Do you support the call for more funding for global warming research?

Question

Eight scientific organizations urged the next U.S. president to help protect the country from climate change by pushing for increased funding for research and forecasting.

The groups, including the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society, urged Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and Republican rival John McCain to support $9 billion in investments between 2010 and 2014 to help protect the country from extreme weather, which would nearly double the current U.S. budget for the area

Answer 1

why spend money researching that if you know the answer or if you don't ever find an answer, what difference does it make.  Should we spend money researching where the first man stood up and walked on two legs?  What good would come from this type research.

Scientist want it because scientist like this can not do anything productive.  This is the old saying in play

Those than can, do.  Those that can't, teach.  Those that can't teach, do research!!!!!!

Answer 2

I think you answered your own question.

""""$9 billion in investments""" its all about the money !   There's no money in admitting that the earth is in a state of constant change.

Do you think that $9 billion will find away to stop the sun from getting hotter ? or from the universe from expanding ? or find a way to prevent the poles from swapping ends or finding away to tilt the earth back to where it was ?

Nope....but it will keep lots of science dudes working !

Answer 3

NO!!!!

This is only another complete waste of taxpayers money and has nothing to do with science, and everything to do with 'Jobs for the Boys'.

But then, it is only another $9 billion.

I'm sure equivalent amounts have been spent on similar worthless research.

Such as studying the s*x habits of the South American swamp rat, or why is water wet, or why is it normally brighter during the day than at night, etc...

Anyone who would support this lunacy deserves to be ripped off but do not pull me in with you!

I still have a functional brain, and plan to use it for a few more years yet.

Answer 4

Let us instead put that money where it will do some good like into a new and better reusable earth to orbit shuttle and a moon base to begin the production of orbital factories and power stations. We need to put the money where it will generate practical solutions to real problems rather than a lot of divorced from reality ivory tower failures pampering themselves and wasting money on feel good concepts that never mature into practical solutions of any kind. Spend the money on real life engineering let us get on with exploiting the new frontier!

Answer 5

Absolutely.  And if in the course of their research they find that global warming is not a problem I am sure they are going to report it and give up their research grants and livelihoods.  (Sarcasm)

Answer 6

Global warming is a natural thing that the earth dose when the sun gets hotter. Yes the temps on other planets are warming as well.  the last probe that went to mars shows that ice melts at the polar region when exposed to the sun, is that right to happen that far from the sun.  The money used for the global warming research is spent on nothing more than to line peoples pockets that already have money. take it from the poor and spend it on useless stuff that is naturally occurring. then after the warning there will be a cooling effect that will need money blown on it as well.

Check out the temps on the other planets from NASA reports that are on line.  Strange that its not told about on the news. That's media for you. They tell us what they are told to tell us about all the bad stuff going on in the world.

Answer 7

The American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society... and others... want to keep milking the 'Grant-Cow' for a 'problem' that does not exist.  We who pay taxes are tired of it...... we've already been bilked out of $$Billions for the ethanol scam.... no more...please!

I'd rather see the money spent on making college more affordable.

Answer 8

I thought the science is settled? why would they need more money if their projections are so perfect?

Of course they want more funding, they are scietists and thats what they live for! Plus they know at some point they will have to come up with a proven link which so far they have failed to do.

I am all for more study as we still no too little to make any accurate climate predictions, but at the same time I dont wont to keep funding groups like the IPCC whose sole aim is to prove a link between man made co2 and the warming we have been observing.

I would rather the money goes into investigation of the other thoeries out there and the funding of an independant organisation with independant scienitsts that look into understanding the earths natural process and wether we have any impact on them. Unforteuntetly the governments wont sponser a research group that wont nesessarily give them the answers they want.

Answer 9

MIGHT AS WELL GIVE OUT GRANTS TO FIND BIGFOOT

Answer 10

Subject: IT IS NOT GLOBAL WARMING, BUT IT IS A SHIFT IN CLIMATE ZONES DUE TO THE DECREASE IN THE EARTH'S OBLIQUITY

> The earth's obliquity Angle decreases by 0.47" each

> year, which changes the focus of the sun's radiation

> on earth, resulting in climate shifts. As the

> obliquity angle decreases, the hemispheres change in

> basic temperature with the south becoming colder and

> the north becoming warmer.  When the obliquity angle

> reaches about 22 degrees, it will start to go the

> other way and the north will get colder again and the

> south will become warmer.  Obviously, and counter to

> Al Gores unlearned theories, the warming of the

> northern hemisphere cannot be stopped by man.  It will

> stop and reverse itself.  Then the climate shifts we

> presently experience will be goin the other way.  It

> is pure logic applied to astro-physical law.

>

> It has long been recognized that rather than staying

> constant, obliquity varies slowly with time as a

> result of external gravitational influences. The Moon

> and Sun's tidal torques on Earth's ellipticity give

> rise to the familiar 26,000-year astronomical

> precession, while the gravitational pull of other

> planets, primarily Jupiter and Venus, slowly perturbs

> the orientation of the ecliptic plane in space. The

> combined effect observed by Earth dwellers is an

> ~41,000-year oscillation in the obliquity with overall

> amplitude typically of about 2°. This oscillation is

> one of the three Milankovitch cycles that ultimately

> affect our long-term climatic system and serve as the

> pacemaker of ice ages. The present-day obliquity

> happens to be close to the mean value, and we are in

> the middle of a downswing (see figure (1)). In terms

> of real distance on the Earth's surface, one should

> see a slow equatorward shift of the tropics by 14.4 m

> a year-well over 1 km in a century!  

Answer 11

Yes.

Bob326 gave a great answer.  Deniers say there's no proof, well, if you want further evidence, you need to fund research.

For AGW proponents, we need to know what the consequences of climate change will be.  We need to know more about feedbacks, water vapor in particular.

While we do know that humans are the primary cause of the current warming, by no means do we know everything that we need to know.

Answer 12

I like Dana's answer-- however research on GW is only one small "link" within a comprehensive energy plan.

Answer 13

Very much so. If we are going to take action (as both presidential candidates plan on doing) against climate change, we need more research money to better models (on both global and regional scales), and our understanding of the climate system in general.

Denier's keep complaining about how there is no "proof" (which doesn't exist for any scientific theory) of AGW. Well, enough scientists are worried about it to make me think that we need to get to the bottom of the issue. Now. How can we do that? Fund more research. D'Aleo was foolish in saying "greenhouse warming research and modeling should be slashed."

Answer 14

No. These folks are quite simply lining their pockets.

Answer 15

I don't understand how people can blatantly deny science.  If we don't put money into research we will never learn anything about anything.  Because of continual research efforts, we have learned many of the impacts climate change has already had on physical and biological systems (link 1,2).  Our climate models have improved to account for natural external forcings (sun and volcanic activity) as well as human activity (GHG emissions) (3-6).  We have learned more about our past climate (link 7,8), and our knowledge of climate related feedbacks has advanced significantly (link 9,10).

We need to make sure our money is going into educated and informed policy decisions.  Without proper scientific research, we cannot properly direct our policies.

Answer 16

Why not? They take all my money now and waste it on c**p. What's one more big steaming pile of waste for my hard earned money.

Actually, the real answer is NO. Sure studying the environment is important, but so far, $50 billion has been spent trying to prove AGW and no study currently supports the theory.

Answer 17

I don't see how increasing funding for research and forecasting is going to prevent Global Warming.

A better use for that 9 billion would be installing alternative energy.

That would help reduce green house gases a lot more than research and forecasting would.

Answer 18

No that is exactly how we got in this box. If they report that there is no problem there will be no money for the research.