Why is global warming listed under environment catagory?

Question

Global warming belongs in the Social Science--> Religion catagory and not in the environment catagory.

With all the mass hysteria going on about global warming in the face of actual physical proof of any negative issues that will result from global warming and not just theoretical models presented by someone with a PhD, doesn't this seem more like a religion then a science? "The end of the world is coming so join us and be saved" type of thing?

What are your thoughts? I expect there to be some flaming here, but please stay civil. Thank you.

Answer 1

There is a scientific base, however I have always said.

Religion needs a consensuses, not science.

Answer 2

Yea, i agrreee. Maybe they got to fix it up a lil bit. :}

Answer 3

When someone sits in the left lane, oblivious, it's not oblivious.  It's called passive / aggressive.  You are not being civil, you are choosing to incite.  Please stop being oblivious about the worldwide environmental problems or get out of the left lane.

Why do anti-environmentalists post in the environment section?  Hmm?  Buhler? Anyone?

Answer 4

While religion is based on beliefs and faith, global warming is more of an applied science where there are certain controlled experiments we try and understand and iteratively measure changes in our climates and it's factors. I agree it is probably not a hard science in that we can constantly reproduce results in a controlled environment (hence the prediction models). If you were to categorize it properly I would place it some where in between economics and mathematics.

Answer 5

There has been plenty of physical proof of negative consequences of just a couple degrees further warming of the planet.  For example, see Myth #12 at the link below.

Answer 6

It should most certainly be in the religious section.

It is a religion (a cult really) with "believers" that call everyone else "deniers".  Also, there are profits who claim the ability to predict the future.

Answer 7

I read a couple of answers and I wonder how some alarmist can claim to have science on their side.  There were a couple of answers from some obvious ignorant (nothing disparaging meant beyond that) that think things such as the oceans have already risen dangerously.  I cannot express the contempt I have for these sorts of lies and distortions that well meaning but scientifically ignorant people take as gospel (pun intended), at least not without getting censured.  As a geologist, I know better than most that sea levels rise and fall naturally and that is the norm and it has been rising for thousands of years.  To take a natural rise in sea level and distort it for political reasons is despicable.

Note: I was not referring to Keith, his answer showed he has more knowledge so in my book his ignorance has less of an excuse.  I was referring to earlier answers.

Answer 8

You mean why isn't it listed in a category called hoax/urban myth

Answer 9

I would think it should be in the 'fairytale' section.

Answer 10

It definitely does not deserve it's own section.

Answer 11

It might also be listed in the Politics category, since it has nothing to do with valid science but lots to do with socialism, financial and political control.

Answer 12

Gravity is a mathematical model too. Same for quantum mechanics. That doesn't mean they don't exist.

Greenland is losing mass. Here's the physical proof:

http://jspc-www.colorado.edu/~isabella/p...

Antarctica is losing mass too. Here's the physical proof:

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

So where is that mass going? Into the oceans. Result: sea level is rising. Here's the physical proof:

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/author_archiv...

Will sea level rise have a negative impact? Yes, and it's measured in hundreds of billions of dollars for the US alone:

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

And I haven't yet gotten into the more severe impacts, like habitat loss, ecosystem collapse, and mass extinction. I won't mention that every single thing you eat was evolved under a different climate than the one we're heading toward. I will gloss over the dystopian future we face when world crop production drops by half, and fisheries by two-thirds.

The difference between science and religion is this: in science, you change your opinion when new data comes in. In religion, you don't give a hoot about the data and cling to your opinion no matter what. We've had 20 years of constant, increasing, and unassailable data that climate change is real, it's happening now, and we're responsible. The data is here, the only question is whether religious zealots like yourself will kill the planet before the scientists can save it.

Most of that data has been gathered by PhD's, whom you don't seem to trust. No, you prefer to trust the future of this planet to idiots like Rush Limbaugh, who flunked out of college. The most civil thing I can say is, if you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas.

Answer 13

Even "the end of the world" can be caused by global warming (an environmental issue).

Scientists are trying to obtain physical proof regarding global warming, for ex: comparing the temperatures in the past with those in the present and linking them with the increase in GHG (green house gases) or other factors.

In the end, everything in this world is linked together; just like you cannot separate physics from chemistry and biology.

In my opinion, I believe that the whole world is a group of chain reactions, one leading to the other... so to answer your question: yes, you can categorize global warming under religion if you want to look at it from this point of view, but scientifically (its causes, effects etc) are environmental in the sense that they concern the whole ecosystem: soil, water, air, flora, fauna etc.

I hope I delivered by point and answered your question.

Answer 14

Because it's proven science.

This is science and what counts is the data, not people's intuition.

"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.

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 15

Ever wonder why people who ask about thoughts often don't have any of their own?  Pretty much what I would expect of a welder.

Answer 16

Okay. Note to self: don't drink the water. lol. Global Warming is in the enironment catagory because it's effacting the environment. It's causing the ice caps to melt and the sea level to rise. Scientist expect to the water to rise three feet by the time Global Warming is finished. Although "Global Warming" isn't entirely "Our" (the people's) fault. It's a cycle that happens every so many billions of years. Like the ice age. That's going to happen one day again. Global Warming is going to speek up the time as to when it'll be here, but regardless, another ice age will be here. How does Global Warming effect the ice age? The Summer's will get hotter and the hurricans will get worse. We all know that, right? Well, the winters are also going to get colder and the snow storms will be more often, and the world will be cold for a while. That's why Global Warming is effecting the ice age. But that's not your question. I already told you the answer and I've explained it too you so maybe somebody will actually LISTEN *gasp* God forbid someone listen!