global warming?

Question

Hi! I'm really wondering what you american people think about this topic. In Europe (I'm European) everybody takes it seriously. I am a biology&chemistry major, so of course I know it's true. But I heard there are people, especially in the United States who still don't believe it's true.
So, what do you think of this?

Dr.T"Yeah. Well, Europeans also thought Hitler was either an OK guy or a minor annoyance until it was too late. We saved your butts once, don't worry, we're trying to save it again"
Well, first of all I think it's kindda arrogant to say americans saved our butt... it's the allies and as far as I know the U.S aren't the only one in it. And you are definitley not saving our butt, you're worsening the situation!!! Your country is the most polluting!!!

Answer 1

Yeah. Well, Europeans also thought Hitler was either an OK guy or a minor annoyance until it was too late. We saved your butts once, don't worry, we're trying to save it again.

Answer 2

According to all scientist (even Americans), except the ones working for Exon, etc... HUMAN ACTION IS THE CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING. Dear American skeptics this is not even a question anymore. Some people take action, try to prevent before the statue of liberty is going to suffocate under water. Even though the biggest polluter of our globe is not participating for s**t. As about Americans saving our *** in WWII thank you very much this was the time America was still a country of freedom and intelligence. This time I think is mostly over. Also Don't forget that the Russians defeated Hitler and not so much the Americans...

Answer 3

To say that mankind has had no effect on the natural environment is ludicrous. To a layman that has hiked in mountains and flown in airplanes, in the 1950s and in 2007, the visibility of air pollution in the form of haze is obvious, and vastly more profound today than it was 50 years ago.

Without quoting figures, the following are givens:

1) Earth has been substantially denuded of trees and vegetation in the last 200 years.

2) A huge amount of fossil fuel has been extracted from the bowels of the earth, burned, and the residue released into the atmosphere, including into the air that we breathe.

All of this is being studied by scientists. Much is fact, some is theory. BS is BS. To anyone that is looking for FACTS, please read the definition of science, available in your old-fashioned dictionary, Dictionary.com or m-w.com.


Jim Hutzler, Alexandria, VA USA

Answer 4

30 years ago when I went to college (I was a math major) they taught us a thing called scientific methodology. This was true in all my hard sciences classes: math, chemistry, biology, physics, geology, etc. With any theory we were taught to gather all relevant data, to disreguard any that was unreliable, and to form an opinion based on this data and to preform experiments to prove our theory.
The environmentalist, and others with an agenda gather data, including any unreliable data that supports their conclusion, and distorting any that doesn't, to reach the conclusion they want. They point to areas with increased temperatures (and ignore areas with decreased temperatures.) This proves their theory. They show us melting glaciers (and ignore glaciers and the polar ice packs which are getting thicker) as futher proof. They scream at the top of their voices about rising sea levels (but fail to mention that there is no costal flooding.) Even more proof.
And of course man is the cause of all this because he is the biggest producer of greenhouse gasses. All you have to do to reach that conclusion is ignore all the other,larger contributers. Methane produced by cows, termites, and other animal life. Methane produced on the ocean floors and released into the atmosphere. Forest fires. Decomposing plant life. And the biggest producer of all, volcanoes. One erupting volcano produces more greenhouse gasses in a week than industrialized man has in 200 years.
The data supports a conclusion of regional (not global) warming. But there is no money or polital power to gather on regional warming so they must distort the data and at times resort to outright lies in order to get the answer they need to get what they want.
As an educated person one would hope you would ignore the politically correct and look at the evidence.

Answer 5

I think Global Warming is a big issue and needs to be dealt with. I people don't start helping the environment then it might take over. Endangered animals dying, floods, oceans getting deeper, and glaciers melting. It is sad that know one is caring about this issue. Soon people will notice that we should of took a stand earlier. I'm from the United States of America.

Answer 6

I'm a reluctant believer. I took the total tonnage of coal, oil and natural gas consumed world wide, totaled what I knew about historical date since the start of the Industrial revolution, made some assumptions about the percentages of carbon in each, combined it with O2 to get CO2 and compared that number with NASA's figure for %CO2 increase in the Earth's atmosphere and got comparable answers. Close enough for back of the envelope stuff that I'm forced to reluctantly agree that it probably exists and we are responsible.
As far as what to do about it, I still think Solar Power Satellites to run a hydrogen based economy are the best way to go. I will not back any solution that does not permit the continuation of a high tech civilization that all people on earth may join in with or that requires genocide to reduce the earth's population as part of the cure.

Answer 7

I think It's serious and we need to reduce our emissions. I'm from America. I don't think the Yahoo Answers community is a very representative sample of Americans. There are some rude people on here too

Answer 8

The issue is not so much whether Americans believe (or not) that global warming exists, it's more what we believe to be the cause. There has been global warming and cooling from the beginning of time. If, as many of us do, you accept that it is a natural process, the question then becomes adapting to it. To think that Man can change Nature to suit his fears, is laughable.

The other issue is that we are rapidly recognizing that many people in power are "using" global warming as a front to further their personal agendas. In some cases, the agenda is to create a global society and break down the authorities of different countries. In other cases, it is a general hatred for capitalism and a desire to further a socialist economy. In other cases, it is the "rabid" environmentalists that want humans to revert to a pre-industrial culture.

Bob...99+% huh? Show me the source for that stat or stop engaging in hyperboly. It amazes me that so many people simply want to close the book on global warming. If it is truly a science (and not a weird religion), since when is debate not allowed? In religion, that attitude is called heresy, what do you call stifling discussion in "science?"

Answer 9

Bill J, as a college educated person, I would've hoped that you at least realized that while envioronmentalists may have their own agendas and use climate change to push them, it is climatiologists that are publishing results. Look at the authors of IPCC and the departments they come from. They are typically climatology, atmospheric, oceanic scientists. Not environmentalists.

Answer 10

You have to distinguish "Americans" from "Americans on Yahoo Answers".

Like everyone in the world, most Americans think it's real and a serious problem.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/412.php?lb=hmpg1&pnt=412&nid=&id=

"To think that Man can change Nature to suit his fears, is laughable."

Really? How come 99+% of all scientists, most every world leader, and most corporate leaders, are not laughing? Stupid, uninformed, or engaged in a giant conspiracy?