Why won't cons believe the vast majority of scientists when they say global warming is real and man made?

Question

Why do they have to come up with conspiracy theories?

Examples: They're either all socialists trying to destroy capitalism or capitalists just going after the global warming money.

NOW FOR SOME EVIDENCE. I LOOKED UP ALL THE WELL ESTABLISHED (((SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS))) ENAGED IN CLIMATIC, GEOLOGIC, AND METEOROLOGIC RESEARCH. THIS IS WHAT I FOUND:

=============================================

1) THE AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION, FOUNDED IN 1919, OVER 45,000 MEMBERS
"Human activities are increasingly altering the Earth's climate. These effects add to natural influences that have been present over Earth's history. Scientific evidence strongly indicates that natural influences cannot explain the rapid increase in global near-surface temperatures observed during the second half of the 20th century."
http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/climate_change_position.html

2) THE U.S. NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCE (ALONG WITH THE NAS OF THE G8 NATIONS), FOUNDED IN 1863, OVER 2,000 MEMBERS, OVER 200 NOBEL PRIZE MEMBERS
"There is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities. The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify nations taking prompt action.
http://www.academie-sciences.fr/actualites/textes/G8_gb.pdf

3) THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA, FOUNDED IN 1888, OVER 20,500 MEMBERS
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) supports the scientific conclusions that Earth’s climate is changing; the climate changes are due in part to human activities; and the probable consequences of the climate changes will be significant and blind to geopolitical boundaries.
http://www.geosociety.org/aboutus/position10.htm

4) THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, FOUNDED IN 1876, OVER 160,000 MEMBERS
"There is now general agreement among scientific experts that the recent warming trend is real (and particularly strong within the past 20 years), that most of the observed warming is likely due to increased atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations, and that climate change could have serious adverse effects by the end of this century."
http://www.chemistry.org/portal/resources/ACS/ACSContent/government/statements/2004_statements/2004_07_global_climate_chg_env.pdf

5) THE AMERICAN METEOROLOGY SOCIETY, FOUNDED IN 1919, OVER 11,000 MEMBERS
"Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond."
http://www.ametsoc.org/POLICY/2007climatechange.html

6) THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE, CREATED IN 1988, HUNDREDS OF SCIENTISTS FROM OVER 130 NATIONS
"Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely (defined in footnotes as greater then 90% likelyhood) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations. Discernible human influences now extend to other aspects of climate, including ocean warming, continental-average temperatures, temperature extremes and wind patterns"
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

7) THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE, FOUNDED IN 1848, SERVES 262 AFFILIATED SOCIETIES AND ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE FOR A TOTAL OF 10 MILLION INDIVIDUALS
"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society. Accumulating data from across the globe reveal a wide array of effects: rapidly melting glaciers, destabilization of major ice sheets, increases in extreme weather, rising sea level, shifts in species ranges, and more. The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now."
http://www.aaas.org/news/press_room/climate_change/mtg_200702/aaas_climate_statement.pdf

8) THE NOAA'S NATIONAL CLIMATIC DATA CENTER PALEOCLIMATOLOGY PROGRAM, FOUNDED IN 1992, HAS THE LARGEST ARCHIVE OF CLIMATE AND PALEOCLIMATE DATA
"Many scientists have now concluded that global warming can be explained by a human-caused enhancement of the greenhouse effect. It is important to remember both that the greenhouse effect occurs naturally, and that it has been intensified by humankind's input of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere."
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/what.html

9) THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR ATMOSPHERIC RESEARCH, FOUNDED IN 1960, OVER 120 MEMBERS, SERVES OVER 62 PARTNER ORGANIZATIONS INCLUDING UNIVERSITIES AND RESEARCH CENTERS
"Together, these data show that Earth's surface air temperature has risen more than 1.1°F (0.7°C) since the late 1800s. This warming of the average temperature around the globe has been especially sharp since the 1970s. Global models at NCAR have simulated 20th century climate and found three main factors at work:
1) Solar activity contributed to a warming trend in global average temperature from the 1910s through 1930s.
2) As industrial activity increased following World War II, sun-blocking sulfates and other aerosol emissions helped lead to a slight global cooling from the 1940s to 1970s.
3) Since 1980, the rise in greenhouse gas emissions from human activity has overwhelmed the aerosol effect to produce overall global warming."
http://www.ucar.edu/research/climate/warming.jsp

10) THE NASA'S GODDARD INSTITUTE FOR SPACE STUDIES, FOUNDED IN 1961, SPECIALIZES IN SPACECRAFT OBSERVATIONS AND GLOBAL CLIMATE MODELS
"A new NASA-funded study used a computer climate model to simulate the last 50 years of climate changes, projects warming over the next 50 years regardless of whether or not nations curb their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions soon. If no emission reductions are made and they continue to increase at the current rate, global temperatures may increase by 1-2º Celsius (1.8º-3.6º Fahrenheit). But if the growth rate of carbon dioxide does not exceed its current rate and if the growth of true air pollutants (things that are harmful to human health) is reversed, temperatures may rise by only 0.75C (1.35F)."
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20020919/

Answer 1

why are the libs so obsessed with global warming? it's obvious they're using it for political gain, or else they wouldn't be constantly trying to shove it down our throats all the time.

