What would it take to convince you of global warming?

Question

What would be the deciding factor for you?

Answer 1

i'm convinced.

just the past few years weather wise across the world...it's hard to deny we're going through a climate shift.

Answer 2

I'm already convinced.

Answer 3

Pay me first then I will believe you. (jokin)

Answer 4

Some actual Warm temperatures would help. The coldest winter in 50 years doesn't do much to convince me.

The earth hasn't warmed since 1998.

Answer 5

If in another 100 years, the temperature increases by another whopping .6 degrees, I'll worry.  Actually a fresh pitcher of ice tea should do the trick.

Answer 6

I am already conviniced we turned are house into a 'GREEN' house and signed up on line we recycle and help the environment but to convince other children the polar bears adults the statistics

Answer 7

I am already convinced, as are the great majority of people in the developed world. This debate is exclusively an American one as everyone else has decided to do something about it.

I suppose I would have to say though that if extremes of climate caused Jello to freeze or melt I wouldn't be too concerned!

Answer 8

I am convinced, mostly because most scientists agree that it is happening. Although, it isn't just global warming, it's really climate change. Although global warming is a side effect of climate change, it isn't the main problem. Also, to all of you who said that you don't believe it because you are having really cold winters? That's because of CLIMATE CHANGE, not global warming. That even goes to prove that it's happening.

Answer 9

One prediction to come true. Non biased scientist getting grants to prove it is happening to keep getting grants. Models that actually work. An accurate 5 day forcasts much less a 100 year forcast.

The Sun is the biggest factor in warming and cooling and the position of the earth. Yes I know winds, ocean currents and other such factors exists but the Sun is the PRIMARY sourse of heat for the planet not c02 emmisions from my car.

Answer 10

I would like climate scientists to be able to tell me exactly what drives the earth's climate with the same amount of certainty a mechanic could express when he explains to you what makes the wheels on your car turn .

Answer 11

Some objective science would be nice.

Right now science is just guessing.  Very few of their predictions, if any, have come true,

Can anyone say that in 5 years, the climate is going to be warmer?

Answer 12

Well, we're having the coldest winter on record in Ohio, and it was made up by someone who I don't like, so nothing can convince me.

Answer 13

I'm convinced and I'm glad.

More seasonal weather for growing crops to feed people.

YAY lets hear it for Global warming! YAY!!!

Answer 14

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/0...    The Cold Truth about Global Warming  by Joseph Romm

This shows how the IPCC has actually been understating the severity as well as the near certainty of AGW.   Yet we keep hearing skeptics claim that the IPCC is alarmist.  They have actually been overly conservative so as not to seem alarmist.    

Their conlusions are not arrived at easily.   They have over compensated for possible solar activity for example.  That's another one of those non issues that skeptics keep repeating.  

How often have you heard them ask, "why should we believe about global warming when in the earlly 70s the theory of the alarmists was that the planet was cooling?"

  Well that was maybe 2 scientists, who three years later, recanted and said they had under calculated the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere.

A little different than 14,000 scientists studying global warming to up to 30 years, going over and over all the possible evidence to the contrary, and still concluding that it's over 95% probable that man is causing warming.

  And you know how the skeptics are always complaining that the "real" scientific data is being ignored?    Here is how science really works.

http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v06/n08/...

"honest skeptics persist at trying to convince their colleagues of alternative conclusions, and they do it by submitting their manuscripts for publication. If they do not get published, then it is because their data, their arguments, their assumptions, and their conclusions did not stand up to careful scrutiny, not because reviewers were predisposed to a different opinion. Oh sure, some reviewers can be opinionated and have their own political ax to grind, but with persistence, you can find enough fair academics to get any legitimate conclusion published. My years as a journal editor, as a reviewer, and as an author of scientific articles validates my position that most academics will give a valid minority position a fair evaluation."

And here's the kind of propaganda real scientists are up against.  The Wall St. Journal published

"Science has spoken: global warming is a myth" by A. B. and Z. W. Robinson.

"Global warming, as a scientific issue, remains unresolved, and because of its complexity much conflicting and marginal data exists. But the conclusions reached by Robinson et al., upon which The Wall Street Journal news item was based, in my opinion and that of my class, cannot stand the scrutiny of objective peer-review. Our judgement notwithstanding, The Wall Street Journal presented an unpublished manuscript as actual science to a gullible business world. Giving support and credence to an unpublished manuscript certainly reflects poorly on The Wall Street Journal and its standards of reporting and objectivity. We know The Wall Street Journal’s science reporting cannot be trusted if they don't know the difference between opinion and science, or worse, if they do know the difference, then they're just dishonest."

http://www.reall.org/newsletter/v06/n08/...

"They (the authors of the supposed scientific paper) sought to influence public opinion via the news media rather than trying to persuade scientists of the validity of their arguments and conclusions."

Real science doesn't work like that.

Answer 15

That the ice is disappearing at both pole's,  which it is, so Iam convinced

Answer 16

Some real evidence not given by a biased organization(Greenpeace, GE...), politician, or the UN.

Answer 17

Some solid evidence that isn't easily disputed.

Answer 18

i am already convinced.

Answer 19

you cant convince me...i know better

google it, it has to do with sun spot cycles..not CO2 emissions (graphs will even show..CO2 increases with heat..not the other way around)...secondly, this is a cycle that has been going on for all of Earth's existance, the world cools and heats (newspapers will prove that)...and also, right now...its not global warming thats happening...the earth is currently cooling..(look it up)