Hello friends, I have become concerned lately with the amount of anti-scientific rhetoric I have heard on this forum. I have heard many claim, that Global Warming is a liberal hoax, a sad conclusion that is granted only upon being severely misinformed. In reality, global warming is happening, and it is universally agreed by scientists that is caused by human activity: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/Scientists-agree-Humans-causing-global-warming-1227187.php http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-19/world/eco.globalwarmingsurvey_1_global-warming-climate-science-human-activity?_s=PM:WORLD http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change The lie is that it is not caused by humans. Those who tell others humans are not causing global warming are driven by special interests. An example is The Heartland Institute, a libertarian think tank that has a history of among other things attempting to dilute the link between second hand smoke and poor health. The way the Global Warming "Debate" is presented on FOX (also with a special agenda) is that there is an even split amongst the scientific community regarding the cause of global warming. Therefore, we are required to view the opinion and of the overwhelming majority of scientists as equal to that of a very small handful. I don't mean to be confrontational, but whether one likes it or not, global warming is happening and humans are the cause. There is no way one can deny this is happening.
I'm afraid this thread may be all in vain. It's hard to expect a lot of Americans to be well versed in science when comparing our pre-collegiate education systems to that of several of our peers.
We were told the discussion was over. There are an awful lot of people who know it is a scam. There are an awful lot of people who think it probably is a scam. There are an awful lot of people who suspect the science, and are suspect of politicians and scientists paid by the government. But...what is the point.? Everyone was told the discussion was over. Vast amounts of people don't believe it, but there is to be no more talking about that. Good job. If I'm right and it's a scam, then they just suckered us into a huge money making scam of epic proportions. If they are right, then shame on them, for closing the doors on dialog as the planet dies.
Of course, global warming is happening. Everyone accepts that. And, obviously, humans aren't the cause and your scientists who are bought a paid for, conceal their data and methodology from peer review, and get caught lying and cooking the books aren't going to change that. Just the other night I heard an ad on Old Time radio by a scientist promoting Chesterfield cigarettes as good for your health. I didn't believe that, either. I really worry about the lefists who are eager to pervert science for ideological ends. Higher taxes, one-world government, and, over all, the absolute destruction of the U.S. are the goal and science is irrelevant. Oh, I read this morning a scientist has announced, a scientist, mind you, that aliens might destroy humans to protect the universe. That's the global warming hysterics on steroids. I also object to the constant liberal insistence that global warming and manmade global warming are the same issue. Next, they'll be pretending euthanasia and assisted-suicide are the same thing.
Holy crap. Ok man, have you stopped using all oil based products, stopped driving your gasoline car, quit using your lights? If not, then go away. Just another useful something or another who thinks taxing people is gonna cause Mother Earth to cool down.
Humans do have some effect. How much is the real question. Just cutting down rain forests will affect climates.
I read the links. One was 2-1/2 years old and the other one was 4-1/2 years old (I won't even comment on the wiki). Here is a more up-to-date article with some actual hard research: http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
Some very striking data and I must admit has changed my perspective somewhat. However, I noticed this at the bottom of the article you referenced: "James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News" Look at my first post for information about the Heartland Institute.
You are shooting the messenger. Taylor was just the writer of the article, not the person that reviewed the data. Here is the actual data and report: http://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/3/8/1603/pdf
Oh, super, a wiki page. Let me bore you with a little story. There were two guys on a forum just like this that were having a serious discussion. Guy A was really kicking guy B's tail. All of a sudden, Guy B pulled a wiki page that completely supported his stance.....complete with reference links....that were all falsified. Apparently, Guy B wrote the wiki page to support his argument. Little did he know, that Guy C was following the whole discussion. He was also an IT expert and was able to uncover the deception. Now, I am certainly not saying that the page is not true or that it is doctored by anybody, but I personally do not rely on wiki pages unless I have no other source or if it is covering historical events that I am deeply familiar with. Point is, wiki pages are no better the listening to two people discussing something in a bar and they are quite often written with a bias slant. However, it still does not matter, just because the writer of the article is from the Heartland Institute does not mean the study (which wasn't written by him) was incorrect. His article just might have a little bias tenor to it.
In the past 100 years, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has gone from 0.031 of 1% to the present level of 0.039 of 1%. Plant growth in greenhouses is increased when CO2 levels are higher--up to about 0.140 of 1%---or nearly 4 times the current concentration. The air you exhale is about 4% CO2-- or about 100X the concentration of the air you breathe in. 34 years ago, some of these same global-warming scientists were declaring we were cooling rapidly into the next Ice Age. Lots of scientists are skeptics of man-made global warming. It's about control and money.
Just trust they government. They say NOT .... New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth's atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
