Global Warming. Why are the facts hidden?

Question

Every day we hear about Global Warming and it seems always to be attributed to humans. We hear how it is killing off species and so on. Scientists who disagree are called crazy and never given airtime.

Fact: Arctic is shrinking but the Antarctic is not, the ice is growing overall in the South Pole. This is a pattern which has occured for many thousands of years.

Fact: 8,000 years ago the North of Scotland was under 300m of ice (300 m!!). Where did it all go? Well the earth warmed up and it melted. just a natural event which has happened 5 times we know of.

Fact: The amount of CO2 in the atmoshere in 1600 was 0.01% less than it is now. Human contribution to global warming does exist but it is VASTLY over stated by the bean eating, sandle wearing brigade.

Fact: In 1955 Polar bears on WWF endangerd list. 2007 25,000 P bears and still on list?? They increased 5 fold! Not in danger.

Global warming in not affected by humans. It is natural event.

The Earth does not have lungs... It is a planet.

Let me give you an example of the rubbish the bean eaters come out with...

An area of rainforrest the size of Wales is cut down every day. Really? Well do the maths..... as they say. That would mean the entire plannet would be cut down in less than 5 years??? And as most of the plannet is ocean and muh is desert and city how is this so??? No one asks this do they.. They accept the tosh coz it comes from a bean eater!

And besides that it is Plnakton NOT the forests which absorb most of the CO2 ..... Planets Lungs?? Lungs my ar*e

Whales eat Plankto.... should we kill them to help the planet.....?

WLAKA F
You exemplify the very point I was making. Thank you. If anyone cares to check his so called facts and mine they will see he is wrong.

Just take his statement that co2 levels have doubled..... Really. Well how is it that we are breathing?

Tit

Answer 1

Since global warming is happening on a scale of decades not centuries or millenia and most global scientific data is backing it up that humans are causing climate change which is not difficult to believe considering the pollution it has caused then I will go with the emperical scientific data.

It is not politicans all saying this it is scientists. Most politicans feel that dealing with the problem is harmful to their economies rather than an excuse to tax. Global warming is a big headache for countries they would be happy to just carry on polluting if there was no scientific data it would be doing harm. We can go by past experiences to know that.

The free ride is coming to an end, the earth cannot sustain the damage to it's enviroment. The earth's lungs that deal with a lot of carbon dioxide such as the rainforests are under serious threat. Fossil fuel burning in industry and cities are belching out greenhouse gasses in this closed atmospheric system that has to eventually have an impact on climate. Satellite data is confirming our worst fears that the earth's enviroment is not sustainable to our human ambition and development.

Some global warming denialists will ignore data because a country may have a cold snap in winter. The global weather change will bring unusual and sometimes extreme cold, drought, rainfall and heatwaves to different areas of the earth.

EDIT: Seeing how you are just truly RANTING now about bullsh*t we can dismiss this as being a sincere question.
You can live in your ignorance.
If the majority of the world scientists are collaborating and agreeing on the data they are receiving then most of us will accept that rather than a no data, no scientific ranter what you are that just wants to kick a biased political football around.

Answer 2

So you've taken four facts and come to the conclusion that this is a naturally induced warming event? Why do have we wasted all this time and effort from highly educated minds to study something that could be figured out so easily by just four simple facts?

Fact 1: The Antarctic Ice Sheet is growing. There are various explanations as to why this may be happening, but this alone does not show that climate change does or doesn't exist, or that it is or isn't caused by humans.

Fact 2: Thank you for pointing out that there was an ice age (which ended 10,000 years ago by the way; you may mean 8,000 BC, not 8,000 years ago). Just because that was natural doesn't mean this is. "Natural" climate change doesn't mean "unexplainable" or "magical" climate change. It still must be caused by something. Climate scientists have no evidence of natural forcings contributing to the current climate change significantly.

Fact 3: Did you just make this statistic up? Or did you misread information. This is absolutely incorrect. The amount of CO2 in our atmosphere today is 27% higer than its highest levels in at least 160,000 years.

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/lawdome.html

Fact 4: I have no idea what polar bears have to do with this argument. But I don't understand what qualifies you to judge when a species has a healthy population or not. I'd say humans were in danger if we had 1,000 people in the world. We could increase to 20,000 and I'd still say we're in danger.

As to your question: Why are the facts hidden? Well tell me how you've found these facts (some of which i've shown are suspect facts). Are you an in depth investigative journalist? Or did you just google a couple things? If they're so hidden, why do you know these facts?

Answer 3

These facts can help prove the point, but we need hard evidence to convince people. just like the alarmists need hard evidence to prove their side. Not one scientist has proven anything. The CO2 is vastly overstated, because they truly don't know the exact measurements of atmospheric CO2 concentrations of any period beyond the last century. They have rough estimates, but no valid proof. The science of global warming is vastly true, but the science of man-made global warming is theoretical with little evidence to support the claims. Just a small time scale reading of data. Can 147 years truly determine the cycles of a planet that is approximately 5 billion years old? No, it cannot.

