83% believe in Global warming

[newpolitics]

My question for this forum is the people that don't believe in global warming, why is that? I have always been curious as to why they don't believe it and just a list of reasons. It's extremely fascinating to me. Thanks a lot!

--TakePart

Myself and most sceptics I know are firm believers in global warming. We just don't "believe" that man has a part in it. And no AGW cultist has ever been able to provide a shred of empirical data to support it. But you allready knew that didn't you olfraud.

that people require evidence as if it was owed to them I have always found obnoxious, especially since we are dealing with a vastly complex natural system for which all the variables and the nature of their interactions are not entirely understood, therefore, providing 'proof' as concrete as they want it simply is not possible. Simply, you use the information you have, use common sense, and extrapolate. Further, the smart thing here would be to play it safe, that is, to assume that Global Warming is our responsibility and that we must change our ways to fix it. If we are wrong, no biggie relative to the consequences if we took no action. If we are right, we just saved our posterity from absolute misery. It would seem like a no brainer, but economic interests and short term thinking causes some to doubt its validity, and they ask and require absolute proof, as if it exists. it is the same kind of demand that I see of creationists, who expect that scientists simply produce absolute evidence. the truth is, much like in the case of global warming, the creationists have already made up their mind, and do not want to look at things fairly, so you are really dealing with ingrained beliefs. it is too bad there are many of them. our future generations are going to be the ones to suffer and simply ask "why" at how we could be so short-sighted.

 

[wirebender]

The planet has warmed .4c since 1980...So of course people are going to believe we live on a warming planet.

What's your margin of error in that .4C claim Matthew?

 

[skookerasbil]

A few questions

1# Do you believe the earth has warmed since 1980?
2# the sea ice has declined
3# co2 has increase since 2000
4# glaciers throughout the world have decline in mass, volume and size?

If you do then I see no reason not to agree with this poll.

Matthew..........all that stuff is essentially immaterial in the bigger picture.

Heres the analogy.............

People occassionally get notices in the mail of a local sex offender moving into the area two or three neighborhoods over. Causes a tweak of uneasiness, of course. But how many people are going to..........on their own dime......... go and surround their property with mines and machine gun towers. Maybe a mote. An arsenal of automatic weapons to ensure safety of the potential threat.

THATS the alarmist response to climate change and its not even an embellishment. Thankfully, most people ( and easily the majority) can think on the margin and realize that while they might feel safer from the sex offender by building a fortress, the threat is just not real enough to go to those lengths, plus, the cost is so prohibitive.

To the alarmists/far lefties though, cost is never a factor with anything having to do with problem solving. 71 trillion to go green? The alarmist/far lefty response, "Hey.....whatever it takes!!!"


Most people can think on the margin, which makes polls on who believes in climate change hyper-gay. THey dont matter for anything. If they did, America would be steamrolling towards green energy and running as fast as they could from fossil fuels...........but this is hardly happening. . If the American public were so concerned with climate change, we'd have just a bit more legislation in the past three years than 86ing the incandescent light bulb..........which by the way was enacted upon just to keep the alarmist crowd quiet. Bunch of fcukking suckers..................

 

[wirebender]

A few questions

1# Do you believe the earth has warmed since 1980?
2# the sea ice has declined
3# co2 has increase since 2000
4# glaciers throughout the world have decline in mass, volume and size?

If you do then I see no reason not to agree with this poll.

A few more important questions.

1. How long has the general warming trend been going on and does the period from 1980 to the present in any way represent an unprecedented increase?
   
2. How much has sea ice declined since the general warming trend began
   
3. Is there any hard, observed, repeatable evidence that CO2 even matters and is the present atmospheric CO2 concentration in any way unusual other than it being at historically low levels?
   
4. How much have glaciers declined since the general warming trend began?

 

[wirebender]

My question for this forum is the people that don't believe in global warming, why is that? I have always been curious as to why they don't believe it and just a list of reasons. It's extremely fascinating to me. Thanks a lot!

--TakePart

I doubt that anyone is arguing that the climate isn't changing since it is always changing. The dispute arises over whether man is the cause. I don't beleive because in order for man to cause the change as climate science claims, several physical laws must be broken in order to achieve their claimed results.

