Why are we forced to pay a carbon surcharge and carbon taxes when there is no evidence of global warming?

Question

And before all you greenos freak-out on me for saying global warming doesn't exist, look beyond ABC, NBC, The NY Times and CBS and listen to 1,900 scientists and the founder of the weather network who signed the petition - Everyone knows greenhouse gasses are 95% water vapor - with a mere 1.8% from human action. Just because a view is unpopular doesn't mean its wrong.

Answer 1

There's massive evidence of global warming.  Here are MANY facts for you (particularly the link about water vapor), if you're truly interested in the truth.  The introductory quote is just to provide context:

"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

Here are two summaries of the mountain of peer reviewed data that convinced Admiral Truly and the vast majority of the scientific community, short and long.

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

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report....

summarized at:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report...

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://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...

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

EVERY major scientific organization has issued an official statement that this is real, and mostly caused by us.  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.

WATER VAPOR FACTS - Water vapor CANNOT cause global warming.  Excess water vapor simply falls out as precipitation.  Excess CO2 stays there a very long time.  Details here:

http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...

Good websites for more info:

http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/f101.a...

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/sci...

http://www.realclimate.org

"climate science from climate scientists"

http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...

Answer 2

i would answer....... wrong question my friend. we should not be actually asking if it's true or not we should be at a point where we are debating about SOLUTIONS to the environmental problems.  you don't have to research or watch t.v or listen to the news. YOU JUST HAVE TO OBSERVE. common. look around and see how we(humans) have already caused so much impact on the planet. and whether POWER PLANTS cause GW or NOT how about the pollution it create and distribute? isn't unfair for the future generations to live in a polluted world??!

CARBON TAXES are not only to fight GW it's by the fact that we should be using CLEAN RENWABLE ENERGY, where OIL doesn't anymore longer control the prices of the commodities where in we are living in a clean and healthy environment... think of the other considerations in CARBON TAX. so, what now?! huh!

hehe. peace out.

Answer 3

Liberal whacked out Democrat in Wash D.C. think it is a good way as any to get more tax money out of us

Answer 4

Why do you think we're "greenos" if we think there's plenty of evidence of global warming? I drive an SUV, I own a mine, I never voted for Al Gore, but the evidence for global warming is overwhelming.  It ranges from land-based temperature measurements, to satellite-based measurements, to changes in the onset of the seasons, regional drought, the increase in atmospheric CO2, the acidification of the ocean, glacial retreat, and on and on.

I don't know what petition you're talking about, but you're going to have to do better than "the founder of the weather network" to convince me.  The guy you're talking about is John Coleman--he does not have a degree in climate science and only has a minor in meteorology.  He's so astute that he managed to lose money on The Weather Channel.  He's a TV weather guy, NOT a scientist.  Also, when you say "greenhouse gasses are 95% water vapor - with a mere 1.8% from human action" do you really know what that means? How do you know that 1.8% isn't enough to s***w up the climate?  Are you trained in climate science at all?  Maybe the question should really be "Should I be held liable for all the greenhouse gases I've been responsible for before there was a tax?"

Answer 5

It's simply a Pigouvian tax:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pigovian_ta...

Answer 6

"I drive an SUV, I own a mine, I never voted for Al Gore, but the evidence for global warming is overwhelming."

Sorry Pegminer, but you're part of the scam and part of the hypocrisy.  How can you preach to us when you pollute more than I do and propably more than a lot of "deniers" do?  So if I say I believe in it and then decide to pollute as much as you do, I'm suddenly a good person and not an evil denier?  Even if this scam were true, I'm pretty sure "the earth" would prefer "deniers" who pollute less over  advocates who pollute more than the average person.  That's the biggest problem with this scam--they want everyone else to make the sacrifices while they reap the benefits.

Answer 7

Unfortunately in this case, it does mean you're wrong. I'll stack up your 1,900 scientists next to my hundreds of thousands of scientists anyday.

Answer 8

YOU MUST EB SILENCED! Do not question the authorita of the IPCC. All who do must perish. You can't handle the truth......

Which is they could care less about temps, they just want your money. This is the perfect excuse to pilfer more of your hard earned cash. But do not worry, Al Gore knows just how to spend it. Buy more carbon credits from his company.

