Global Warming..Fact or Fiction???

Question

I think its complete fiction. Al Gore's charts are pulled back so far that it looks pretty convincing, but when you match up those same charts on a shorter time line they don't match up. The Earth naturally gets warmer and colder.. Global warming is a bunch of B.S.

Your thoughts?

Answer 1

31,000 leading scientists recently agreed to a statement that there is NO global warming.  Thats 31,000 THOUSAND.   Global warming has been exposed as a fraud and a con, and it is on its way out.

Answer 2

Global warming? Likely yes. Caused by man. Not very likely at all. Have you noticed the back peddling of the AGW robots? Everything no matter how oxymoronic, is a symptom of man's supposed bad effects on mother earth.

By the way, don't trust Wiki. It is a far left propaganda machine. They claim to be a free encyclopedia. The truth is you'll pay with your brain cells as they wash them thoroughly full of trash.

Answer 3

We should be skeptical about "scientists" who predict climate future based on computer models. People are trying to play God by saying, 'Oh, this computer model told me 50 years from now that this IS going to happen.' That's an arguable point. and I think we should question it. But to say that someone has absolute knowledge of the future seems to me to be playing something more than a mortal.

There is a difference between thinking something is going to happen and deducing something is going to happen. But saying, 'No, I know it; the debate is over' is just plain stupid to say you know something's going to happen 50 years from now

Answer 4

Fiction - Listen to how "global warming" is described.  No one can say anything about "global warming" without using words like "probably", "may", "believe" "think"....

These are not words of science but are words used by mystics who claim they can predict the future.

No one can predict the future.  No one can say if it will be warmer or colder in the future without just guessing.

Guessing isn't science, global warming isn't real science.  At best, it's a sports bet.

Answer 5

fact

LOL, now 3it's 31,000 "leading scientists".

Next it will be 31,000 of the worlds leading climate scientists.

Too funny.

Answer 6

Be sure to read the questions at the end!!

>

>  

>

>  

> -----

>  

>  

> Into the wild green yonder

>

>

> May 11, 2008

>

> By Walter E. Williams - Now that another Earth Day has come and gone,

> let's look at some environmentalists' predictions they would prefer we

> forget.

>

> At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel

> Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside

> nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for

> mankind." C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said,

> "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough

> that it will not soon be reversed."

>

> In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich, former Vice President Al Gore's hero

> and mentor, predicted a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the

> 1970s... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death."

> Mr. Ehrlich forecast 65 million Americans would die of starvation

> between 1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have

> declined to 22.6 million. Mr. Ehrlich's predictions about England were

> gloomier: "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England

> will not exist in the year 2000."

>

> In 1972, a report for the Club of Rome warned the world would run out

> of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and

> petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992.

>

> Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said Americans

> were using 50 percent of the world's resources and "by 2000 they

> [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them."

>

> In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The

> World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000."

>

> Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "civilization

> will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken

> against problems facing mankind." That was the same year Sen. Gaylord

> Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 "somewhere between 75

> and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."

>

> It's not just latter-day doomsayers who have been wrong; doomsayers

> have always been wrong. In 1885, the U.S. Geological Survey announced

> there was "little or no chance" of oil being discovered in California,

> and a few years later they said the same about Kansas and Texas. In

> 1939, the U.S. Interior Department said American oil supplies would

> last only another 13 years. In 1949, the interior secretary said the

> end of U.S. oil supplies was in sight.

>

> Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous claims, in 1974 the

> U.S. Geological Survey advised us that the U.S. had only a 10-year

> supply of natural gas. In fact,, according to the American Gas

> Association, there's a 1,000- to 2,500-year supply.

>

> Here are my questions: In 1970, when environmentalists were making

> predictions of manmade global cooling and the threat of an ice age and

> millions of Americans starving to death, what kind of government

> policy should we have undertaken to prevent such a calamity?

>

> When Mr. Ehrlich predicted England would not exist in the year 2000,

> what steps should the British Parliament have taken in 1970 to prevent

> such a dire outcome? In 1939, when the Interior Department warned we

> only had oil supplies for another 13 years, what actions should

> President Roosevelt have taken? Finally, what makes us think

> environmental alarmism is any more correct now the tune has been

> switched to manmade global warming?

>

> Here are a few facts: More than 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is

> the result of water vapor in Earth's atmosphere. Without the

> greenhouse effect, Earth's average temperature would be zero degrees

> Fahrenheit. Most climate change is due to the orbital eccentricities

> of Earth and variations in the sun's output. On top of that, natural

> wetlands produce more greenhouse gas contributions annually than all

> human sources combined.

