Global warming is one of my favorite political debates to just sit back and watch. The proponents for the theory say that the scientists who are skeptical are ignoring facts, dishonest, or bought and paid for by the evil corporations who are out to destroy the world ala Captain Planet villains. The skeptics claim that the scientists who adhere to the theory are ignoring facts, dishonest, or bought and paid for by idealist ex hippy elite politicos who want to freeze technological advancement and turn the planet into a giant, eco friendly commune.
The greatest thing about all these proponents and skeptics is how unerringly their opinion on this topic is separated along the exact same lines as partisan politics. When practically every democrat I talk to/hear from believes we're melting the icecaps and heading for day after tomorrow, and practically every republican I hear from is certain that the whole theory was cooked up as part of a global, Marxist conspiracy, I can't help but assume that most of the opinions formed by non climate scientists on this matter are simply an extension of their political identity, and in no way a product of honest logic.
I would even go so far as to say that most of the people siting articles that they've read weren't actually swayed by these essays. If you look deep down and self assess with any level of integrity, I'd be willing to bet that most of you had an opinion in mind and simply set out to find literature that supports a preconceived narrative. Sometimes, the only honest answer is, "I don't know enough about that to say one way or the other."
There is not a single Scientific Society, a single National Academy of Science, or a single major University that states that AGW is wrong. Almost all state that it represents a clear and present danger. That is a strong a consensus as you are going to get in science.
You can see the history of the investigation of the science of GHGs here;
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
That is the American Institute of Physics, a scientific society made up of scientific societies.
You can see current peer reviewed studies here;
AGW Observer
And the scientific society that has the most members involved in studying the affects of AGW, the American Geophyical Union states this concerning global warming;
AGU Position Statement: Human Impacts on Climate
AGU Position Statement
Human Impacts on Climate
Adopted by Council December 2003
Revised and Reaffirmed December 2007
The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system—including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons—are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 1956–2006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.
During recent millennia of relatively stable climate, civilization became established and populations have grown rapidly. In the next 50 years, even the lower limit of impending climate change—an additional global mean warming of 1°C above the last decade—is far beyond the range of climate variability experienced during the past thousand years and poses global problems in planning for and adapting to it. Warming greater than 2°C above 19th century levels is projected to be disruptive, reducing global agricultural productivity, causing widespread loss of biodiversity, and—if sustained over centuries—melting much of the Greenland ice sheet with ensuing rise in sea level of several meters. If this 2°C warming is to be avoided, then our net annual emissions of CO2 must be reduced by more than 50 percent within this century. With such projections, there are many sources of scientific uncertainty, but none are known that could make the impact of climate change inconsequential. Given the uncertainty in climate projections, there can be surprises that may cause more dramatic disruptions than anticipated from the most probable model projections.
With climate change, as with ozone depletion, the human footprint on Earth is apparent. The cause of disruptive climate change, unlike ozone depletion, is tied to energy use and runs through modern society. Solutions will necessarily involve all aspects of society. Mitigation strategies and adaptation responses will call for collaborations across science, technology, industry, and government. Members of the AGU, as part of the scientific community, collectively have special responsibilities: to pursue research needed to understand it; to educate the public on the causes, risks, and hazards; and to communicate clearly and objectively with those who can implement policies to shape future climate.
