Who Doesn't believe in Global Warming?

Question

Please if you do not believe tell me why you think its not true!

Answer 1

Global warming is true for all you idiots

Answer 2

I do not deny global warming. However, after digging into the science behind it, it has become evident to me that it is impossible that rising CO2 is causing the rise in the global climate, and that it is even less likely that the warming is being caused or even significantly influenced by human activity.
The entire theory of major change being caused by the CO2, which is considered by seasoned climatologists to be an insignificant greenhouse gas (with the major one being water vapor) as a single controlling factor in a much larger system is ridiculous. Add to that the fact, (unreported by the proponents of the CO2 "footprint" Theory) that while the rate of change of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere mimics the rate of global climate change, as recorded the the polar ice caps, the CO2 levels lag behind the global temperature change by an average of 800 years. (from 600-1200 years, based on the chemicals assays of oxygen isotopes and CO2 trapped in the ice cores)

There wikipedia link below lists links to a number of highly accredited scientists that disagree with the popular pseudoscientific anthropogenic CO2 theory of global warming. These are not people that gained a sudden knowledge of climate from reading a magazine article, or watching a simple graphic on tv, these are people that have spent years of their working actively to understanding how the climate works. These are real experts.

"SO... What doe s it matter if the anthropogenic theory is wrong? Like DUDE!! We NEED to us less oil anyways... Right??"

It is true that we need to find cheap renewable resouces for energy and fuel. However, we should be considering ways to adapt to the climate change. The current thinking is t hat we can adapt the climate to us. We can't.

Answer 3

"Global warming" has come to be synonomous with human caused global warming. This is becuase it is the vehicle of an agenda on the political left. If they were interested in science, they would refer to it as anthropogenic warming or man-caused. Otherwise it is meaningless. It becomes impossible to determine the degree if any which humans are responsible for warming. As some previous answers pointed out, the CO2 levels increased and yet it still cooled in the 1960s and 70s. Some GW alarmists suggest that it is because we used to pump more sulfur into the air. It is all hot air. We do not drive the climate and never did. As a geologist, I understand that the climate always changes, sea levels rise and fall, and anyone that suggests otherwise is ignorant of the facts. Dana conveniently leaves out that the sun has many cycles including the Milankovitch cycle (actually our orbit and axis of rotation) and numerous other cycles. You don't have to believe me. Here is a wiki link which describes numerous cycles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle

Answer 4

Global warming is natrually occuring. Check out Time magazine in 1972. There was an article about the terrible Ice Age to come. I'm sure it will happen again. It comes and goes in stages. Politics has turned a natrually occuring event into a political cult.

Answer 5

Global warming is happening, I just don't think that we are the cause of it.
I had this great graph that I used in a speech that I gave on er driven climate change in the past. When they first started burning fossil fuels inglobal warming, but I haven't been able to find it online. It basically showed a graph of temperature-CO2 correlation, and then next to it, one of sunspot-temperature correlation. The temperature was obviously the same on both graphs, and it went up-down-up-down-up, while the CO2 went steadily up (not a very good match). The number of sunspots matched quite nicely.
Here's a couple pretty good graphs from Nir Shaviv (2005):
http://motls.blogspot.com/2004/09/sunspots-correlations-with-temperature.html

It has been shown separately by satellite and weather balloon data that, if greenhouse warming is the cause of the current trend, the area of greatest warming should be up in the atmosphere. But there is much less warming in the atmosphere than on the surface. Prof. John Christy explains:
http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/why-isnt-the-atmosphere-warming-like-the-earths-surface

Basically it boils down to this: Mankind has never driven climate change in the past. (Just after WWII (in an era that historians call the "Post-War Economic Boom"), when humans first started burning fossil fuels in large amounts, temperature began to drop. Before then, it had been warming. CO2 doesn't really explain that warming period, does it?)
There is no conclusive evidence that we are causing this minor warming trend.

Answer 6

These guys are correct. The sun drives the warming cycle. Notice that even as CO2 increased during the 60s and 70s, the Earth was cooling, sparking fears of a new ice age.

Al Gore and his minions are playing the public for fools.

Answer 7

ha, this is kinda funny. I personally believe in global warming because it's just....well, think of this. when you disrupt an ecosystem by introducing something that's not supposed to be there, then the whole ecosystem dies. We are introducing CO2 and other stuff in LARGE amounts to our planet EARTH. you think that's not going to upset the balance? anyway, for those of you who don't believe in global warming, i think that's kinda funny :) Usually people don't believe in unicorns, not scientific fact. Anyway, I plan to major in biology/environmental sciences/botany, so i can save this earth.

Answer 8

The Earth did warm up, the cause was the Sun, not man.

"Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity,"

Answer 9

A small number of people who don't understand the science don't believe we're causing global warming.

Generally their explanations consist of "it's the sun" or "it's just natural cycle!". Of course, they can't explain the source of this magical natural cycle

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ar5f3rbVBmo0v3lx0A68zLLty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071204083503AAH5jff

and they can't explain how the sun is causing global warming as its output remains unchanged. Over the past 30 years the Sun hasn't gotten any hotter, but the planet has warmed rapidly.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AquweQAfwYW3kCf6aVIPJqTty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071212090955AAzlZk8
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ahj_9Ts6XCPlEPR8x0ZiSSPty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071213135219AAMHjMA

Punker says that sunspots correlate better with global temperature than CO2 does. Well look at the data over the past 50 years and tell me which correlates better:

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/600px-Temp-sunspot-co2.svg.png

The only way to argue that humans aren't causing global warming is to ignore the modern data and only look at times when humans couldn't be influencing the climate - before the Industrial Revolution.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ahj_9Ts6XCPlEPR8x0ZiSSPsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071213135219AAMHjMA

Answer 10

I don't believe in it, it's a fact.

Hey Jello, you had to go all the way to Russia to dig that up? good job!