How many more scientists have to disagree with global warming before there is a serious debate?

Question

http://bridgetdgms.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/a-few-more-scientists-who-disagree-with-global-warming-alarmists/

and it stop being a poltical football?

It is also hard to sell when I have to dig out of 1 foot of that global warming stuff.

Face we don't know enough about the climate and how it works.

Those who scream the most should lead by example rather than tell us how to live while they fly around in private jets.

aka Gore

Answer 1

you mean that the debates going on for the last year have not been serious.

Dana will be disappointed and Dr yellow should be relieved.

Still one is limited to ones understanding or knowledge when making assessments.

Global Warming is true, there are Natural fazes but we are affecting that to a great extent ,with deforestation ,desertification and pollution., especially air pollution.

A few weeks ago one of NASA's top scientists concluded that the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free within five years, much faster than all previous predictions.

when the north pole is gone , you may have polar bears soon in America ,looking for a home ,

Calculations do not include the accumulative ,speeding up ,factor with time. the increase in water temperature will get faster all the time as well as the melting, when the ice is all gone the deeper cold Ocean currents will be drastically affected,which in turn will affect the warm currents,since all moving bodies of water are connected in series.

This will affect coastal climates ,world wide ,almost instantly. All aquatic flora and fauna will be affected,many dying off and others becoming invasive,

And recently In Chiapas ,and Tabasco in Mexico .more then a million people became homeless overnight with water coming up to their roofs ,because of rains from super evaporation from the forests,this had never happened before. Millions of animals died.

In India 3000 people died because of super storms .

.A few years ago in Europe 3500 people,died during a heat wave ,many of them in France .

Right now the average death toll annually is 150.000 due to Global warming

. these figures are already out of date and are expected to double soon.

In Northern China millions of people are running for their lives because regular dust storms so far have buried 900 villages under the sand and the whole of northern China is turning into a dessert.

The Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year all around the edges ,like a slow burning fire shriveling up their neighbors In the Kalahari huge rivers have dried up and thousand of species are gone due to their habitats disappearing .

The biggest changes are invisible at micro biotic levels species are becoming extinct ,others are multiplying ,

This affects the insect populations that follow ,and changes in that ,affect all that follows in the food chains ,

All life is interrelated of both flora and fauna, And since we are on the top of the food chain ,

we are always the last to know.

So Global warming has its toll there are incidents all over the world ,

However

confusion rules the day ,i am beginning to think that SCIENCE HAS BEEN INVADED WITH POLITICS AND HUMAN EMOTIONS

The truth is being distorted at high levels,

And lies have been weaved in.

Some of the real dangers are being hidden because there are no solutions , Public could panic.and Authorities would loose control .

Besides Corporations have other priorities and changes will cause loss of profits ,this also affects the truths being published

Others facts are exaggerated so that the phenomena can be used to milk the people.

This is further complicated with Arrogance that will not admit that mankind could be guilty, or that Gods could be out of control ,unloving or incompetent

But I do not think we can make a real difference anymore to change the tide.

On a Global scale,Humanity is not co operative enough .

The poor regions have other priorities such as daily survival.

There is a lot we can do about being more responsible with what we got ,

In the first world countries many do not care or are more interested in Global Control than Global Warming.

Can I fly around in a private Jet now ????

I would like nothing better.

.

Answer 2

In case you're too young to remeber,the serious debate on the subject of AGW started over 20 years ago! Now the data is in,and a concensus of scientists has been reached! The so called serious link you provided is just an oil company blog to inject  doubt into the discussion. No real science. Just uninformed opinions!  Face it,YOU don't enough about the climate or how it works!

Answer 3

Scientist who don't go with the consensus are 'tarred and feathered', and libeled to be in cahoots with oil corporations to sell their science.  To make these claims, believers have to ignore their scientist who, out of greed and for profit, sell their science to political parties.

Imagine a priest who questions the existence of God.

The reaction is the same in both cases.

There will never be a debate because the believers have too much at stake if they lose, and they know their "science" is on very shaky ground.  The more people know, the less they will believe than man can change the climate.

Answer 4

What's to debate...global warming ended 10 years ago.  The huge push to "prevent it" now is an aim to pass legislation before the general public becomes aware.  If actions can be enacted quickly, AGW proponents can take credit for the cooling we're already experiencing.

Answer 5

a lot of em'!!!

Answer 6

I do not believe in this b.s. It is only  brought on because the wacko's would not get their funding without crying wolf. If there is such a thing as global warming who is to say that it would be a bad thing? There use to be oranges grown in New Jersey but not anymore.

Answer 7

when the "bullies" who are pushing their agenda stop crying wolf!  But then, no one will listen by then.  i find it interesting that people who can't even accurately predict the weather tomorrow, feel they have the power to predict the weather for the century!  Is this what the Bible means about "false prophets?"

Answer 8

There is a scientific debate.  The "skeptics" just lose.

The cited article just lists a few of them, most (Baliunas, Carter, etc.) instantly recognizable as long time skeptics, not suddenly converted new ones.

EVERY major scientific organization says global warming is real, and mostly caused by us.

The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

These organizations don't take positions like that on controversial issues, only on settled science.  If an issue is still controversial, they simply don't take a position.

This is still true:

"The fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists. I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

NASA's Gavin Schmidt

You can personally choose to believe a few "skeptics" instead of the scientific community.  But you're betting your future well being on a long shot.  The world's leaders aren't about to make that mistake.

Susan - They never claimed 100% of the warming was due to humans.  Just most of it, which is true.

Answer 9

i would think tha there is already a serios debate going on... so i would say about 50/50

Answer 10

Not sure why you say "more" because this is the same list of skeptical scientists as it was 5 years ago.  I recognized every name on there.  It's nothing new.

What sort of debate are you talking about?  Scientific debate?  Because that's done via research.  The thing is, almost none of the scientists on your list there do climate science research.  They just say 'oh I disagree with the consensus for this reason or the other'.  The scientists who are actively researching the issue virtually all agree with the consensus (which is why it's a consensus).

http://www.norvig.com/oreskes.html

There's a political debate as to what we should do about global warming, and that already is a serious debate.