Answer 2

examine the text textile of those comments heavily. that's all rhetoric. They by no ability needless to say state that this or that's occurring to the planet. They continually combat over the wording, because of the fact professional-worldwide warming scientists choose it to sound like impending danger is coming, without truly asserting how or while (that's fairly un-scientific too, btw). particularly some the worldwide warming experiments won't be able to be accurately reproduced, because of the fact climate technological understanding is so noisy. there is plenty documents, and an countless majority of that's misunderstood. i think of GW is actual, inspite of the shown fact that it is not a 50 3 hundred and sixty 5 days time shrink for us to maintain the planet, as some would have us have faith.

Answer 3

1) Humans only contribute about .3% to 5% of all greenhouse gas emissions (the rest occur naturally).
So highly unlikely humans are causing it.

2) The current warming trend started in the mid-to-late 1800's, well before large scale industrialization and autos.

3) The earth has warmed and cooled about every 1500 years over the past millions of years (before autos and factories).

All the data is below (I know liberals and environmentalists hate facts and science, but give it a try)

Answer 4

Well I am not a "con" but I will tell you my opinion.

First: I am not convinced its man made because there is NO way that any scientist could say for sure that it is or isn't. What they say is all based on statistics and precentages and computer models. Basically just an educated opinion on their parts

Second: Even if it turns out to be fact , It just won't have the "sky is falling" effects that are claimed. Basically , It really is not that big a deal.

Third: If it is man made , I just don't think that any of the things that are proposed to correct it would do anything. Only going back to the stone age would "maybe" stop it.

I remember growing up in the 70's and all the PR at that time was in 20-30 years there would be a new ice age because of what humans are doing to the atmosphere. Well didn't see any ice age , did you??

Answer 5

It's warmer than it was 100 years ago. By 1.1 degrees F on average. There remains no tangible proof that the primary cause is human-generated CO2.

It is NOT warmer than it was 1000 years ago. And atmospheric CO2 levels were lower then than they are now.

What someone with a dozen advanced degrees suspects is not proof. What dozens of people each with a dozen advanced degrees suspect is not proof.

And the fact remains, this has always been a highly-politicized issue - with respect to many of the groups you cite, if you come to the opposite conclusion, you're soon not part of that group, so it's a self-fulfilling prophecy that the group comes to the conclusion you want. Certainly this is the case with the IPCC.

Answer 6

Here's a simple observation:

These scientist's jobs is climate science. So if they come out and say global warming isn't real, they lose their jobs. This is a conflict of interest. Regardless of whether or not global warming is real, if they say it isn't they lose their jobs. It's logical to conclude they want to work and enjoy their jobs, and therefore not too far fetched to assume they might be lying so they can keep working.

It's curious that Democrats, which have long been going after the oil industry, would side with global warming alarmists. It seems their goals are hand in hand.

Listen to Tyranus XX, he knows what's up.

Answer 7

In 1490 every scientist thought the world was flat. Before Galileo every scientist thought that the earth was the center of the universe. Just because a bunch of people believe the same thing does not make it true.

Answer 8

"The vast bulk of research to date, however, points to greenhouse gases – mainly carbon dioxide from burning coal, oil, and natural gas – as the main force behind the current warming trend, most climate scientists say.

Still, over the past decade some researchers say they've found puzzling correlations between changes in the sun's output and weather and climate patterns on Earth. These links appear to rise above the level of misinterpreted data or faulty equipment."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0927/p13s03-sten.html

Not to mention only less than 50% of real scientists actually believe global warming; all the others are obvious failures in Earth Science 101. Where all those predicted global warming hurricanes that was talked about within the past year?

"In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the "consensus view," defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes' work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated.

Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising."

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=8641

Greenland debunks Global Warming and Al gore.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/07/06/greenland_ice_yields_hope_on_climate/
http://newsbusters.org/node/13948

More global warming myth news articles.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/317/5834/36?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=eske+willerslev&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

Hurricane scientists mess up hurricane predictions

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aWuWjvhiv8Y4&refer=us

Hundreds of scientists have published articles showing global warming is not man-made and debunks it.

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/news_press_release,176495.shtml

Answer 9

Because 0.6 degrees over the last 110 years could not be in part or even entirely part of a much larger cycle on Earth could it?

I mean seriously in the 70's it was global cooling, today it is global warming.

When the weather people can nail my weather a week ahead of time, I may listen to these same scientists start talking about what will happen 100 years down the line. Until then, it is all bunk.

Answer 10

No one is refuting the up-tick of the thermometer, but, as one deft poster pointed out, it's the reason(s) for the increase.

Now, is there any proof of what global warming is actually doing to the planet? The mean sea-level hasn't risen, has it?

Otters and beavers engaging in gang warfare?

Answer 11

I don't really care if global warming is real or nor, or whether it is man made or not. I am just sick and tired of hearing about it. Give it rest already, and stop trying to scare me that I will be living underwater 50 years from now. I am rebelling against the green movement. I am Anti-Green.