not all scientists believe in global warming. Its about 50/ 50 dummy. what do you think?

Answer 1

It isn't even close to 50 / 50. Do you actually do any research before you spout out these ill informed questions?

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) collected signatures from about 8,000 scientist (including 49 Nobel laureates, 63 National Medal of Science recipients and 171 members of the National Academies) pointing out that this current administration's approach to climate change is dangerous, flawed and counterproductive.

Do the zealots in denial of climate change just think that stating something here gives it credability?!?

Answer 2

It's nowhere near that close. You didn't prove what you said - I will.

There are very few scientific papers opposing global warming.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

EVERY major scientific organization supports global warming theory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

Why? The data says it's real.

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

The bottom line:

"The fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists. I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

NASA's Gavin Schmidt

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"

Answer 3

There are two sources for the inherent uncertainty in "predicting" the effects of global warming: the unpredictability of the climatic and global systems. The climate system is rendered unpredictable by deterministic chaos; the global system renders climate prediction uncertain through the unpredictability of the external forcings imposed on the climate system.

I encourage you to read the other 21 1/2 pages of "Predicting Regional Climate Change: Living With Uncertainty" by Timothy D. Mitchell and Mike Hulme, Climatic Research Unit, School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. Page 66 is particularly interesting, but if you want to skip straight to the conclusion on page 72, no one will know. At least not until you ask your next question.

Answer 4

You're incorrect.

Not only does every major scientific organization support the theory, as mentioned by Bob

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

But there are hardly even any scientific papers which question the theory anymore.

"The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus."

http://www.norvig.com/oreskes.html

It's not even close to 50/50 - more like 99/1.

Answer 5

Out of climatologists 100 per cent acknowledge global climate change. It's simply a fact. "Warming" though is a simplification: major problems are likely to arise from changes in rainfall patterns (e.g. Southern Australia and California becoming drier and more drought and fire prone), and other variations.

Where there is debate is about the relative contribution of human activity and greenhouse gases, and in predicting future trends.

However, the overwhelming majority of climatologists agree that the human contribution is significant.

Answer 6

I'd love to see a link that backs up your statement. Unfortunately it seems you've fallen for yet another lie from the skeptics - they're desperate, they make things up in the absence of having any real evidence to support their claims. Next time a skeptic tells you something ask them to back it up.

Answer 7

i think it might happen...i am not relli shure.....i hope not.....well like i am learning about global warming now in geo. so like i think i it might happen because when we use lots of chemicals and industrail things the chemicals rise and the ozone layer is ditereration from that so sunlight comes to earth but it cant get back out causing a tempature rise

Answer 8

Yes, but it's only the consensus that counts. The consensus is defined as all scientist who agree with Algore. All the others must work from some unnamed oil company, and don't count.

By dumping the dissenters, you get close to 100% of all scientist.

Plus the CEO of Wal-Mart thinks global warming is true. He wants to prevent global warming by selling you CF light bulbs. If the CEO of Wal-Mart thinks global warming is true, how can anyone else argue with him?

Answer 9

Your figures are nonsense. Global warming is a proven fact-and no LEGITIMATE scientist disputes it.

Answer 10

I agree with Ole Mathis Eira who have lived in the Arctic all his life. See link below,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL023Hl9beQ