The fact is that there is not one shred of hard, observable, repeatable evidence that proves an unequivocal link between man and the changing climate.

 

[wirebender]

We know you are an unabashed liar, Walleyes.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

Scripture again. Which part of that do you beleve constiutes proof of anything rocks. I keep asking and you keep failing to answer. Admit it, you don't really understand much of what is there and your belief is a matter of faith as opposed to any actual knowledge.

 

[wirebender]

So we need to protect our environment

Conservationism and AGW alarmism are two entirely different things with two very different goals in mind. I am a hard core conservationist, but don't believe any of the tripe that AGW alarmists claim because none of their claims attributable to man are evident in the real, observable world. Nothing at all that is going on today in the climate is in any way unusual when one looks rationally at climate history.

 

[wirebender]

that people require evidence as if it was owed to them I have always found obnoxious, especially since we are dealing with a vastly complex natural system for which all the variables and the nature of their interactions are not entirely understood, therefore, providing 'proof' as concrete as they want it simply is not possible.

OK. Forget the proof. Can you provide some evidence that what is happening in the climate today is outside the boundries of natural variability? Surely, if you want the people to cough up trillions of dollars, you should be able to show that the present conditions are something entirely new and that man is surely the cause.

 

[editec]

Climate seems to be changing to me.

Whether this is just part of a natural random walk, or a serious trend moving upwards?

Don't know.

 

[Si modo]

There is NO "belief" in science.

What a moronic piece with a moronic title.






There IS "belief" in religion, though.

 

[westwall]

My question for this forum is the people that don't believe in global warming, why is that? I have always been curious as to why they don't believe it and just a list of reasons. It's extremely fascinating to me. Thanks a lot!

--TakePart

Myself and most sceptics I know are firm believers in global warming. We just don't "believe" that man has a part in it. And no AGW cultist has ever been able to provide a shred of empirical data to support it. But you allready knew that didn't you olfraud.

that people require evidence as if it was owed to them I have always found obnoxious, especially since we are dealing with a vastly complex natural system for which all the variables and the nature of their interactions are not entirely understood, therefore, providing 'proof' as concrete as they want it simply is not possible. Simply, you use the information you have, use common sense, and extrapolate. Further, the smart thing here would be to play it safe, that is, to assume that Global Warming is our responsibility and that we must change our ways to fix it. If we are wrong, no biggie relative to the consequences if we took no action. If we are right, we just saved our posterity from absolute misery. It would seem like a no brainer, but economic interests and short term thinking causes some to doubt its validity, and they ask and require absolute proof, as if it exists. it is the same kind of demand that I see of creationists, who expect that scientists simply produce absolute evidence. the truth is, much like in the case of global warming, the creationists have already made up their mind, and do not want to look at things fairly, so you are really dealing with ingrained beliefs. it is too bad there are many of them. our future generations are going to be the ones to suffer and simply ask "why" at how we could be so short-sighted.

Ahhhh no. There has been a claim made. Namely that man is responsible for the current
cycle of warming. The problem with that is the warmists only look at the last 30 years for their evidence. In point of fact the globe began warming from the Little Ice Age a little over 150 years ago. Long before man could have had an influence.

Furhtermore they claim that CO2 is the sole cause of the warming. Ice core data shows that CO2 can not be the cause of the warming. Period end of story. All scientific empirical data shows that their theory is false. Completely false.

They ignore that however, and furhtermore they corrupt data they do have to attempt to sway peoples belief in their failed theory so that they can get legislation passed that will enrich them and cost us trillions of dollars. Money that could be used to do real good for the planet. Money that could be used to do real research that would indeed get mankind off of fossil fuels, that could be used to get man off of this singular rock, that could protect this rock from a life ending asteroid or comet strike as appeared nearly happened in 1883.

So you see it is not merely the economic expense we are talking about, it is the fact that we will get NOTHING for the money they want us to spend. Nothing at all. That money could be used to fix a lot of ills in the world, but they don't care about that, they just want to become wealthy on your back. And you're too ignorant to figure it out.

 

[westwall]

There is NO "belief" in science.

What a moronic piece with a moronic title.






There IS "belief" in religion, though.

Amen Sister!

 

[Skull Pilot]

90 something percent believe in the man in the sky so what exactly is your point?