Answer 9

We are forced to pay a carbon surcharge and carbon taxes with the idea that raising the price will encourage industries and individuals to consume less. A 10% flat carbon tax might reduce the demand for carbon about 5% or less, according to an analysis by the Carbon Tax Center, an environmental advocacy group. There is plenty of evidence that global warming is happening. Indeed greenhouse gasses are 95% water vapor but the other percent left is really harmful, that 5% contributes to the decay of the atmosphere because as you might know CO2 stays up there forever, and the other gases such as methane and nitrous oxide damage the atmosphere at a faster speed, but don't stay up there forever. There is enough evidence to conclude that the reduction of our footprint  can contribute to the reducing of global warming which is why we are paying carbon taxes.

Answer 10

After 9/11, the government took less than a month to act and declared the War against terrorism....

because the American people and mankind were threatened, right? as we can see.... they ARE able to act quickly......

If GW was a true threat and if the government cared (because I wanna think that IS why we have them: to protect us), then why did they wait 20 years to start doing something "protect us"?

(Hansen's first statement about GW was Jun/23/1988)

Answer 11

So, we're not supposed to listen to the TV networks, because they're not reliable. Instead, we're supposed to listen to the founder of a TV network, because he IS reliable?

And were still waiting for a link to your list of "1900 scientists". Lists that have been published previously by deniers have turned out to be highly bogus; like this one:

http://www.desmogblog.com/400-prominent-...

... and this one:

http://www.desmogblog.com/500-scientists...

"Everyone knows" that greenhouse gasses are 95% water vapor? Leaving 5% for everything else? Everyone who knows that is badly misinformed. The actual contribution of long-lived gasses to the greenhouse effect is 40%, not 5%. I guess error of eight times is just par for the course for "everyone" who "knows".

http://atoc.colorado.edu/~dcn/ATOC7500/m...

We do agree, however, that just because a view is unpopular, that doesn't make it wrong. But in this case, that view is both unpopular AND wrong.

And one final note: you haven't been forced to pay one red cent for anything having to do with global warming. Yet. But if we don't do anything, we're all going to be paying hundreds of billions of dollars.

http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarmin...

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/rp/Climat...

http://yosemite.epa.gov/OAR%5Cglobalwarm...

Answer 12

Why are CFCs still banned even though 21 years after the ban, the ozone hole is worse than it was when the ban took effect?

Answer: because it's not really about the planet, never was, never will be.   It's about forcing people to limit their "consumerist" lifestyles.

Answer 13

Greeno.  I think I like that.

There is evidence, and plenty of it.  In fact, the body of evidence is so great that many world leaders who had previously been skeptical have now embraced the theory of global climate change.

I have looked well beyond ABC et al.  I have looked at universities across this great land.  I have discovered consortiums, foundations, international efforts, and Ben & Jerry's "l**k Global Warming" campaign.

You are in the ballpark when you talk about greenhouse gases.  Understanding the dynamics of atmosphere, and the behavior of the various greenhouse gases in various levels of the atmosphere, is key to understanding global warming/climate change.

The powers-that-be have done consumers a great disservice over the years by failing to  properly charge for the product, whatever it is.  The escalated "carbon footprint," the acceleration of natural cycles beyond the ability of nature to absorb them, is a process that's complex but is worth getting to know so you can follow the dialogue that is and will be taking place in the decades to come.

If we must pay surcharges and taxes to help future generations cope with the situation, then so be it.  I want to know about what's going on, so that when monies are assessed, be they taxes or a direct cost of doing business, I know what that means.

Unpopular views and popular views alike are all welcome at this stage of the game.  Only by getting and keeping a dialogue going can we expect to find the tenacity it will take as a community, as a nation, as a world, to combat the effects of global climate change.

Answer 14

Because the lefties want it, and they're too immature to learn about science.  They're masochistic so anytime chaos and worry are missing from their lives they have to create some.  Until then you're stuck paying useless carbon taxes that aren't even used to fight carbon.  But it makes the alarmists feel better.

Answer 15

Yea but you have to look at this evidence...

Our average climate temp has increase a lot since 2000, more natural disasters are occuring, the polar ice caps are melting. Why would this just randomly happen? I actually would like to hear of the 2000 scientists your talking about and their opinion. really could you honestly email me a link? ha

Answer 16

Because so-called "global warming" is not about carbon, but only about raising taxes.

Ice could be flowing down Pennsylvania Avenue, and d'rats would still be trying to raise taxes to fight "global warming".

Answer 17

What country do you live in?   There are no carbon taxes in the US, and only in BC in Canada.

Answer 18

because Liberals are far-left, and are one step down froma dictator.