They could be on top of a mountain up to their necks in rising sea water and some would say it's because of an increase in cosmic rain caused by the Sun.
The evidence is already there, there's mountains of it and for anyone open minded enough to look through the evidence for themselves without simply dismissing it because it doesn't conform to a preconceived notion, there's only really one conclusion that can be drawn.
You and me are both scientists, we don't accept things at face value without examining all the evidence, evaluating all the arguments and arriving at an informed decision. When this approach is adopted it's almost inevitable that people will accept the reality of global warming - hence the overwhelming majority of scientists accept it as fact.
Ultimately, the human race is made up of a wide variety of people, some people think differently than others, they have different criteria for accepting or rejecting an idea. In some cases there's a psychological barrier that effectively prevents people accepting something that they wish wasn't happening or don't want to be a part of - it's human nature for some people and is the reason why something can be domonstrated, in person, to someone but they still reject it out of hand.
It can be hard to comprehend the way that differnt people thing and strange to realise that there are people who, despite having seen the evidence for themselve,s are capable of dismissing it as if it were never there in the first place. It's human nature and is why we're all different.
In time almost all will come round. You've been using this forum for some time now. Think back to some of the regular skeptics from 6 or 12 months ago. They were as adamant as many of today's skeptics and metaphorically swore blind that they would never accept the theory of manmade global warming, but several of them have and others have 'slunk off'.
2007-12-10 15:21:44
·
answer #1
·
answered by Trevor 7
·
11⤊
4⤋
Could you provide me with the reference that backs up your statement that warming is at a rate 20x > than natural? Is this warming rate compared to all previous ice ages or only the most recent?
As for the IPCC being off (both ice melt and CO2), well that may mean things are accelerating. OR it may mean that the IPCC has a problem with the models they used for their projections. Which is it?
Record ice melt lifted sea levels 2 hundredths of an inch? There is no mechanism provided for the 7 degree rise in temps over Greenland. Is it really CO2, or is it some other mechanism? Not answered in that article.
2007-12-11 04:05:34
·
answer #2
·
answered by Marc G 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
That isn't evidence. Liberal magazines citing liberal propaganda doesn't count as evidence. Trevor is talking about sea level rises like it is rising. Sorry if I don't panic over an inch or two. Being a scientist and not a witch doctor I also don't panic from wild predictions from people that claim to know more than they actually do. We came out of the ice age 10,000 years ago as you should know. Your claim of it warming 20 times faster than when we come out of an ice age is without merit and ridiculous. It doesn't even make sense. You need a time reference and way more facts to back your assertions. You fail to recognize that it always beats their projections because the predictions become more shrill every year. You should recognize that you see the world through a liberal mind set. It is not all bad. Good things will happen even if it warms. Believe it or not, there are some benefits to warming. Embrace them and you can live in peace and comfort, warm and secure.
2007-12-10 16:37:08
·
answer #3
·
answered by JimZ 7
·
2⤊
3⤋
How fast did the ice caps on Greenland melt during the MWP? If you can compare those two data sets then you can tell if it is a record melt and if we really need to be worried about it.
2007-12-11 01:36:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Nature will do whatever it wants. Global warming is not caused by humans. Man is responsible for only 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually. Everything else is natural. Mars is losing its ice caps just like earth. It also has approximately the same average temperature increase. The sun is obviously causing global warming. If not, then that means that our CO2 is travelling to Mars.
Don't buy into Al Gore's crap. He supports global warming and says that all the oceans will be rising, but he just went out and bought a bunch of land on Malibu Beach. He flies around on his private jet burning fuel while telling us it is wrong to own SUV's. He goes against everything he tells us to do.
2007-12-10 15:39:25
·
answer #5
·
answered by Jake L 2
·
6⤊
4⤋
Maybe we will get back to the climate that the Danes found when they settled Greenland.
2007-12-11 12:38:43
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You might as well stop trying to convince neo-cons of anything. They live for the moment. It my section of the country, the normal temp for us yesterday should have been somewhere in the 30 degree range. It was 65.
2007-12-10 21:46:14
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Very gloomy, its the beginning of the end. Even China, one of the world's top users of coal are unwilling to curb the emissions of CO2 in light of America's stance to curb its emissions.
2007-12-10 17:59:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by CAPTAIN BEAR 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
'slunk off'... that's great :)
That's what's going to happen to Greenland's ice sheet. :(
http://apnews.excite.com/article/20071212/D8TFSOT00.html
2007-12-11 00:56:13
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It was warmer 700 years ago on Greenland. Why is this a concern?
Also, it seems like the IPCC projections are always wrong. What's up with that?
2007-12-10 15:10:24
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
8⤋