>

> Walter E. Williams is a nationally syndicated columnist and a

> professor of economics at George Mason University.

>

Answer 7

Of course its a fact!

Its always happening around us!

Answer 8

To answer the question directly.....Fact.

Answer 9

Deffinitely fiction

Answer 10

It is a fact

Answer 11

you are the best please make me best you are the master

Answer 12

I remember hearing in the 70's we were coming into an ice age.  We do have an impact but I think it is more cyclical than anything.

Answer 13

Actually, i have a theory...a theory that talks about GLOBAL COOLING. why cooling? let me present to you an example:

in New York, many of the older houses (like from the 1700's) are built out of cypress trees. CYPRESS TREES.

that suggests that a while back (300 years or so) that New York had to have been swampy, wet, and warm, or else the cypress trees could not have grown there. Cypress cannot grow in cold climates, you dnt usually even see cypress trees past jacksonville florida...

so, that is an example of my theory, the whole world is actually cooling down, not warming up.

i agree with you, dnt believe the global warming people...they're just doing it for attention.

Answer 14

I don't care if it is a fact or fiction. What I am worrying is that people seem uncaring and irresponsible in their activities that  would cause harm to mother nature. So much use of chemicals, fuel that causes carbon monoxide, powerful weapons that would shake mother earth, our home, for reasons of power, wealth and greed. We all die anyway, what's the use of power and wealth . . .if we leave behind the "unlivable" world for our children.

Answer 15

IT'S ALL HYPE !! IT'S RIDICULES TO THINK THAT THE TEMPERATURE WILL STAY THE SAME YEAR AFTER YEAR WITHOUT A VARIATION. THERE WILL BE COLDER TIMES AND THERE WILL BE WARMER TIMES-THAT'S LIFE. AL GORE IS TRYING TO MAKE MONEY AND A LIVING, AT OUR EXPENSE. THAT DOESN'T MEAN WE SHOULD NOT TAKE CARE OF OUR ENVIRONMENT AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR KEEPING OUR PLANET CLEAN. I THINK RECYCLING IS GREAT. WE NEED TO DO OUR PART-NOT HAVING THE GOVERNMENT IMPART AND CONTROL EVERYTHING WE DO !

Answer 16

Fact.  For evidence, see the link below.  In response to your comment about 'Al Gore's charts', see the section entitled 'Carbon Dioxide Feedbacks'.

Answer 17

Some warming may be fact but within certain limitations (i.e a time scale is needed) but consequences are grossly exaggerated fiction

Answer 18

Mostly fiction, the earth is going through a warming cycle, but i think it's a natural warming cycle. If you look back in history during the medievel warm period, it was warmer then, than it is now and their was much less C02 circulating in the atmosphere back then.

Answer 19

One of the biggest scams created by the governments around the globe for scare tactics and brainwashing.

My 2 cents.

Answer 20

well global warming is a fact... and this is not natural as it is being created by artificial source i.e. by the humans... not by the nature.. earth is not able to balance this.. as because the rate pf global warming is very high and also the balancing agent i.e trees are depleting day by day ...

Answer 21

Man made global warming?....FICTION and lousy fiction at that.

Answer 22

It's a fact.  Check the IPCC, NAS, EPA, NASA, NOAA and almost any university with an atmospheric sciences department.    We can't use the models to predict what the weather on June 23 2010 will be, but they predict relatively well what the average change in temperature will be between the winter of 1955 and the winter of 2055.

Answer 23

Bubba - I'm with you on this! Gelatin (aka Jello) is the prime misinformationist on this site. He's always preaching to the choir. Always telling them what they want to hear. But Gelatin doesn't like to hear what science actually says.

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

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library...

http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/policy/positi...

http://www.ipcc.ch/index.htm

http://www.geosociety.org/positions/inde...

He doesn't have the courage, let alone knowledge, to challenge the scientists at the National Academy, AGU, AIP, GPU, NASA, NOAA or the IPCC. That's why he's putting so much time in on this site.

You want to know if GW is fact? Talk or read about what scientists say, not some hack on Y!A.

Answer 24

It's a fact that increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere will cause warming.  How much warming is uncertain as there are additional complex climate factors that will react to the CO2 induced warming.  But the consensus view of climate scientist (as opposed to a 11 year-old bogus list of 31,000 unverified names created by documented deceptive methods) is that a doubling of CO2 levels from pre-industrial times will create an additional 1.7 -  4 C warming (with some scientists estimating as low as 1.0 C and some as high as 10.0 C).

If Global warming is merely a bunch of B.S., then it's the best B.S. ever devised, as it's "fooled" the greatest science organizations in the world.

Answer 25

AGW-unproven theory

GW-natural cycle