NASA warming scientist: 'This is the last chance'?

Question

There are over 35000 scientist that state global warming is not cause of man. why are you still claiming that it is a man made cause and effect? look at the history of the temperatures of the world and see that it has been way way way way warmer during the different times of the history of the world then now. Yes its getting warmer but it has been way warmer in the past with out the presence of man. I'm glad there has been a green movement but its has taken a front seat but really it is a natural occurrence in relationship to the sun. Don't believe the hype. Your thoughts?

Answer 1

I agree, I show evidence to people on here that clearly shows how wrong they are and they still don't want to jump off the bandwagon of the AGW theory. And like another answerer stated we are focusing on the wrong things when it comes to our environment.

Answer 2

Very simple answer:  The climate can be modeled.  Scientists have an understanding of how different factors effect the temperature of the earth.  And the current warming is more than what can be explained by natural causes.

I don't mean to be rude, but did you really think the climate scientists didn't realize there is such a thing as natural climate change?

Also, those "scientists" of the petition project are people with B.S. degrees in various disciplines, most unrelated to climatology.

Approximately one in four American adults have earned a bachelor's degree, which with a US population of 300 million, amounts to about 75 million people. Of course not all of those are B.S. degrees, but this gives you a rough idea of just how many "scientists" are out there.

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

http://www.answers.com/topic/bachelor-s-...

http://petitionproject.org/

Answer 3

Actually 70% of global warming is not caused by humans.The reason why we are taking it serious  is because in the end we are the one who is going suffer very badly.I know that it's natural and we cannot stop it but at least we can prevent it for a while so that we may able to survive a little more with less problems(lack of electricity,water,weather,pollution........

Answer 4

It's getting increasingly foolish since the ice has returned, it was very cool last year and the World Meteorological Organization predicts several more years of cooling, yet they have this neat theory that it's going to get warmer. If they are really concerned about warming, why aren't we funding programs to actually cool or warm the Earth instead of launching a full-frontal assault on the economies of developed nations? We could launch tiny disks into the upper atmosphere to cool or warm the planet, depending on the surface of the disks themselves, shiny to reflect sunlight, dark to absorb it. That way we might even be able to stave of an ice age, or at least blunt it's impact.

Instead they only want to shoot down any solution that doesn't require the fearful abandonment of the fuel that gave us the modern world and all the conveniences we enjoy. And they claim the ideal climate must have been right at the end of the Little Ice Age, if it gets warmer than that temp it is a sign of disaster. Despite the fact that humans flourished when it was warmer than it is today during the Roman Warming and the Medieval Warming, along with the Bronze Age warming.

I support the ultimate goal of moving away from fossil fuels to better alternatives, but I don't like the way the try to frighten schoolkids with their dogmatic theory or the way they attack anyone who dares question what is, after all, still just a theory.

No doubt they'll pick apart your list of 35,000 scientists just as they did with prior lists, and claim that only oil company hacks and the illiterate doubt global warming. They'll list all the people who've signed onto the AGW train and attack anyone who doubts their theory. But saying the Earth is flat didn't make it so and saying AGW is real won't make that real either. CO2 levels are not going up as they predict, the ocean and even the desert absorb more than they thought, their models can't even predict past temp with historical data plugged into them, so how can they rely on them to predict things 100 years from now?

We'd be a lot better off trying to mitigate the harm caused by floods and the idiocy of using farmland to grow fuel than in rushing to reduce CO2 levels. They have been far higher than they are now, 10 times the present level during an ice age, and prior to the Industrial Revolution they were so low they were perilously close to the suffocation level for plants and you can guess how bad that would be for us.

Answer 5

Environmentalist group start out with good ideas, but then money and power takes over. I agree with you but there is way to much money involved now to let go of global warming.

Answer 6

Ah again with the petition from the Oregon institute really is starting to look out of touch when even Exxon is admitting there is a problem. The 35000 is a nice touch when even the home page of the petition only claims 31000?

http://www.oism.org/pproject/

This link to the petition also has a link to what they call a peer reviewed paper which appeared in "globalwarmingreview"

trouble is, that isn't a real scientific publication but just a web page and not a very good one and conveniently also located in Oregon?.

Jazzfan: interesting comment about "picking apart the new list like the other ones" because the new list is the same list just with more names added.

Answer 7

My thoughts...Show me the scientists! You present nothing but uninformed opinion/propaganda, otherwise you would have posted data that strengthens your position.

Real scientists disagree with you...

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim...

Answer 8

I agree.  The climate is changing and has changed in the past.  There is nothing anyone can really do about it.  The green movement is nice and all but I wish we'd drop the 'stop global warming' excuse for it and just get back to basic ecology we can actually do something about like working to reduce: pollution, erosion, the filling of landfills (instead of recycling and using less packaging), the use of toxic chemicals etc. etc.  It's sad that these problems that are on-going but are clearly man-caused and that have real solutions to them have taken a back seat to all this preventing global climate change nonsense.

Answer 9

There are over 570,238,426 climate scientists who say the planet will explode from over-heating in 3 years.

;-)

You see, I can make things up too.  Your OISM petition ("35000 scientists", yeah right) of bogus  names, economists, sociologists, TV personalities, Engineers, and other self proclaimed "scientists" with no climate science training or research experience is the real hype.

The first 10 (of over 200) actual climate scientists in the list below have over 300 peer reviewed scientific publications in reputable climate science related journals. I'd doubt if your entire list of 35000 "scientists" has even 50 such peer reviewed articles.

http://www.ccrc.unsw.edu.au/news/2007/Ba...

Claiming to be a "scientist" and putting your name on an unvalidated web-site list and actually being a scientist who does research and publishes the results, are two very different things.

Answer 10

Just a comment -- for the "professional" climate scientists. I would not be so sure of your expertise if the PROFESSION I was in was only 2 or 3 decades old!---

Climatology is a YOUNG academic specialty -- I wonder why Cosmologists in Astronomy don't preach CONSENSUS and no more discussion on the Big Bang theory? Maybe they realize that more hard research needs to be done until a final theory is settled upon. Unlike the GW advocates.

Answer 11

Natural cycles simply do not explain current warming. When you account for all the natural cycles there is still a warming trend that correlates exceedingly well with the predictions made by those who see human activity as the cause. No other viable alternative has yet been proposed. There are nearly 7 billion people on this little planet. So 35,000 of them signed a petition to deny global warming is caused by humans. mmmm not quite a majority is it?

Besides even if a majority of humans thought it was untrue, it wouldn't change a thing, its not about how many believers there are, just about the science. I notice that none of those 35,000 have put up a viable alternative explanation that is testable and stands up to scrutiny. This is not a popularity contest.

It is exactly this kind of false presentation that the anti faction puts up. Rather than sound transparent science, with facts and numbers that can be verified, they put up, 35,000 signed a petition to they they do not believe. So? A lot of people did not believe that the earth was round, that did not make it flat! A lot of people including doctors and scientists said smoking tobacco was not addictive and did not harm your health. We know better! Look at the real evidence and do the analysis it is pretty straight forward. If your understanding of the relevant science and math is not up to it, then rely on people who have the respect of their peers in the relevant field to do it for you. Do not take the word of outsiders who are not experts in the field and who present no real evidence.