What if Global warming is a hoax?

Question

This winter is the coldest winter globally in 100 years - there are more scientists that disagree with global warming, and they are not being given equal time in the media. Why is this?

What if you found out that your politicians and schools were teaching Global Warming as a fact, when in fact the claims are false. How would you respond? Would you continue to vote for them? Learning as though they are the experts?

Today, there is a Global Warming conference of many (some 2500) experts and scientists that is in opposition to Gore and his self proclaimed "experts", and the media refuses to show you that this is going on.

So, I ask you ... what will you do if the whole claim of Global Warming as a cause by man (in the coldest winter on record in 100 years) is false, and is really a means to profit on the ignorance of people.

Do you just believe because the ones on "your side" say so? Why? Facts are facts, and lies are propoganda. How do you know if you don't challenge them?

Answer 1

then the jokes on us!

Answer 2

Right! Also the earth is flat and the moon exploration was a hoax. The dinosaurs were a myth and science is all phony.

Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, pal.

Answer 3

If you learn how to read, you'll find out that Global Warming will lead to the next Ice Age.

I may not be an expert (in fact I'm a noob) but I can publicly say that you had never watched The Day After Tomorrow or any other documentaries on Discovery Channel/NGC

Answer 4

omg your that dude who set up the website on 9/11 and crop circles arent ya

Answer 5

In that case I won't have lost anything...didn't believe it too much anyway ;)

Answer 6

The climate of the world is bound to change over time.  Whatever effects people have had on it are minimal in comparison to what nature does.  They still have effects, but not as massive as global warming - imo.

Answer 7

I think your question is ridiculous but I'll answer in the spirit of debate.

Specifically, what would I do if I found out global warming was not caused by humans?

I would continue doing exactly what I'm doing now, because it doesn't hurt to recycle, compost, and use energy efficiently. It saves me money actually, and uses less resources. I'm not sure why people are so resistant to that part of it. It shouldn't be a partisan or political issue, nor should it be a classist one. Conserving water, energy and resources is not an us-versus-them game, it's common sense.

I'm not going to argue with you about global warming. It appears  you're not going to change your mind on this anytime soon. Basically, we should help each other make wise decisions based on firsthand experience and peer-reviewed scientific evidence. That should be indisputable.

Answer 8

If global warming is a hoax, them you don't have anything to worry about do you. When you are running for the hills because of a tidal wave, will you remember that you said you had nothing to worry about.

Answer 9

If it's a hoax, Algore will have cleaned up with his 'carbon credits' and laughed all the way to the bank at our expense.

We need to go for renewable energy on ECONOMIC grounds. We shouldn't have to be LIED to. It only makes SENSE to stop using a resource that's getting more expensive every year.

Answer 10

No it is not im sorry  if u dont like it because i dont like it either that is wy everybody is trying to help the enviornent! i know i am but if you really want to stop it try using a bike instead of a car!

Answer 11

If you're not a scientist ( like "Bob", below, who is too busy worshiping the new religion of Global Warming, and thus only believes the hoaxters ) then you might like to read an article written by a real Atmospheric Physicist which was written for the layman.  This particular editorial went global in a heartbeat, has been read in about 50 foreign countries, and is referenced from over 100 other web sites.  It's been "peer reviewed" by a host of real climate scientists and declared to be accurate.

See http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-w...

One of the favorite lies of Bob and the other hoaxters is to produce a long list of organizations who believe in man-made global warming.  He gets away with it, because no one, including him, can poll every member of those organizations to find out what the consensus really is.

I'll tell you this:  The President of the World Federation of Scientists thinks a hoax, and has sent a letter to the U.N. along with 100 others asking them to back off on the perpetration of the hoax.

Answer 12

OMG, we might be recycling for something that hasn't happened yet! Ridiculous!

Answer 13

You cant believe in Global Warming ifyou live in the North cuz it has been freaking cold.

Answer 14

Global warming is another terrible debacle by scientists to fully consult with marketing firms. In reality it is global climate change, causing extremes in temps both ways. Thus leading to more snow in the winter, more heat and drought in the summer (or now if you live in GA).

It is uncertain the level of man's impact on global warming, but either way you cannot argue that breathing in a thick cloud of smog is good right? Clean up your act and stop buying into the other extreme side  of the argument.

How is it a profit on ignorance? Worst case scenario we move to renewable energy and stop throwing c**p into the air and giving away trillions of dollars to our enemies who in turn use it to teach kids to fly planes into our buildings?

Even if it is not true, there are many benefits to improving ourselves.

