Give that the largest peer reviewed scientific study in history conducted by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated with 90% certainty man is the primary cause of global warming, (more than 2000 scientists from over 200 countries-1000 of them from the US over nearly 30 years of study) how can people still question climate change? Despite the confusion in the public, there is no agrument over it in the scientific community. The few articles that are published against it aren’t in any peer reviewed journals because the arguments are so weak, they can’t pass the scrutiny of other scientists. Do people really think 99% of scientists are wrong or that its a monstrous scientific conspiracy? Exxon is doing a great PR job if a lot of the general public still question it.
News and comments on global climate change, global warming and greenhouse effect
thats it keep slugging them ,lot of hard heads out there
scientists are not nessescary to state the obvious
and they even have lied
ecologists and scientists who work for politicians ,get paid by these politicians and they have downplayed the facts because solutions are expensive and means change and change effects many peoples incomes,and upsets profit margins,so most of the world is kept in the dark of the real things that are going on.
and visna go ,some very good point you made there
if forrest are being exchanged for ashalt,concrete and desserts
what is gonna keep this planet habitable for us
Global warming is a very complex collection of many effects
climate change is caused partly by desertification ,and most desertification is caused by man
the thinner ozone layer helps to speed this up.and this is caused mainly by air polution ,also as a result of mans actions .
Global warming is in theory reversable,but it will mean global co operation between all countries ,and taking into account human nature and the world politics ,it is unlikely that this will happen a battle for world supremecay seems more important right now
Manmade??
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiIICvXrd2tUJwW5u709Ribsy6IX?qid=20070403203137AA23lBm&show=7#profile-info-AA11208041
possible cures ??
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=An5ABYMwIL38_MRrKZooGMDsy6IX?qid=20070403221423AAat5hj&show=7#profile-info-EYAAfU9uaa
I doubt that people think 99% of these scientists are wrong. it’s just a matter of these people being to ignorant to realize what their bad habits are doing to our world. Either that or they just don’t care enough to worry about doing something about it.
You dont need any scientist or scientific study to prove that global warming and climate change is caused by us. History, itself, is enough proof to make anyone a believer. I read the other day that if the world’s population today went back in time 100 years, we would all have serious breathing problems. Why? Because we are not used to clean air. Our organisms have adapted to pollution, so much that we cant identify with air purity anymore. It is a fact that pollution is to blame for the deterioration of our atmosphere. We are to blame for pollution. However, there is nothing we can do about it now. It is already too late. Even if we got rid of all our factories, automobiles…everything… it would take hundreds and hundreds of years to restore to the earth back to what it used to be only a century ago. So why bother? That is the answer to your question. Today, the world is a very selfish place. We dont care about our tomorrow, we care about our right now. Right now, we need money, jobs and cars to get to work. Industries are the reason why our nations are prosperous. So its no wonder people look the other way. We all know the truth, but it would take too much time, and too much sacrifice to fix our mistakes.
You answered your own question. I think fewer people are arguing against it. Some don’t want to be blamed, some are frightened children; but deep down, the majority of people believe and those that don’t will be forced to go where the market leads.
I think you have answered your own question when you point out that it is the interGOVERNMENTAL panel on climate change. It is all about politics, that is what governments do.
How do the 2000 scientists hired by the IPCC equate to 99% of all scientists believe in man made global warming? There are only 2020 scientists in the world? I don’t think thats true. Scientific journals also have editors and publishers who decide what to publish, so the lack of published anti-global warming articles also has alot to do with politics and peer pressure. What publisher wants to deal with the negative backlash if they publish an anti-global warming article? Scientists who give their views that global warming is a natural cycle receive death threats. A weather channel meteorologist is suggesting that any meteorologists who questions man-made global warming should lose their accredidation with the American Meteorological Society. These conditions don’t allow for honest scientific debate. These conditions sound alot more like Nazi Germany than a free society.
Let’s look at some simple facts of the IPCC reports. The IPCC used to include the ‘hockey stick’ graph in their reports, but have not included it in their latest report because it has been thouroughly discredited. The IPCC ‘Procedures for…Publication of IPCC Reports" (see link below) states that the longer synthesis report which follow the summary for policy makers can be changed by reviewers. See section 4.4.1 step 5 which says "when CHANGES are required to CONFORM to the SPM…" Think about what this means. This means that first the IPCC will put out a SUMMARY which states what they believe. They will LATER release the scientific studies to support the SUMMARY, but if the science in the study does not match the SUMMARY, the IPCC panel will change what the study says to match the summary….I ask you, how is this science? It is not! But this is how the IPCC operates.
What the latest IPCC report does show is that the earth warmed 0.6*C in the last century. Considering that the earth had been in a cooling period for several hundred years before before the middle 19th century (the little ice age,) what is unusual about a century of warming? Nothing, it is absolutely natural for their to be a long period of warming after a long period of cooling.
I’ve also heard all kinds of claims that the earth is warmer now than any time in the last 450,000 years or that the earth has warmed before, but man is causing the RATE of warming to be faster than ever before. Of course all of these kinds of claims are untrue. Scientist have done ice core studies in both antarctica and greenland to reconstruct temperatures of the last 150,000 years or so. (See the attached link to Current Major Interglacial) That study show that antarctic temperatures have been warmer as recently as 400 years ago, as well as 600 ya, 1400 ya, etc, and many times over the last 10,000 years. It also shows warming rates as much as 1.4*C per century 700 years ago, and 2.2*C per century 400 years ago, and 3*C per century 8500 years ago (as well as other rapid warming periods.) All of these warming rates are faster than the current warming trend, but there was no man made global warming at those times.
The facts show that there is only warming and cooling happening on the earth. It has been warmer than present and cooler than present in the recent past. Warming and cooling rates have been faster than what we are currently seeing. But somehow, we are supposed to believe that man is causing some type of catastrophic change to temperature. The FACTS do not support a man-made catastrophic change, despite what the interGOVERNMENTAL panel on climate change says.
As others have said, people are questioning the motives of the IPCC.
There is nothing unusual about questioning the source of the information your are receiving.
In fact, questioning one’s source is a basic tenet of good research.