Do the AGW alarmist look at ALL the science?

Question

Do the AGW alarmist look at ALL the science?

Answer 1

It's hard to speak for every alarmist.I think some really believe in what they are doing.Some are more open to non bias facts, while others go in feet first with blinders on.This category on YA can be informative,humorous,mundane and indecisive at times.After all weather/climate has been the topic of general discussion for a long time.

It's just I never seen anyone get so upset over climatic conditions as some posters do on this site.

Answer 2

Yes.

Answer 3

Uh, yeah. Just like the media looks at ALL the news.

Answer 4

I find that if you are an alarmist, then you may not be looking at all the science.  Scientists are often based in different areas of study like, Climatology, Oceanography, Geology, Solar Astronomers etc.  Each of these people have their own specialty and look in depth at based upon their own research.  

The scientists I find fascinating are ones that start their research thinking one thing and then end up concluding something else.  I think too often scientists will see one idea so pervasive in the media and politics that they look more at the data that seems to be in sync with these conclusions and are less likely to look at data that does not fit exactly to this mold.

I think of it like a college research paper.  My job was to come up with a theory and find facts and data to back up my theory.  If scientists are being constantly told by the media and other scientists that global warming is caused by humans and C02, there are obvious reasons why many would fall in line with this and find data to back up these claims instead of questioning the research for its validity and merit.  

Scientists are human too and there is some talk out there about scientists who aren't goose-stepping to the global warming beat who have been threatened by their colleagues and organizations to get in line or get fired/lose funding.

That isn't science at all, and it concerns me that people on both sides of the issue aren't standing up to say.....this isn't right.  Where is freedom of speech?  Where is the freedom to find the truth?  

The global warming debate is not over and should never be over.  Science should be a constant attempt to find the truth or come as close to the truth as possible, but when you attempt to muzzle one side of an issue you are not helping science as a whole, you are hurting it.

Answer 5

Canadian head-alarmist Dr. David Suzuki came out last week in a speech saying that politicians who don't agree with his 'junk science' should be jailed.  This speech was made to a packed house of university idiots in Montreal, and they all stood and cheered.  And he is not even a climatologist!  

Those who are use tactics like this to shape and control the minds of people are scary.  They preach global warming and practice mind control.  They're the ones who should be jailed.  They have made up their own brand of science to  control people's minds, using the same tactics the n**i's in Germany did in the 1930's.  Make up a fictitious problem, convince the masses, jail the opponents and burn their books.  

They're not concerned with any scientific facts, couldn't care less.  Their goal has nothing to do with science, rather it's a dangerous brand of politics built on lies and deceit.  Thankfully, a growing mass of people around the world are starting to see this and are starting to reject their 'global warming' ideas.

Answer 6

Of course 'alarmists' don't. Do you have the time or scientific background? Thought not.

That's why the scientists are paid to do the work for for us. If you wish to open up a scientific debate then you're in the wrong place.

Answer 7

When one prediction comes true just one I may consider the so called truth of man made global warming. Until then I will be a skeptic perhaps because I understand that man can not control the climate any more than the rotation of the moon.  All of these doomsday scenarios are just like a bad movie.  I can not even imagine a 1 degree rise in temperatures much less 2 and how that can have such a drastic effect on weather around the world. No single day has the same temps year after year after year. There is no thermostat for the Earth. The sun does not always have the same output so how are we to trust what one scientist says against another. It just proves that it is at best inconclusive.

Answer 8

No!!

EDIT:  blgrad20.....Excellent post!!

Answer 9

Global warming is a selective science.  Believers just look into the data that supports their views.

The science of global warming is not objective.  It requires a select group of people who are like minded to agree that global warming is man made.  Anyone who descents from this "mob rule" is slandered as a "skeptic".

Answer 10

No, I don't waste my time with crackpot scientists like Senator Inofe's "prominent climate researchers." snort.

http://unitedcats.wordpress.com/2008/02/...

Answer 11

LOL....ya crack me up.....

To answer the question yes... BUT you have never posted a single link to anything you have ever posted so I am inclined to believe that you judge people by your own standards. Do you look at ANY of the science... can you even read?

I also fail to understand how taking care of my environment and being aware of my surroundings makes me an alarmist. Maybe in the fututre you should think a little bit longer about your questions as they are all totally puerile.

Answer 12

If you bothered to pay attention to what the 'warmers' are saying = anyone that is a skeptic has been 'paid off', is ignorant, has not been 'educated', only listens to one side  etc. etc.

However when they discredit Fox News or Rush, that in itself is an admission that they would NEVER listen to an opposite opinion. The number of web pages supporting the 'warmers' position far outnumber any opposite viewpoint - but isn't about 95% of the internet Nonsense anyway?

This is also interesting that everyone witnesses on television - and people are beginning to understand that scientists are not infallible or incorruptable:

Science For Hire:

http://www.tuberose.com/Science_For_Hire...

"Scientists are accepting large sums of money from drug companies to put their names to articles endorsing new medicines that they have not written--a growing practice that some fear is putting scientific integrity in jeopardy."