As far as i'm concerned the whole argument is stupid. <br />
<br />
If people were forced to live each day ba<x>sed on a weathermans predictions, how would we live at all?? Climate science is not a finite science. Its about predictability... not addition/subtraction or even common sense. <br />
<br />
Humans do not "own" the planet. We live here but it doesn't belong to us. So why does it matter who's right or wrong? LESS pollution is always better than more. That's the only thing that has been proven accurate.

Best Answer

All deniers are driven by hidden agendas.

Best Answer

It's not so "hidden". I would venture to most deniers are profit driven. Environmental science and protections reduce profits. Or, just political pundits. The party claims its not true, so it must not be true.

Best Answer

I suspect that some global warming denialists are driven by honorarium fees for their speaking engagements. "Follow the money trail", as the saying goes. If a money trail leads to a fossil fuel industry entity such as an oil company or a coal company or a petro-dictator (a dictator of an oil exporting country), then the hidden agenda is pretty much going to be what one would expect: namely, the hidden agenda of getting people to keep using more and more oil and coal.

Best Answer

What do you suppose ended the last six ice ages?

Best Answer

Increases in the amount of sunlight in the Northern Hemisphere or the Southern Hemisphere or in both hemispheres led the way out of the previous glaciations in the Quaternary Period in the last 2 1/2 million years. These increases in sunlight were due to "Milankovic" cycles. More sunlight meant that warming took place, which meant more water vapour.
Water vapour is a greenhouse gas, so even more warming took place.
The increase in temperature meant that organic materials decomposed into CO2, which meant even more warming. Ocean currents changed because of the temperature increases, dredging up CO2-rich water from places in the deep ocean which had previously been almost stagnant. The CO2 from this water entered the atmosphere and caused even more warming. This warming caused even more water vapour to enter the atmosphere, which caused even more warming.
This sequence of events explains the complexity of the true nature of the argument of whether CO2 leads or follows global warming. In reality, a rise in CO2 followed the initial warming from an increased amount of sunlight, and this rise in CO2 then went on to cause an additional amount of warming.

Best Answer

So, natural forces. Yet this time it requires more tax money to resolve? Just what is the correct temperature for the earth and how does anyone know? What would be wrong with a warmer earth?

Best Answer

Mars is warming too. And Jupiter and Pluto...

https://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm

Best Answer

what caused the last six ice ages?

Best Answer

The correct actual temperature for Earth in 2014 is about 287.80 Kelvin, or 14.65 Celsius. The temperature is from readings from weather stations and oceanic buoys. There is scientific quibbling over how to average in the temperatures at a data gap in the Arctic Ocean, but 14.65 Celsius is a close enough for most purposes.
As far as what would be wrong with a warmer Earth, I see typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines as the first true 21st Century global warming superstorm, with a Dvorak number of more than 8.0 for a time. With a warmer ocean and a colder atmosphere at the 15 kilometer altitude, there will be more convection in 21st Century tropical storms than in the 20th Century tropical storms. In other words, typhoon Haiyan was merely the first of its kind in the 21st Century. As the temperature difference between sea level and the 15 kilometer altitude gets greater, the cap on how strong a storm can get will likewise get greater. This cap on storm strength will get greater for another reason as well. Storm strength is partly a matter of how much water vapour is in the storm region. A warmer ocean means more water vapour. This is true not only in the tropics but in the Arctic Ocean as well, where central pressures that would be considered unusually low in the 20th Century will become more and more common as the Arctic Ocean heats up in the 21st Century. To sum up, a key problem with a warmer Earth in the 21st Century is storm ferocity that will be almost unimaginably high from the point of view of 20th Century standards.

Best Answer

Its because of the SUV's that they maritians. jupitertarians and plutonians are driving.

Best Answer

# 1. You are aware of the false reports of temp in russia a china? What better way for to damage our economy then by do it our selves?
# 2 Are you aware that the stations in the USA are in heat islands? They were first placed at Fire stations so they could collect the data, sounds like a good idea but what is all around a fire station? Concrete!
yea thats a way to collect untainted data!

