Is there any doubt as to the real reason behind AGW?

Question

http://www.newsmax.com/us/un_climate_change/2007/11/27/52561.html

The real reason behind AGW is to promote an anti-capitalist agenda. Our friends the UN want to seize our hard earned money and redistribute it to other nations. Why dont they get their money the way other criminals do, steal it!

Bob,
Your 100:1 is totally fabricated. You and I both know that is a bunch of BS. There is no probability you can put on the outcome since there is no evidence it is man made. Oh that's right, use the consensus arguement. Real good.

Answer 1

Of course. But it's at least 100:1 that global warming is real, and mostly caused by us. Want to bet your economic well being on a 100:1 shot?

The argument that this is an "anti-capitalist" thing is just nuts. "Anti-capitalists" like these?

"Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"

"National Review (the most prestigious conservative magazine) published a cover story this past week calling on conservatives to shake off denial and get into the climate policy debate"

"Pat Robertson (very conservative Christian leader) 'It is getting hotter and the ice caps are melting and there is a build up of carbon dioxide in the air. We really need to do something on fossil fuels.”

"I believe there is now more than enough evidence of climate change to warrant an immediate and comprehensive - but considered - response. Anyone who disagrees is, in my view, still in denial."

Ford Motor Company CEO William Clay Ford, Jr.

"The science of global warming is clear. We know enough to act now. We must act now."

James Rogers, CEO of Charlotte-based Duke Energy.

"Republican governors team up against global warming"

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Republican_Governors_team_up_against_Global_0716.html

"the overwhelming number of scientists now believe that there is significant human cause,'' Giuliani said, adding the debate on the existence of global warming "is almost unnecessary ... ''

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/02/13/GIULIANI.TMP

"(from Republicans for Environmental Protection) The consensus of almost all climate scientists is that global warming is already happening, that human actions are causing it, and that it will cause major problems for our planet."

http://www.rep.org/news/GEvol5/ge5.1_globalwarming.html

EDIT - The 100:1 comes from scientific analysis of the data. You can read it here:

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html

But those guys are conservative. Most scientists put the odds much higher:

"Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

I notice you didn't say anything about those "anti-capitalists" above. And Rick blew by them to rant about "socialists". Those CEOs are pretty surprised to be called that.

Answer 2

There is more to this - why not ask a person who can analyse the rhetoric before adding such a daft question to Yahoo answers?

First, the metonymic use of the idea of average global warming will not give you freedom, even if denied because you merely might refer to something else. Actualising everyones personal sense of affinity with your not at all so secret organisation, the UN, will not work to reap for you any increased value overall. The attempted use of irony and antithesis, always assuming we all identified ourselves with the initial preposterous notions of reality, was the most effective bit , but then the overall form was so standard, it might as well have been rote. Are people always persuaded by simple methods, and do simple ways of thinking, based on contest of persuasion only, give answers to large relatively immensurate questions of Global Warming? - I don't think so.

The difficulty people have with the big problem of Global warming is not that of understanding how if you put too many machines, plants and animals in one small container, there will be problems, it is more a matter of how to understand individual role while retaining the good sense of awareness of the larger problems.

There are many problems in our modern complex system that need understanding that extends beyond the individual, even if we are only concerned with Natural Medecine. If you have creative or technical skills, you want to know perhaps, how you can contribute to solutions in a worthwhile way. The answer is not in pro- or anti- capitalism, but it may be in website design at its most basic, if you have the need and positive values to communicate. Finding an environmentally friendly cause is really quite easy. Finding a salaried career that does not placate those who promote news for the sake of more news is not so easy. Go quietly amidst the noise and bustle, and if you don't find an answer to Global Warming on my website, it's probably not there yet.

Answer 3

On the contrary, global warming is real. I am currently engaged in studies on the subject and I have seen the evidence firsthand.

However, the question of how much of it is man-made is up for debate.

But just for the record, even if we stop ALL CO2 emissions, we probably will still continue to warm as a result of positive feedback loops like those of desertification or albedo. That is, ice prevents sunlight from being absorbed by the Earth; sunlight, as it is short-wave radiation, is not stopped by greenhouse gases. As the Earth melts, the ice melts, allowing more sunlight in.

They think clouds may the way out of this feedback loop. The introduction of more freshwater increases cloud cover, and this will eventually fix things, but this is all merely speculation.

Anyways, all this doom and gloom is silly; man is resilient enough to survive a matter of a few degrees. It's better to be warming, as plants die to cooling. And since we're going to be warming for awhile, we need to take measures to control desertification and to move populations inland over the next century or so.

And not to sound cold-hearted, but the UN's idea of bolstering the ability of underdeveloped nations to survive global warming is a waste of money. Bangaldesh, for example, will be totally underwater within the next century. The only way for the more modern countries to survive is to save their own populations first.

@Dr. Jello, linlyons
I do not see how one's stance on creationism has to do with anything behind this. I personally do not believe in evolution because it is false science. Like creationism, there is no means to empirically prove or disprove the theory short of building a time machine (hence, it is more like theology than science). However, in my personal opinion, the argument for irreducible complexity and sentient intervention is much more sound than abiogenesis.

You guys call global warming the biggest swindle of the 21st century, but naturalism and evolution was the biggest swindle of the 20th century.

Answer 4

Bob's quoting different people to prove global warming is real boarders on the laughable. I'll bet half of those same people mentioned also believe in creationism. I guess to Bob that means that creationism is real as well.

Many smart people once believed that Eugenics was real as well. The consensus of scientist once said that Eugenics was real. It only took about 10 million people to die for this folly, and still there is a following.

Answer 5

Do you mean the unorganization filled with a majority of petty dictators and socialists bent on forcing the world into to it's failed policies?
Socialists will never admit their systems are a failure and could care less about their 'workers paradise' producing poverty. Just look at Venezuela - from one of the Top Ten economies into a Socialist, Hate Filled slum.
Do you see the Hate Filled people 'Class Envy' 'Hate Evil Corporations' people posting on this forum?