In 30 years, will we look back on global warming as a silly fad?

Question

Something based more on opinion than fact?

http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html

Answer 1

it is not a fad, it is a money making rip off

Answer 2

well on the rate of pollution we are now we gon be extinct  in 30 years

Answer 3

Yup! same as the cooling scare of the 70's.

Attention: we now know that weather changes, this is the only constant.

Answer 4

A silly fad that is backed by overwhelming scientific evidence.   What's silly is clinging to arguments that have already been debunked by climate scientists.

Like the supposed global cooling scare in the 70s .

Here is the truth.  

There was a theory that included 7 scientific papers predicting global cooling.  One of the lead scientists recanted 3 years later, saying he underestimated the amount of CO2.

There was no consensus whatsoever that cooling would happen.

  In fact at the same time, there were 42 scientific papers predicting Glogal Warming, AGW.   So actually, the  vast majority of climate science was leaning toward warming.

That's 84% of papers predicting warming.

Over time, William Connelly has been steadily documenting 70's research predicting global cooling. It's a rich resource but as he admits, could be more accessible. Now he has collaborated with Thomas Peterson and John Fleck to publish The Myth of the 1970's Global Cooling Scientific Consensus, due to be published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society."

"So in fact, the large majority of climate research in the 1970s predicted the Earth would warm as a consequence of CO2. Rather than climate science predicting cooling, the opposite is the case. Most interesting about Peterson's paper is not the debunking of an already well debunked skeptic argument but a succinct history of climate science over the 20th century, describing how scientists from different fields gradually pieced together their diverse findings into a more unified picture of how climate operates. A must read paper."

http://www.skepticalscience.com/What-197...

CASE CLOSED  

Ah but is it?

"It's easy to refute all the contrarian arguments but that seems to have very little effect on how commonly they are believed. Refuted arguments seem to live on in the public imagination."

Michael Tobis Ph.D. - University of Texas Institute for Geophysics

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics".

Dr. James Baker - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

"A handful of "contrarian" scientists and public figures who are not scientists have challenged mainstream climatologists' conclusions that the warming of the last few decades has been extraordinary and that at least part of this warming has been anthropogenically induced. What must be emphasized here is that, despite the length of this section, there are truly only a handful of climatologist contrarians relative to the number of mainstream climatologists out there."

"The global warming is a hoax believers don't understand the difference between informed opinion, uninformed opinion, misinformed opinion and totally ignorant opinions."  from comments at  gristmill.grist.org/story/2006/11/11/236...

posted by LeeAnnG