I need the BEST explanation of global warming skepticism, specifically, skepticism that humans are the cause.?

Question

With credible sources, please.

Answer 1

The "swindle" movie suggested above is wrong.  It is simply a political statement which distorts science.  The director has a history of putting out misleading stuff.  In 1997 he made a series for Channel 4 called “Against Nature”, which compared environmentalists with n***s. Channel 4 had to apologise for the misleading stuff in that one.  The present movie is also a distortion of the science. More here:

http://news.independent.co.uk/environmen...

"A Channel 4 documentary claimed that climate change was a conspiratorial lie. But an analysis of the evidence it used shows the film was riddled with distortions and errors."

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313p...

"Pure Propaganda"

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...

Explanations of why the science is wrong.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Durk...

History of the director.

http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climat...

"The science might be bunkum, the research discredited. But all that counts for Channel 4 is generating controversy."  

Gore's movie may be a little over dramatic, but it has the basic science right.  This movie does not.

Channel 4 itself undercuts the movie in a funny way.  If you go to their website on the movie you find links to real global warming information.  They also have a way to "Ask the Expert" about global warming.  The questions go to a respected mainstream scientist who supports (mostly) human responsibility for global warming.

The sun (or, in the case of Mars, giant dust storms) may be responsible for the other planets, but it's not the main cause of global warming on Earth.

Actual data shows it's not the suns radiation that's the major cause of global warming on Earth, it's us. Solar radiation is carefully measured.  Climatologists include it in their analysis.

The results are in the report below.  Increased solar radiation is 0.12 watts per meter squared.  Man's warming is 1.6 watts per meter squared, more than ten times as much.

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

What scientists think.  Not from the "liberal" media.

""While evidence suggests fluctuations in solar activity can affect climate on Earth, and that it has done so in the past, the majority of climate scientists and astrophysicists agree that the sun is not to blame for the current and historically sudden uptick in global temperatures on Earth, which seems to be mostly a mess created by our own species."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,2583...

Answer 2

just watch this documentary:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...

its about an hour long or so, but worth considering.

Answer 3

The short answer is that big business, especially heavy manufacturing and petroleum refinement are afraid of the cost of adjusting their processes to come into alignment with environmental impact regulations.

Thus this small number of people have bought and paid for a significant campaign to discredit the global warming pundits. Their campaign is reminiscent of the tobacco campaign after the Surgeon General's warnings about smoking. The tobacco companies paid for these huge marketing campaigns to discredit anyone who said that smoking was harmful.

The thing about it is that while there would necessarily be a significant capital investment, it will create an entirely new industry which will in turn create new jobs and additional capital investment.

This information is not mine. I learned it from Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth". I strongly recommend it.

Answer 4

The first reference is an interview with Fred Singer.

If nothing else, the following links refute the fact that there is a 'consensus'.

Answer 5

The sun's output is increasing and mars and Pluto are warming at the same time the earth is.... Read all about it -----

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/su...

Answer 6

Time.

It was a lot warmer during the time of the dinosaurs.

It was a lot colder during the last ice age.

Answer 7

skeptisism has been carefully manufactured by subliminal propaganda

political leaders do not have the interests of the public in mind in the first place

in 1898 kissinger said at a meeting in Copenhagen that the agenda demanded a decrease of 60% in the world population their objective is less public .how they hope to acheve that is another story.

secondly,scientists who get paid by politicians give reports that suit the political scenario,

to admit to Global warming means to have to do something about it .

this means changing Industry ,changing lifestyles ,

damaging present profitable operations ,change cuts into profits ,new laws, new machinery,tighter controls on contaminants and methods of operations .all costly concepts ,all hurting the owners of big business and they pay the politicians

Global warming is far worse than the public is allowed to know .

global warming cannot be stopped

it can be slowed down but ar great cost

we are being lied to from all sides ,to keep us from going crazy and panicking

but we have been lied to for centuries anyway

those who touch the truth are ridiculed and propeganda makes the truth seem like lies ,those who persist are removed (conspiracy theories )

so the masses live in darkness ,that is far cheaper ,and it wont make much difference in the end

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

Answer 8

The fact that other planets in our solar system are showing warming trends as well.  There are no humans on these other planets to blame the warming on.

Answer 9

The way that the media has been reporting the issue, making it seem more controversial among scientists than it actually is. A lot of the no-warming groups are funded by oil companies. Check this out:

Forty public policy groups have this in common: They seek to undermine the scientific consensus that humans are causing the earth to overheat. And they all get money from ExxonMobil.