Which is easier to promote when it comes to fact or fiction about GW?

Question

Can speculation be a indicator of fact? Nothing has happen yet, and we see cooling not warming. Those that yell the loudest, do nothing but tell use what to do. What should these people do, to make a real difference.

Answer 1

If your a believer in AGW  fiction becomes fact.

Answer 2

The ironic thing is we have the facts.  It's the denialists who peddle in speculation and opinion.  Ask some Inuit if nothing has changed.  You presume a lot about other people you never met.  I've done plenty in 30 years.  What have you done?  I would say the number one thing to do right now is start considering the environmental problems we currently experience, and stop pretending they don't exist.  The first step is to admit we have a problem.

Answer 3

What do you mean nothing has happened yet?  I see all sorts of things happening.  Just look at California, or the Arctic.

Answer 4

Well the fact you call yourself Heretic means you prefer facts to fantasy, but in general fiction sells much better than factual reports. Fiction can be enhanced and focused to achieve the authors desired affect on the reader. With facts it takes a very good writer to present them in a way that will hold the readers interest. As to the Eskimo’s there own history documents two periods when the arctic ocean was virtually ice free and they lived on shore as farmers and herders as well fishing from their boats.

It is very well documented that the Inuit of Greenland and surrounding islands were farmers and herders during the early period of Danish settlement of the land there including several wars between them in the late 13th century when it started getting colder and the Inuit wanted the Danish farms closer to the sea for their own. But eventually by the mid 15th century the Dane’s had to evacuate back to Iceland because the climate became to cold for them to farm there any more. In fact the last of the Danish settlers starved to death because they could no longer raise enough crops to feed themselves with are were culturally unable to shift to hunter gatherer mode like the Inuit did to survive.

So the Inuit were able to change cultural modes to adapt to the climate change because they were faced with this every few generations and their cultural history prepared them for it and how to alter their life style accordingly. The Danes on the other hand had lost most of their older culture and were not able to adapt and so starved to death.

Answer 5

They should get real proof. And since the world goes through cycles, it is possible that we are in a warming period, although there has been no real proof nor can it be said that we are responsible as a species. Perhaps the sun is going through a flareing period which will change the climate. There is little we can do about it. It is always easier to promote doomsday ideas, more people will listen to that than to scientists who usually stay in the lab working.

Answer 6

Send Al Gore to the space station on a one way ticket.

Answer 7

Well, speculation is not enough of an indicator for us to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on something.  If something bears watching, it will be.  But until there is conclusive evidence of an event -global warming specifically- we shouldn't waste our money on it.

Answer 8

you see cooling, do you? the plant hardiness zones for the US were just changed  two years ago, based on the fact that the minimum temp for the past 15 years in  just about every area of the US and Canada has been 5-10 degrees higher  than it had been on the 1990 map, which was based on the fact that the minimum temps previous were higher than the original map in 1965. here,click play and watch the temperatures move north on the map. http://www.arborday.org/media/mapchanges... and that's just one piece of evidence.