What do the proponents of Global Warming Consider proof that Mankind is the cause of Global Warming?

Question

So far everything in Inconvenient (lie) truth has been shown to be false.

Answer 1

Where did you get the ridiculous idea that An Inconvenient Truth had been debunked? You are mistaken. The science presented in it is accurate. If you really want an answer and are not simply interested in Green Baiting take a look at the Real Climate blog. It is run by real climate scientists. You can look up any of your pet contrarian theories there and get a real scientific assessment of their validity. If you are actually open minded it will prove to be an eye opener for you.

The very simplified explanation of what I consider proof by the way is the fact that humans have altered the Earth's atmosphere slightly (emissions of greenhouse gasses and aerosols) by an amount that calculation to the predicts would cause the amount of global warming that we actually are seeing.

We have a cause (greenhouse gasses) we have and effect (global warming) and we have the relationship between that specific cause and that specific effect showing that cause results in that effect (the calculations).

All three components of a proof: A, B, and A causes B.

Answer 2

There is a mountain of data proving it.  Here are two summaries short and long.  They're not based on theories, they're based on verified, peer reviewed data:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Ima...

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

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)

Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/a...

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/fu... and:

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics.  Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point,You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/

http://www.realclimate.org

"climate science from climate scientists"

By the way, some details in Gore's movie have been criticized by scientists.  But they think he has the basic things right; global warming is real, mostly caused by us, and a serious danger.

Let me anticipate two fallacies often repeated here:

It's (mostly) not the sun:

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-...

The "swindle" movie has been extensively refuted:

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

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

That movie makes Gore look like an Oracle of Truth.

Answer 3

You are right about Al Gore being deceiving.

Chris Landsea is one of the world's most authoritative experts on Hurricanes and was a member of the united Nations IPCC.  He resigned because he thought the decision to say that severe hurricanes will be a result of global warming was a political decision and not the scientific decision reached by the scientists.  

"Differing conclusions and robust debates are certainly crucial to progress in climate science. However, this case is not an honest scientific discussion conducted at a meeting of climate researchers. Instead, a scientist with an important role in the IPCC represented himself as a Lead Author for the IPCC has used that position to promulgate to the media and general public his own opinion that the busy 2004 hurricane season was caused by global warming, which is in direct opposition to research written in the field and is counter to conclusions in the TAR."  (TAR is the United Nations Third assessment report)

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/promet...

He uses as proof the ice core records that shows the correlation of co2 and temperature.  The ice core records show that co2 lags temperature.  In other words temperature goes up or down co2 follows years later.

The temperature reconstruction for the past 1000 years that he uses is also fraudulent.  It shows temperatures steady and shooting up during the 20th century.  The author of the study, Man, refuses to state his methodology.  It is fraudulent because it ignores the Medieval warm period when temperatures where a lot warmer than today.  The Man et all study shows that temperatures were as warm as today.  Historical evidence on the colonization of Greenland contradicts him.

http://www.archaeology.org/online/featur...

He states that co2 is a major greenhouse gas, it is not.  Water vapour constitutes 95% of greenhouse gases and is the major one. Human induced co2  is actually less than half of 1% of the atmosphere's total CO2 content (750-830 GT).

On Malaria:

"Gore is completely wrong here -- malaria has been documented at an altitude of 2,500 metres -- Nairobi and Harare are at altitudes of about 1,500 metres. The new altitudes of malaria are lower than those recorded 100 years ago. None of the "30 so-called new diseases" Gore references are attributable to global warming, none." -- Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, unit of insects and infectious diseases, Paris, comments on Gore's belief that Nairobi and Harare were founded just above the mosquito line to avoid malaria and how the mosquitoes are now moving to higher altitudes.

Ice melting:

"Mr. Gore suggests that the Greenland melt area increased considerably between 1992 and 2005. But 1992 was exceptionally cold in Greenland and the melt area of ice sheet was exceptionally low due to the cooling caused by volcanic dust emitted from Mt. Pinatubo. If, instead of 1992, Gore had chosen for comparison the year 1991, one in which the melt area was 1% higher than in 2005, he would have to conclude that the ice sheet melt area is shrinking and that perhaps a new Ice Age is just around the corner." -- Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Department of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax.

Both the Antarctic and Greenland ice caps are thickening. The temperature at the South Pole has declined by more than one degree C since 1950. And the area of sea ice around the continent has increased over the last 20 years." -- Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia.

- - -

"From data published by the Canadian Ice Service, there has been no precipitous drop-off in the amount or thickness of the ice cap since 1970 when reliable overall coverage became available for the Canadian Arctic." -- Dr./Cdr. M.R. Morgan, FRMS, formerly advisor to the World Meteorological Organization/climatology research scientist at University of Exeter, U.K.

Answer 4

watch an inconvenient truth.  it is on DVD

Answer 5

Most of the experts on global worming agree that it's caused mostly by man. There are a few who don't agree though. It's best to be on the safe side and do our best to eliminate greenhouse gases as best we can. Even if this doesn't help with the global warming threat, we can at least breath cleaner air.

Answer 6

Funny how the Conservatives listen to some Republican spout off about man being conceited by the notion of man being able to cause global warming, yet some washed up Democrat makes a movie and your liberals turn it into the next religious cult.

20 years ago they said we had 20 years to make an impact before its too late, now they say we have another 20 years before its too late.  See ya in another 20 years to get my next 20 years before its too late.

Answer 7

OMG!!  I AM SO SICK AND TIRED OF HEARING "isnt it a little bit conceited to think we humans could cause global warming"?  NO ITS NOT YOU FRIGGING MORONS!!!

Some of you heard some dumbass republican spout off about how we humans couldnt possible have an effect like this on something as large as the planet , and now without even considering the facts you just repeat it over and over thinking that it actually means something...????

There are BILLIONS of human beings most with cars and homes and waste.....do you really believe that all out factories and pollutants couldnt effect the world???  If you do you are an idiot!!!

Why are fish contaminated with Mercury??  Why are Asthma rates skyrocketing?  Why is it warmer than ever???  Do some frigging research instead of just blindly listening to some "fatcat" who is lining his pockets with our granchildrens future!!!!

Answer 8

2500 scientist from hundreds of institutions along ten years have contributed to the IPCC reports

hundreds of thousands of evidences were reported

they produduce tens of millions of pages explaining why those evidences prove it

do you really want that we copy all of them here?