know/knew that it was a bunch of crap!

Answer 7

I mean... I think it could be possible...

I think it's probably the most likely scenario to explain the warming that we have had... personally, and I personally know some folks in the scientific field that belive that...

now... is it possible it's something else... yes...

SO, we're left with this one question:

How much credence, effort and money should we put into the idea... that we can't quite prove, but we think may be a danger?

I would rather be the person that spent 100 million on a program you didn't need than the person that didn't spend 100 million and should have...

I will say that much...

and it's in no way a "fact" that man didn't cause it, no more than it is a "fact" that he did... that's a pretty silly statement... and it got four thumbs up... HAHAHAHA... that's borderline depressing

Answer 8

it seems to me that large populations of people destroying forest which create oxygen should at some time affect the planet. maybe I wouldn't use the term global warming but with the Industrial revolution back in the 1700's it was bound to eventually have an effect. Call it the minimization of ozone, or the increased emission effect, the increased median temperature of the oceans, etc. Call the byproducts of industrialization whatever you want to call it.

Answer 9

I believe it because the few scientists who disagree with it are the ones getting grants from Exxon Mobil and other such companies.
You might say that's impossible or improbable. I'm obviously some conspiracy theorist, huh? Well "scientists" funded by corporations have never lied to protect their benefactors, have they? That's why the "Does tobacco cause cancer?" issue was a "debate" for decades. Republicans were on the wrong side of that one, too.
Call me crazy, but I just have this delusion of trusting people who present peer-reviewed, scientific-method tested, empirical knowledge to prove their arguments instead of people who just repeat them loudly over and over on Faux News and have the guy who wrote Jurassic Park write novels about them.
I mean, really, can you really, honestly expect that we can pour millions and millions of megatons of CO2, a greenhouse gas, and other chemicals into the atmosphere in less than a century and a half, while cutting down huge amounts of trees, and expect nothing to happen at all?
I mean, a lot of these scientists are actually socially and fiscally conservative!

Answer 10

Global warming exists - fact. Man didn't cause it - fact.

The planet has been warming and cooling for thousands and thousand of years. We went through a cooling stage in the '70s, now we're in a warming stage. If man caused global warming because of our progressing industrialization, why was the planet cooling in the '70s?

Actual statistics do not back up Gore's claim that man has caused global warming. Statistics from history. Statistics from scientists. Even statistics from the U.N.