Will anthropogenic global warming soon be universally accepted?

Question

Virtually all climate scientists agree that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/a-statistical-analysis-of-the-consensus/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A26065-2004Dec25.html

Most of the world population agrees (though there is disagreement about the degree of the threat)

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/btenvironmentra/329.php?nid=&id=&pnt=329&lb=bte

Global warming skeptics and deniers on Y!A are unable to come up with an alternative explanation for the acceleration in global warming, or even a decent reason to doubt the scientific consensus. Now they appear to be tampering with Y!A just to create some semblance of credibility.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AmSdKP_qXh6VsgTYRkmRFsPsy6IX?qid=20070827222953AA6X4j9&show=7#profile-info-6j0BRQZSaa

Are we approaching the day when virtually everyone accepts the reality of AGM and we finally do something about it?

jim, try reading your own links next time:

"An often-cited 1980 study by Imbrie and Imbrie determined that "Ignoring anthropogenic and other possible sources of variation acting at frequencies higher than one cycle per 19,000 years, this model predicts that the long-term cooling trend which began some 6,000 years ago will continue for the next 23,000 years."

James - try getting your information from a source or two that's not completely right-wing biased. You might as well be asking Phillip Morris 20 years ago whether cigarettes cause cancer.

Answer 1

It's a reflection of the speed at which we can communicate these days just how quickly global warming is being accepted by the large majority. You'll know from the World Opinion Report link that 90% of people worldwide consider global warming to be a serious threat - that's from the 2006 survey, a more recent global survey now puts the figure at 92%.

For any concept to have 90% acceptance in such a short space of time is remarkable. Historically such radical concepts as Darwinism, a spherical earth, the Sun at the centre of the solar system etc have taken decades if not centuries to be widely adopted.

What we've seen in the last few years is a massive shift from the side of the deniers, skeptics and late adopters to the side of the believers. We've seen this from governments, scientific organisations, individual scientists, big business and even the petrochemical industry.

Today, practically anyone and everyone who can authoratively speak on the subject of global warming is on the side of the believers. The non believers are diminishing in numbers but there will undoubtedly always be some that don’t accept global warming just as there are some who still claim the Earth is flat, is the centre of the universe and that evolution doesn’t exist.

Answer 2

it's already accepted by scientists and people smart enough to interpret the data. The real question is when will nearly all policymakers accept it. I hope that day is coming soon. I'm not going to hold out much hope for the general public

Answer 3

I think it's already close to universally accepted in almost all countries around the world (except perhaps in some developing countries where the level of education is low). Even the U.S. government accepts it now.

The issue now is to make the actions to fight global warming universally accepted as well.

And please Dana and others, don't let the deniers here at Y!A bother you. It won't help the cause to argue about it so just try to ignore it. That way your scientific arguments will win in the long run.

Answer 4

Yes and no. For all practical purposes, the acceptance is already near total--the smallminority of "skeptics" aardly count. You always have a few such, just like you have peopelwho think they've been abducted by aliens, etc.

BUT--the real problem is the special interests--the oil andcoal companies, mainly. They are doing anything they can to obstruct change. A recent news report (FOX news, BTW) recounts how Exxon has violated its agreement to stopfunding minsinformation groups:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273692,00.html

The reality is tha tconservation (e.g.fuel efficient cars) will boost the economy--by putting much of the money spent for gas into people's pockets to be spent on oter things--helping the economy to grow and creating jobs. The same is true of the growing alternative energy technology/industry-its creating new jobs and the technology will soon be able to produce energy at less cost than fossil fuels.

The only loser is the fossil fuel industry--and if we wat action--thats where the problem is.

Answer 5

Most concepts will never be universally accepted and I seriously doubt this one will. We still have a debate over whether people should be allowed to marry whomever they choose. There are so many people who still oppose evolution that some schools allow children to opt out of learning it.

Answer 6

Nothing is ever "universally" accepted, especially here in America. But as long as enough people care in their daily lives to make the small changes, and enough powerful people care to make the big changes (which is currently starting to happen), then we will start making progress on environmental issues of all kinds.

Answer 7

It will be a hot day in Antarctica when GW is universally accepted.

Answer 8

jim z - The last peak of the Milankovic cycles ended the last ice age about 20,000 years ago. They occur at roughly 100,000 year intervals, we're not due for another 80,000 years.

The present warming is mostly caused by us:

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

Answer 9

It seems the alarmists are always looking for consensus instead of looking for or subjectively analyzing the evidence. There is a pattern called the Milankovitch cycle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycle
Please look at it and study it. The time scale is reversed from most scales and the present is to the left. The graph reveals a very rapid increase in temperature during the last few thousand years. For you to suggest that only humans could be reponsible for a rapid growth in temperature seems to me to be more wishful thinking than science.

Answer 10

virtually all "scientists" collect huge sums of grant money to prostitute science too.