2007-07-01 10:59:43 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Global Warming
I BELIEVE YOU ARE BASED ON JUNK SCIENCE
WAKE UP YOURE BORED ARENT YOU YOURE
LOVE HILLARY
2007-07-01 11:11:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
The hard part is separating the junk from the real. There is a layer of the atmosphere that shows a warming trend. The others don't. How does this increase compare to others in the past? It is less that most. The partial pressures of the green house gasses do not show an increase over any length of time. You only need high school chemistry to understand this, along with some calculus to prove the point. So it can't be due to green house gasses. And why go to the trouble to distort the data? If there is a legitimate point, an honest presentation should do it.
Why are the proposed solutions designed to hamper Western civilization, instead of solving the proposed problem. Do so many people, some of them smart, support the propaganda because they are not thinking?
2007-07-01 18:20:45 · answer #2 · answered by Richard F 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Without Global warming we would still be in the last ice age.
Due to slowing solar activity we should get a mini ice age in 2030. [google..mini ice age 2030 ]
Has anyone checked out how fast the sea is rising.
About 2mm a year max...scary stuff. Possibly due to the land rising out of the sea from when the glaciers melted.[The IPCC notes "No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected."]
Anyway all the satelites have been recalibrated by 5pc so who knows what is what. [sea level rise wikipedia]
The scientists from the big committee only said that 'there was a possibility' of man made GW and that was after much editing.
Truth is no-one knows...so we should all be careful just in case.
2007-07-01 19:35:54 · answer #3 · answered by Joyce J 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are a lot of people that agree with you that it is based on junk science, and all of them are wrong. The analysis of something as huge and complex as the Earth's entire atmosphere is bound to have a few question marks in regards to it, but overall, the evidence is well over 70% in favor of the reality of global warming. Your opinion is not equal to scientific evidence, nor is mine.
2007-07-01 20:34:54 · answer #4 · answered by Paul Hxyz 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If you had paid attention in basic Chemistry or Earth science, instead of reading your retarded global warming rebuttals on some republican noise machine website, you'd know that CO2 is a green house gas. And if burning fossil fuels emits CO2, then you're going to have more CO2 in the air. More CO2 in the air means more heat storing molecules in the air. That's basically global warming in a nutshell, it's not a complex science.
2007-07-01 18:09:06 · answer #5 · answered by Jason Thomas 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think that it's true to an extent.
I don't think we'll be affected by it in our lifetime, nor will our kids be affected by it in their's, but I do think that some time in the future, it will impact our world and our human race.
And you say "it's all junk," where's YOUR backing? The TOP environmental scientists and other types of scientists have confirmed global warming with studies. What do YOU have to show that it's NOT true?
You people say "Whatever, these scientists don't know what they're talking about- global warming isn't real and will never be!"
But where is YOUR proof? Scientists have statistics, studies, and plenty of other things they've been working on for YEARS that point to their discoveries- you have nothing to prove that they are wrong besides your own ignorance.
2007-07-01 18:05:13 · answer #6 · answered by msxcheshirexcat 4 · 5⤊ 2⤋
I actually just came on here to give props to the "Captain Crunch" chic.... Hilarious!!!
Anyway... Look dude, Al Gore had to put up with a LOT of crap for about 20 years from his republican advisaries because THEY didn't believe in Global Warming... NOW even Thick-*** President Bush is talking about climate change when his daddy was one of Gore's biggest critics for YEARS!!!
In conclusion...all you climate change doubters are seriously out of style and behind the times...Get a new "contraversial" way to annoy people...
BESIDES...the biggest environmental threat to our way of life is NOT Global Warming but the DEPLETION OF THE WORLD'S FRESH WATER SUPPLY!!!
GET WITH IT!!!
2007-07-01 21:25:36 · answer #7 · answered by GrinGASTIC!! 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes. It is totally junk science. Water vapor is a much more important greenhouse gas, but they don't talk about it much because us humans didn't cause it. They just want to tax the successful ones in the world --- Us. Don't buy the spin.
2007-07-01 20:02:51 · answer #8 · answered by en tu cabeza 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it is not that the science is junk its the politicians who are junking the whle debate its not about the weather we cannot no matter how close our politicians get to god they cannot do anything about the weather its alll destraction to take your minds off the real problemsthey caused that is the spread by poor policy
2007-07-01 21:45:39 · answer #9 · answered by theanswer read it again please 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I bet lots of people agree with you. Doesn't matter though. The truth or falsity of a claim isn't determined by how many people believe it. In order to say global warming theory is junk science you've got to provide lots and lots of evidence, which you haven't done.
So let's see some evidence please.
2007-07-01 18:37:15 · answer #10 · answered by SomeGuy 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Ok this one is easy.
You have fish in a fish bowl but you never clean the fish bowl, what happens to the fish, they die.
It saddens me to see these kind of posts for the simple reason that people still think these things.
They say by the end of the century North and South Pole will have no more ice. I say it will happen faster than that. The scary thing is in the next 5 years we will see and then there will be no dought what a good job human kind did on destroying there planet.
We are killing our planet day by day, we created a on switch but we never created a off switch.
2007-07-01 18:11:35 · answer #11 · answered by PlanetMercury 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