Answer 15

then there wil be many angry people if its all a hoax but i doubt its a hoax

Answer 16

someone must have a big fire going to be melting the ice cap

Answer 17

If it was a hoax then the independent data sources confirming warming would somehow have to be tampered with:

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2...

...for some reason.  It makes no sense.  Scientists would want to raise their own living costs, sell their SUVs, etc.

The claim that it's a hoax is just plain silly.  Would the hoax have started in the early 1800s, the late 1800s, the early 1900s, or some other time?  There's a long history behind current carbon cycle science:

http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.h...

At exactly what point in that history was some sort of evil plot started?  Why have your "2500 experts and scientists" not published peer-reviewed scientific papers?  Here's roughly how scientific opinion stands:

http://norvig.com/oreskes.html

The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.

The public however is led to believe that global warming is a myth by a very sophisticated and well funded effort underway to convince people of that.  It is very similar to the campaign used by the tobacco industry in the past:

http://www.nowpublic.com/whos_paid_to_de...

There is a hoax involved, but it centers around the oil industry, which is funding the conference you speak of.  

NASA has something to say about your claim about the "coldest winter on record:"

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2...

The past year (2007) witnessed a transition from a weak El Nino to a strong La Nina (the latter is perhaps beginning to moderate already, as the ocean waters near Peru are beginning to warm). January 2007 was the warmest January in the period of instrumental data in the GISS analysis, while, as shown in Figure 1, October 2007 was # 5 warmest, November 2007 was #8 warmest, December 2007 was #8 warmest, and January 2008 was #40 warmest. Undoubtedly, the cooling trend through the year was due to the strengthening La Nina, and the unusual coolness in January was aided by a winter weather fluctuation.

The monthly fluctuations of global or near-global temperature, as well as the trend over recent decades can be seen in Figure 2 for the GISS surface temperature analysis as well as the lower tropospheric data of UAH (University of Alabama at Huntsville)2 and RSS (Remote Sensing Systems).  The reason to show these is to expose the recent nonsense that has appeared in the blogosphere, to the effect that recent cooling has wiped out global warming of the past century, and the Earth may be headed into an ice age. On the contrary, these misleaders have foolishly (or devilishly) fixated on a natural fluctuation that will soon disappear.

Note that even the UAH data now have a substantial warming trend (0.14°C per decade). RSS find 0.18°C per decade, close to the surface temperature trend (0.17°C per decade). The large short-term temperature fluctuations have no bearing on the global warming matter or the impacts of global warming discussed in the Illinois Wesleyan presentation. A global warming much smaller than weather fluctuations has the potential for dramatic effects, e.g., by setting in motion future large sea level change, species extinction, and various other impacts.

---

You can believe the propaganda blogs if you like.  The Pentagon predicts that the world could have food riots and anarchy within 16 years.  If you're unprepared, you'll just be that much easier to take food and other resources from.  Please keep disbelieving.

Answer 18

If Global warming is a hoax or wrong, we still would be helping our energy crisis and limiting industrial pollution. Or is that a hoax too?

Who's to say I haven't looked at the facts and tried to form my own conclusions? I'm very critical of what everyone says. I'm even critical of my own thoughts too.

Answer 19

When Al Gore claim to help invent the Internet, I know it is a hoax.

But for global warming, I really hope it is a hoax because the weather is freaking me out.

Unfortunately, there are too many evidences to prove that global warming is true.

Scientists disagree on the cause of global warming but not the existence of global warming.

There are also many scientists that work for car & oil companies that try to convince people that global warming is a hoax so that people will continue to buy cars and burn fuel.

Just like cigerette companies that use fake research and advertisment to convince people smoking is harmless.

Answer 20

Honestly, I am glad to hear of someone that is freethinking.  The truth is the facts can lead to different answers.  Yes, greenhouse gases have risen considerably.  Yes, these gases will cause solar energy not to escape back into space.  No, we do not know what will happen as a result of this.  One theory is that we will warm; while another states we will go into a new ice-age.  Computer models haven't processed the data correctly yet; therefore, we must realize there are underlying issues that we have not added to our models or issues we haven't even foreseen.

Answer 21

What do you mean...."IF" ??!!

Answer 22

The ignorance of the alarmists is mind boggling and they pretend to have science on their side.  It is pure politics and they refuse to admit it.  Bob suggest that global warming must happen, that it is inevitable because we emit greenhouse gases.  JS pretends that it is the skeptics that use natural cycles to further their cause when in fact it is the alarmist that pretend their are no natural cycles until it becomes inconveniently cold.  The cycle of warming and cooling has repeated several times.  It warms and then the CO2 goes up.  CO2 is not significant enough of a factor to drive climate.  That is the hoax.  They pretend that they know it is but all they do is continually demonstrate the ignorance of climate history,  their gullibility, and their political bent, in my opinion.

