why is global warming a controversial issue?

Answer 1

Perhaps it's because we're screwing ourselves into extinction and there are still people who think that it doesn't exist. How much controversial do you want it to be?

Answer 2

If you want controversy then you might mention that there is no evidence that the earth is warming. Land temperatures have risen less than 1 degree in the last 100 years. The ice caps are not melting. They are measured every year by multiple organizations and they all agree the polar ice cars are getting thicker every year by a fraction of an inch. The oceans are not rising. Don't take my word for it check with any coastal city to see if they are flooded. New Orleans was not flooded by rising sea levels but by a hurricane and because it is below sea level. Global warming scientist say global warming will cause more hurricanes. Check with the American Meteorological Society or NOAA. They both report that the number of hurricanes has been below average for many years. So far this year we have Had fewer hurricanes than any years since 1975. If you want to know the truth about global warming the read State of Fear by Michael Crichton. It is a fictitious story about an environmental organization but the scientific facts about global warming are well researched and presented. It's also a good read.

Answer 3

A lot of people don't understand all that much about global warming - it's a very complex subject and to understand it fully takes a great deal of time. If people don't understand something it's very easy to become confused, make errors etc.

Some people don't want to admit that global warming may be happening, to do so means admitting to being a part of the problem and acknowledging that we need to make changes in order to deal with the consequences and the problem itself. People are naturally reluctant to change and given a choice, would much prefer things to remain as they are - not just in the context of global warming but in life in general.

Then there's the likes of Al Gore, at the end of the day he's a politician not a scientist and as a politician he had his supporters and detractors. Thus, to a large extent, whatever he says will be agreed upon by those who are alligned with his politics and will be refuted by those of other political persuasions.

A few years ago some of the big oil and power companies engaged in a policy of discrediting the science of global warming and to this end they used their in-house scientists along with others they had commissioned, to examine the data with a view to finding errors. They found hardly any errors so engaged in a campaign of misinformation instead. Today this has largely stopped but the misonformation is still doing the rounds.

Finally, it's not really a controversial issue at all. Overwhelmingly people support the theory of manmade global warming and see climate change as a serious threat (92% in a recent worldwide poll). On this forum there's a lot of controversy as it's one of the few places that skeptics can have a say, they tend to congregate here in their numbers. If you were to go to a scientific forum you'd find almost no dissent at all.

Answer 4

because there is no consenses contrary to what they repeat on the news all the time that there is consences. what is funny there is no controversy that the earth is round and it hangs on nothing or that gravity exists and that atoms make up all things and that we can fly in planes and that cars can go very fast etc. why? because there truly is not only consenses but you can see for yourself these things, they have all the evidence to prove the earth is round and hangs on nothing and gravity exists there is no dissagreement that is why there is no controversy.

there is only controversy when there is dissagreements about what the evidence actually shows. meaning that science hasn't proven beyond a doubt anything about what who why how or anything about global warming and causes and long term affects. they have proved beyond any doubt that the earth is round, they havn't proved that global warming is man caused or will cause armegeddon if we don't do something about it. all the evidence is there but is ambiguous and open to interpretation, and thus scientists will dissagree (aka controversy) on what it all means.

RRRRR

Answer 5

Global warming is controversial for several reasons:

* The Warmers – the climate scientists who strongly believe in global warming – have made a number of mistakes and in some cases have committed unethical acts to promote the theory. The most famous of these is Michael Mann and his broken “Hockey Stick” that was promoted heavily by the IPCC. The Dutch science magazine Natuurwetenschap & Techniek had a good article on it. Here is the English translation.
http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/Climate_L.pdf

* The European Science Foundation recently held an international conference in Lisbon on research misconduct. The two fields singled out as having the most problems are the medical and climate science fields. Read what Howard Alper says here:
http://www.esf.org/ext-ceo-news-singleview/article/experts-deconstruct-research-misconduct-from-global-and-institutional-perspectives-320.html