It is pointless to post these facts. They will post "facts" to disprove your "facts". But all the while, they don't post any evidence. Just manipulated data and opinions.

Answer 4

Sorry to disagree, but many of your so called FACTS are in fact untrue or at best misrepresentations of the truth. Antarctic is not growing, but is also loosing ice, faster than most people predicted in fact. Those loony fringe scientists who disagree are in fact given far to much air time. 1000 agreeing scientists, 1 disagreeing one and that one gets almost equal billing, doesn't seem right to me.

300m all over Scotland? Or just parts? How long did it take to melt? What happened to the sea level? Yes there are and always will be natural cycles, but that does not suggest that this is one of those natural cycles, in fact the balance of evidence 100 to 3 suggests that it is not!

The amount of CO2 in 1600 was 0.01% less than now? Sorry can't believe that. You are either wrong or totally confusing your percentages. There is an almost doubling of CO2 levels since then, about 80% increase. You appear to be mixing absolute values with relative statements. (and somewhat sloppy figures as well). This is at best an honest mistake, or possibly deliberately misleading.

25,000 polar bears is not such a big number if that is the total population world wide! That is a very small number of individuals for a whole species. Add to that that they all live in a very narrow eco zone and are all particularly vulnerable to a lack of winter sea ice and you have very good reason to be concerned about their future survival.

Finally, your last statement simply is not even supported by your earlier assertions even if they had been true. One does not follow logically from the other. There is no connection or cause and effect shown in your reasoning.

So please take the time to look again at all the evidence and the logic that goes with it. If you do that with an open mind then you will become a GW convert. It does not require an act of blind faith, just a clear head.

Answer 5

We are all approaching the point where there is little to be gained by beating a dead horse. Everyone is convinced that the facts are on their side. That is simply not possible. Someone is full of baloney. So, here, from the mind of a skeptic is something everyone needs to consider.

One side is trying to end all debate on the subject. That same side seeks to discredit those who ask questions rather than answer them. The side that presented the theory has declaired the discussion over while important issues are still in question regarding their work.

I have cited many examples of how information is being cherry picked and carfully displayed to support a preconcieved assumption. I have cited examples of the skeptical scientists being threatened or attempts made to discredit them. I have seen numbers cited that are not supported by any facts. I have heard very unscientific arguments regarding 'concensus' among scientists as if concensus has any role in science. It does not. You can either prove your statements or you cannot. You can support your theory or you cannot. There are more than one explaination or there are not. The only way to prove any theory is to make every attempt to disprove it.

Considering these facts one can only assume one thing. Those who claim Global Warming is occurring, is outside of the normal range, is man-made and is reversible have not proven this to be so and are deliberately covering up that fact. You do not prove a theory by shutting up anyone who questions it.

If that does not make the supporters suspicious then I can only assume they are being motivated by something more sinister than a quest for the truth. Shutting down debate will by no means lead to the truth. I have not heard a single skeptic who wishes to prevent the supporters from having their say. Yet I hear plenty of supporters who will not tolerate Global Warming infidels.

Merry Christmas!

.

Answer 6

only problem with your statement is humans are increasing the rate of global warming at a drastic rate. over the past forty years take a look at uv indexes, climate shifts, hotter summers. as for the bean counters thats fine numbers are a bunch of bull to keep people in the dark about facts and here is a big fact which does contribute to global warming burning of fossil fuels. which is base all around money, be it the petroleum products produced vehicles which get worse gas mileage than their ancestors, and industrial waste

Answer 7

First--the Antartic ice is melting, not growing--the increase at the pole is alocal condition
Second--what happpened thousands of years ago is irrelevant--the CURRANT global warming is due to human actions.Third--the amount of CO2 has increased far more than you claim
Fourth--conditions have changed since the 1950s. The bear population was increasing due to the fact they were placed on the endangered list so idiots who don't understand science wouldn't kill them off

There are no hiddenfacts. Only people tooo ignorant to read the thousands of scientific papers that are readily available.

Answer 8

How can we close this endless Global Warming thread?
There are thousands of articles concerning the facts of Global Warming in this forum. Everybody can search and read them.

Stop this endless global warming 'questions', please: Go to report and block this spam!

Answer 9

The UN and it's minions are not concerned with facts. They just want more money and power and see global warming as the tool to get-r-done.

Answer 10

I don't have an answer, because ALL TRUE already said it all.

Some people will always believe what they want to believe, just like there will always be scientists willing to do "research" with total tunnel vision--that is, having already decided what their outcome will be--given proper financial incentives.