Answer 23

Well I can't say i would do anything because there is nothing we would be able to do if we found out global warming did not exist.

However I entirely agree with you because for all we know this could just be they way the world this may have happened thousands of years ago aswell, it might just be they way the weather changes etc. The only reason people don't belive it is because there is no evidnce to back it up.

Answer 24

GW is a no win situation. If it's too cold it's because of GW, if it's too hot it's because of GW. What we are sure of is that it's a nice little earner.

Answer 25

local weather has nothing to do with global warming

the way to tell is to look to the poles and note the drastic reduction in polar ice and increasing temps in the night time not how it is where you are

Answer 26

You say "(some 2500) experts and scientists that is in opposition to Gore...", where does that information come from?  According to Anthony Watts there are closer to 500 attendees (including press, interested laymen, sociologists, economists, TV Weathermen, etc.).

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/

What's even more hilarious about this mock "scientific" conference is that the Heartland Institutes (well known pro-tobacco lobbyists, partly funded by energy companies) president spends much of his opening address mocking Al Gore?  Has anyone EVER heard of a legitimate scientific conference doing anything even remotely as immature and clearly partisan as that?  Give me a break.  If this were a scientific conference, they should be talking about science, not Al Gore.

Here's another similar upcoming conference with many "scientists" opposing the main-stream scientific theories:

http://www.icc08.org/

Edit:

Jim Z - do you ever post any scientific links to support you opinions?  I don't believe I've ever seen you do that.  Talk is cheap, where's your data that warming is going to be such a great thing for humanity?

Answer 27

merely suggesting that Global Warming is a hoax shows reveals your intelligence.

Answer 28

Two answers.  The long one given here:

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

Second, we had short term cooling (also known as weather) in 1982, 1991-1992, 1999-2000; also.  Every time global warming came back stronger than ever.

It has to, with our increased production of greenhouse gases.

The answer below says - "We shouldn't have to be LIED to."  Good grief, man, you say you're a scientist?  Are these guys lying?

The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

EVERY major scientific organization says global warming is real, and mostly caused by us.

Good grief.

Answer 29

Global warming is true. how much are we contributing to it remains a question. Careful with looking at all those graphs, many of them don't show the whole picture, and can be misleading. The planet naturally heats up and cools down, it's what its been doing since it formed. During global warming some parts of the worlds' tempuratures will dramitically increase, and other parts will decrease. The earth is never at equillibrium and is constantly changing to try and reach this equilibrium, but too many factors (natural and un-natural) are preventing it. Please do not get your facts from politicians or movies, such as "The Day After Tommorow".  Listen to a geologist (like me), or better yet a published geologist. You can find articles online and in mags such as geosciencesworld.gov, or Scientic American. Look at it this way.  The world was never built to sustain life for very long, it shifts dramatically too frequently.  If you think that the extinction of the dino's is the largest extinction to have occurred your wrong.  There has been 4-5 mass extinctions in the past that don't include the dino's. So how exactly are we going to stop global warming? This is an event that has been taking place for billions of years. That would be like stopping the world from spinning. It is way beyond us. So perhaps we need to find different ways of adapting to the ever changing environment of our plant. Genetic manipulation? Now if your argument is simply pollution, well ya, we need to cut that c**p out. I am more worried about breathing in all this c**p then global warming.

Answer 30

I believe MAN MADE global warming is a hoax.  When that ends up being true, i will continue living my life the same.  Questioning the media and trying the get both sides of the story instead of blindly agreeing with everything that the liberal media puts out as "news".

Answer 31

don't believe the hype.

Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming

Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on.

No more than anecdotal evidence, to be sure. But now, that evidence has been supplanted by hard scientific fact. All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's GISS, UAH, RSS) have released updated data. All show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously.

A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out nearly all the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

Scientists quoted in a past DailyTech article link the cooling to reduced solar activity which they claim is a much larger driver of climate change than man-made greenhouse gases. The dramatic cooling seen in just 12 months time seems to bear that out. While the data doesn't itself disprove that carbon dioxide is acting to warm the planet, it does demonstrate clearly that more powerful factors are now cooling it.

Let's hope those factors stop fast. Cold is more damaging than heat. The mean temperature of the planet is about 54 degrees. Humans -- and most of the crops and animals we depend on -- prefer a temperature closer to 70.

Historically, the warm periods such as the Medieval Climate Optimum were beneficial for civilization. Corresponding cooling events such as the Little Ice Age, though, were uniformly bad news.