* Recent research indicates the Earth is not warming as much as we first thought. Anthony Watts, a broadcast meteorologist, has been leading an effort to photograph and document the quality of weather stations reporting temperatures in the US. He and his team have surveyed about 1/3 of these stations in the last few months. Only 15% of them meet the minimum standards set by the NOAA. 95% of the poor stations have a warm bias. The surface station network outside the US is even lower quality. Up to half of the observed warming appears not to be real but is an artifact of these poor quality stations.
We will know much more when this effort is completed in about two years. The worst station found so far was being overseen by the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at the University of Arizona in Tucson. It was located on top of parking lots! To see pictures, go to:
http://surfacestations.org
You can view Watts' presentation to the scientists at UCAR here:
http://gallery.surfacestations.org/UCAR-slides/index.html

* Scientists have known for several years that the surface temperature record was not reliable. Years ago, Roger Pielke suggested using a different metric to measure global warming - ocean heat content. This has been used by scientists on both sides of the debate. (It became more interesting when the oceans began cooling in 2003.) Just recently Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Laboratory published a peer-reviewed paper using a combination of surface temps and ocean heat content to estimate the climate sensitivity to doubled atmospheric CO2. Using this method, he calculated the sensitivity to be much less than previously thought indicating that global warming will not be catastrophic.
http://www.ecd.bnl.gov/steve/pubs/HeatCapacity.pdf

* Finally, the biggest reason it is controversial is because the Warmers do not abide by the normal standards of practice in science. Let me explain. Science is supposed to be open, not hidden. Other researchers expect to get whatever information or data they need to reproduce or audit a study. Peer-reviewed journals and research funding agencies normally require researchers to archive their data to make it easier for other researchers to check their work and build on it. If more information is required, the authors of the journal article are supposed to provide any other information they need. Climate scientists rarely archive their data and rarely comply with requests for additional data, methods and source code needed to reproduce their study. Stephen McIntyre runs a blog called ClimateAudit. He regularly writes about different researchers who refuse to provide information. This is a key issue, perhaps the biggest issue in the debate. Science is not science until it has been replicated. When a researcher attempts to prevent replication, it shows his work to be pseudoscience. Remember the line from Wizard of Oz “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!” The actions of the Warmers make it look like they are hiding something. If they really want to convince the Skeptics, they ought to put all of the data on the table so it can be examined. This is the only way the Skeptics will be convinced.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_data_archiving
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_sharing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoscience

This is a good question because there are a number of people here who should know the answer to this question and obviously, they don't know the answer either.

Answer 6

Global warming is simply elevated temperature. Did you know buildings, education and all of the global warming scientists use calculators and assumption of compliance?

As architects, we can't see the temperatures we design for and the calculations are done in a calculator and signed off as compliant. Every other professional thinks the other is doing their job and the mistakes continue.

The world thinks building development has a negligible impact on climate change. They have set up monitors and tried to qualify this but can't because they can't see the temperatures. Buildings are thought to absorb the sun's rays when in fact the sun's rays is causing buildings to generate extreme heat and we are treating the symptoms with ozone depletion as well as more emissions. Go to http://thermoguy.com/globalwarming-heatgain.html to see the supporting evidence and go to http://www.thermoguy.com/blog to see my response to the Canadian Government on their climate mandate.

All the scientists guessing on the GHG interaction when their info is missing critical data.

Answer 7

People like to say that it doesnt exist, that its made up just to scare us. Well were i currently live by this time in october we have to turn on our heat, last week i took the air conditioner out of our window two days later my boyfriend put it back in cuz it was so hot. I definatly believe in global warming and the idea of a white christmas is becoming extinct.

Answer 8

Because special interests (oil companies, coal and natural gas companies, mainly) stand to lose big when the world junks their outdated technology in favor of more modern and cost-efficient means of producing energy.

Global warming is a particular theat to them simply because its giving new impetus to new technology--and te special interests realize that, once those technologies get a solid foothold, they cannot compete.

So they've tried to politicize the science (and failed), discredit scientists (and faild), buy politicians (with a deplorable degree of success), etc.

Answer 9

It is controversial:

- because the science is quite complex

- because dealing with it is quite difficult

- because the effects are not yet clearly apparent so there is room for much argument

Answer 10

global warming is very simple - we use less and less heat and more and more air conditioning - don't need a scientists to tell you there is global warming - look at your heat bill - ok now look at your air conditioning bill - see it is really very simple.