Do global warming deniers think the IPCC and other scientists haven't ruled out their simplistic objections to

Question

anthropogenic global warming?

Or do the deniers think that some day the scientific community will issue a big OOPS news conference saying;

"We're sorry we were wrong but we didn't even think about [insert one; ice ages, Martian global warming, some other BS]

To Michinoku; That was a handful of scientists. Today there's a world wide consensus and a handful of deniers. Why do you side with the handful in this case and not for the case you cited?

Answer 1

Most deniers of a well-researched and well-established scientific fact don't want to listen to scientists explaining how they arrived at their conclusions.

Most deniers have already reached a conclusion and then cherry-pick any fact that supports it, and completely ignores any fact that refutes it.

This is the difference between a ignorant scientist and an ignorant denier. Both start out ignorant, but only one changes as discoveries are made.

This is also true of those who deny evolution (like Mr. Huckabee). They have no interest in having it explained to them.

Answer 2

The IPCC is an enterprise of the UN and in case you think of the UN is friendly to united states of america you have not been paying interest. there is plenty in the Kyoto Accords that quantity to not something greater beneficial than shifting funds from one united states of america to a distinctive (as Japan and different economically wealthy countries that have signed the accords are presently sorting out) that it rather is perplexing to believe the accords are benevolent of their application. nonetheless, enable's assume the prospect that utilising the accords could certainly gain reducing the earth's well-known temperature in ordinary terms some ranges. have you ever stopped to evaluate what that would do to the earth's capacity to assist crop production? the tip results of which would be "inhabitants administration? on a enormous scale, and that's not debatable. Oh, BTW, calling people who don't think as you do "deniers" isn't something greater beneficial than an attempt to denegrate their mind given which you may not furnish concrete data to the choice.

Answer 3

Some people seem to think they've come up with some brilliant idea that scientists haven't considered.

However, most seem to think that scientists are wrongly dismissing an alternative theory such as increased solar activity.

Either way it amazes me that laymen think they know more about climate science than climatologists.

Answer 4

All theories are based on presuppositions that can be broken down to some level of questionability. However, to answer your question I would say that the claim that global warming can be attributed to human interference will be substantiated or rejected as new measurement techniques are developed. After which, the scientific community might issue a "OOPS" statement just like they did with the planet Pluto.

Answer 5

A researcher exposed Global Warming creator, James Hansen:

" Canadian research scientist Steve McIntyre, whose expertise is in mineral exploration and author of numerous articles on the made up name 'global warming', the real science of 'climate change'; and the facts and myths which surround it.

McIntyre has recently discovered evidence which destroys the hypothetical theories brought on by James Hansen (who made up the name 'global warming' in 1988) and Michael Mann who developed the famous 'hockey stick' chart convincing us so-called global warming is caused by human pollution ".

Answer 6

sadly, the global warming supporters have never seen the inside of a lab, or are even interested in sound scientific proofs.

those scientists who support this so called theory are either bullied or threatened into supporting it.the rest are just cashing in.

Answer 7

I just think there's not a lot of money to be made by saying, "Hey, everybody, things are okay. Keep going about your daily lives."

Now I just said it. I bet you a nickel the government grants don't come rushing in and the U.N. doesn't decide to tax the world to the tune of billions of dollars to redistribute the global wealth so as to fund my theorum.

Answer 8

Sadly, the deniers are so anti-science that they believe these factors have been overlooked by scientists who want to cash in on some sort of research bonanza.

Answer 9

No, I personally dont believe it. I think it will slip into the pages of history quietly in the night

Answer 10

the only people denying the facts about global warming are either not scientists, or they are scientists paid by energy companies.