There is no human caused global warming. Hard evidence ...?

Question

Summary: observational data do not support the greenhouse models of "global warming" as something caused by humans burning fossil fuels. Rather, the data strongly suggest these models are useless.

It is much more likely that the current experience of climate change is caused by subtle variations in solar magnetic fields which impact cloud formation and thus the amount of heat the Earth gains from the sun.

Read Yahoo's summary here [from the original British Journal in which it was published.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20071216/ts_alt_afp/usclimatewarmingdenial

Can you say that the US Senate was right to refuse the Kyoto treaty? And that President Bush is right to refuse to negotiate rigid standards for something that doesn't need doing? [or worse -- would simply made us all poorer while accomplishing nothing?]

Let's hear a round of applause for America -- where [this time] the politicians refused to be stampeded into ill-conceived legislation. 8-)

This is, of course, only the latest such study and article to debunk human caused "global warming".

The way I read the scientific literature in all the many, many areas where I'm not personally an expert is to look for controversy. When there is active discussion and rebuttal in the professional literature [as there is in this case], the editors of the journals do NOT agree that the case is settled [or they'd stop publishing articles on the subject].

So, for all of you who are impressed with the 100s or 1,000s of "scientists" who support global warming but are not experts in the field -- the editors of one of the most respected journals in the field respectively disagree with the mass "conclusion".

Dr. Goerbels observed many decades ago that if you tell a lie loudly enough and long enough many people will begin to believe it.

It is the experts who you'll fail to convince and in this case, the experts aren't convinced.

Answer 1

Yes there is.

The paper discussed in this article is a very rare peer-reviewed skeptical paper. We discussed it in the Environment section here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArMT.KEpVJDO3QGAqTrCds0jzKIX;_ylv=3?qid=20071211105001AApjaQF

Basically these skeptical scientists find one flaw in the anthropogenic (man-made) global warming theory and say "there's a flaw so it's completely wrong". Of course, their altnerative theory that the current warming is natural has many more flaws than the AGW theory.

There are many basic scientific facts which can only be explained if the current global warming is being caused by an increased greenhouse effect due to carbon dioxide accumulating in the atmosphere from humans burning fossil fuels.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=As6MMc8lLk5ZrMSOAhywS77sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071215102828AAxyWW6

There's a reason this is a small group, and that one of its lead authors (Singer) has also claimed that smoking does not cause lung cancer and more recently has been directly funded by, has organisartions funded by, and has multiple links to ExxonMobile, the Western Fuels Alliance, the American Petroleum Institute, etc. etc.

Answer 2

The verdict is still out as to the cause of global warming. The evidence which supports the various camps of global warming, IE. natural occurring cycle, CO2 emissions, solar activity, are not yet sufficient to provide us conclusive proof. It is foolish to deal with the problem thru the very expensive reduction of carbon emissions that in the end will only provide a very marginal difference in temperature. The cost being a reduction in growth rates through out the world hurting the world's poor the most. World governments are wiser to pursue a course of more research and technology development rather than putting limits on carbon emissions now,

Answer 3

Well the opening sentence pretty much sums it up don't it now?


A small group of US experts stubbornly insist that, contrary to what the vast majority of their colleagues believe, humans may not be responsible for the warming of the planet Earth.

Answer 4

No, but I strongly suggest reading the book 'The Weather Makers' by Tim Flannery. It provides many viewpoints and believable evidence on the issue. Happy reading, and I hope you find the answers you're looking for. =)

Answer 5

It always has been about money and power for the pro manmade crowd, nothing less than total victory will stop them.
They attack even those of us who support cleaning up the environment for more logical reasons because we do not support their theory nor their wealth redistributionand one world schemes

I support honest attempt to find alternative sources of energy but not schemes like ethanol from corn that is inefficient and has negative impacts on the price of food. I support cleaning up our air and water and so on but not politically driven BS like manmade global warming

Answer 6

No, this is not hard evidence.
This is only a "A small group of US experts", as stated in the first sentence of your article.
Remember when a "A small group of US experts", assured everyone that smoking was not harmful to your health?

Answer 7

Global warming is real, however it has been happening for the last several hundred billion years.

Global warming was a major factor in the last Ice Age, but the environmentalists can't blame that period on mankind.

Answer 8

I have no idea what you're talking about when you say "refused." You must not be keeping up with the news.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/15/bali.agreement/index.html

Answer 9

So one study invalidates the numerous other studies? Sorry science does not work that way and the jury is still out.

Answer 10

You are...oh, never mind.
B.S. and politics over science won't stop the deaths of your grandchildren due to the "myth" of global warming due to the cancer that is humanity.