Best Answer

Is it going to rain next Thursday? If you know whats going to happen in the philippines why don't you know? BTW, Why are mars, Jupiter and Pluto warming? I still want to know. Why don't you want to know? No taxpayers there?

Best Answer
5 More Responses

Those people are crazy.

Best Answer

I think of such global warming denialists as being greedy, as opposed to crazy. I wonder what the honorarium payment income has been for a typical climate science denial orator who makes speeches at forums where community leaders are present, forums such as Rotary Clubs, and I also wonder just what other types of speeches such an orator has been giving for the right amount of money.

Best Answer

Either they are not really good scientists, or they have a hidden agenda...*as I sit at a power plant auditing a CO2 monitor....

Best Answer

It's all those cow's and other vegetarians, they keep putting to much methane in the air.

Best Answer

It is an interesting point that you raise, about the methane produced by cows. Also, rice paddies produce methane, so vegetarians who eat rice are also somewhat responsible for methane in Earth's atmosphere. Starting long ago around 3000 BCE, rice paddies became much more common, and the amount of methane increased, counteracting what would have been a Milankovic decline in temperature and sea level. As a result, instead of a cooling climate, Earth's temperature and sea level remained unusually stable in the 5000 year period between 3000 BCE and 2000 CE.
Now in 2014, the CO2 from roughly 90 million barrels of petroleum produced every day and some 8 billion metric tons of coal mined every year is overwhelming compared to how much is needed to keep Earth from suffering Milankovic cooling into another glacial period, even in the unlikely scenario where genetic modification allows rice paddies and cattle to stop producing methane. In fact, the melt ponds that are beginning in this 21st Century to seasonally appear atop the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets are evidence that the geological Quaternary Period, defined by typically year round ice cover over the North Pole, is about to come to an end. A mostly ice-free September at the North Pole is generally agreed to be less than 20 years in the future, when using the definition of a September average ice cover for the region within 60 nautical miles of the North Pole of no more than 15%, which is a scientific way of saying that at least 85% of the time there will be open water at the North Pole in such a September, while no more than 15% of the time there will be an iceberg floating at the North Pole in such a September. When such a September comes due to global warming during this 21st Century, the Quaternary Period will by definition be at an end, and the Anthropogene Period then begins.

Best Answer

I'd like to know what the Scientists have to say about scientists first

Best Answer

RoadWarrior3928 put it rather well regarding scientists who deny that global warming comes from CO2: "Either they are not really good scientists, or they have a hidden agenda...*as I sit at a power plant auditing a CO2 monitor...."

Best Answer

CO2 would be just one of the causes, as far as I've heard/read/seen

Best Answer

because CO2 is a lagging indicator NOT a leading one.

Best Answer

C02 is a lagging indicator. We have had ZERO temperate increase in the past 17 years.

Best Answer

Many people call themselves 'scientists'. "Global warming" is a passe phrase. Here, it is 23 April and I am wearing a heavy jacket today. That is hardly "warming".

Best Answer

Don't confusing climate science with meteorology (daily weather). Climate is the study of predictable trends over decades or longer. When you look at THOSE numbers, the earth is most certainly warming. Its been mathematically proven. WHY is the question...not That.

Best Answer

"Global Warming" is what it was originally called in the 1990's. "Climate Change" is what it is called now and better describes the varying effects it is having in different regions of the world.

Best Answer

LOL its called climate change because the masses have caught on to the notion that global warming is BUNK!

Best Answer

Honestly you do realize that co2 is what plants breath and is needed? It gets in the are when ever a plant dies, the only kind of co2 that is a problem is the one coming from fossil energy sources... Oh and it has been proven that at least the bigger part of the global warming is part of the natural rithm of our planet, it gets warmer till the ice melts rivers in the oceans get stopped and then they stop transporting warmth, that's when the next ice age starts... All that the so called global warming might do is speed up the whole process... You do realize so far can't create elements therefore we can't put anything on the planet it can't deal with... It might alternate it and make it anything but a workable invirement for us but the planet won't really bother...

Best Answer

Those are sciontits, can't tell the difference when they say it on the tv

Best Answer