Where do you sit on the climate change debate?

Where do you sit on the climate change debate?
Do you think that humans are the cause of global warming or do you think that we not the cause and it’s a natural process?
or maybe you just sit on the fence?

If you could explain why, that would be great!

Thank-you! 🙂

âś… Answers

? Best Answer

  • I just don’t see why so many people seem to ignore the more likely scenario. That it’s a combination of the two. We know that the Earth’s climate has varied throughout history, long before humans existed. So that could very well be part of it. But no one can deny that we’ve been pumping an insane amount of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere for over 1 years now that just has to be accelerating the warming. And even if what we’re doing is only a small part of the warming, why wouldn’t we still want to clean up our act? I don’t like breathing all this smog, who cares if it’s causing warming or not. We still need to quit it.
    – Chosen by Asker
  • I don’t think it matters. Climate change is not new to earth though. Humans will adapt.

  • yes your sit on the climate changes every day…………….

  • It has already been proven that humans are not the cause, it is a natural process. We are doing things to speed it up but not causing it.

    This is not the first time it has happened, it happened in the ice age too and it’s happening on other planets with no human life.

  • What global warming? The earth’s temperature has decreased during the last decade.

    http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/far/wg_I/…

    If you will look at the bottom chart on page 202 you will see that a rise in temperature occurred starting at around 1650. About half of the rise occurred within the first fifty years. There is nobody on either side of that fence can attribute that temperature change to anything mankind has done.

    If you will look at the chart immediately above the one indicated you will see that the earth’s temperature has been hotter and the earth’s temperature has been colder in the past. What were man’s actions which caused these temperature fluctuations?

    As one of many scientists put it: Quote by Martin Keeley, geology scientist: “Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science.”

    Indeed that sums up the majority of scientists thoughts. Why don’t you hear from scientists like these?

    Quote by Ross Gelbsan, former journalist: “Not only do journalists not have a responsibility to report what skeptical scientists have to say about global warming. They have a responsibility not to report what these scientists say.”

    Quote by Charles Alexander, Time Magazine science editor: “I would freely admit that on [global warming] we have crossed the boundary from news reporting to advocacy.”

    Quote by Jim Sibbison, environmental journalist, former public relations official for the Environmental Protection Agency: “We routinely wrote scare stories…Our press reports were more or less true…We were out to whip the public into a frenzy about the environment.”

    So the greenies even admit they hide the truth.

    Quote by Al Gore, former U.S. vice president, and large CO2 producer: “I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.”

    So the greenies admit that they lie. You may say ‘over-representation, but I say lie. Anything that is not the truth is a lie.

    So where do I sit with Climate Change. I sit with the side of TRUTH.

    Ha! Ha! CR has trotted out the old line about instrumental record. Yes if ‘instrumental record’ starts at 1998 I guess that might be true. But it doesn’t hold up when you go back in history. Here is an example of how James Hansen cooked the books.

    http://www.c3headlines.com/fabricating-f…

    When you do things like this you are nothing but a liar. AGW is based on falsehoods and deception.
    Let’s face it, James Hansen got caught with his pants down. Now all you greenies have to get together and try to resurrect his integrity. Good Luck!

  • Its been proven its not us

  • exactly were science sits its natural + man made and we are to late to stop it

  • the current rise in temperatures in the past 150 years is mostly due to greenhouse gases. I’ll go with the people who spend their lives studying this. If I have 9 out of 10 doctors telling me I need an operation, I’d go with the experts too.

    If you spent any amount of time learning first year university physics and chemistry, that would be obvious- CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and there is a lot more of it since the industrial revolution, burning coal then oil. Clearing large tracks of forests and intensive agriculture also contributed.

    Source(s):
    http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/

  • I sit with the science which. contrary to what Sagebrush would have you believe, is not settled by irrelevant quotes by politicians. Science is settled with evidence, which says that global warming is happening
    http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010…
    And we are causing it
    http://planetsave.com/2010/08/18/humans-…

    The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 25, 29, 27, 22, 1998, 26, 23, 24 and 2011.
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

    You claim that you have proof that James Hansen is a liar and what do you post? A video of a graph attached to a see-saw. The graph obviously has something that somebody does not want us to see, and it is not James Hansen who does not want us to see it. It is whoever attached the graph to a see-saw and videotaped it.

    If James Hansen were to lie for the government, you would think that his lie would have supported the Bush administration’s decision to back out of the Kyoto Accord. But instead, he stood up to the Bush administration, putting scientific integrity over his career.
    http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integri…

    Do you know what you and other denialists are trying to James Hansen and other climatologists who have a message that you don’t like? “Shoot the messenger,” a metaphoric phrase used to describe the act of lashing out at the blameless bearer of bad news.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_th…

    OM

    <Comparing what’s going on over both sides of the fence, I’d say the skeptics are much more calm and collected.>

    Yeah! Sagebrush calling James Hansen a liar is really calm and collected. If denialists were so calm and collected, why don’t they just wait for nothing to happen, rather than lash out at honest climatologist?

    I am not afraid of global warming because it is a solvable problem. Just use new energy sources. I have to admit that I do find people like Madd Maxx and Sagebrush frightening because they may one day come to power and throw everyone who disagrees with them in jail, or worse. And it is “warmers” who distiguish between weather and climate, based on consistent defintions of the terms. It is denialists who say that a heat wave is nothing and yet, when they see some snow, they say, “Oh! No! We are heading into an ice age! James Hansen and Al Gore are liars!”

  • Depends if you accept what real scientists say, or regurgitate anti-science nonsense peddled by crackpots and fossil fuel company tools and dupes.

  • I agree with the majority view of the scientists, roughly 31,0 of them, that global warming is natural and not man made.

    It’s a shame that the science deniers continue to religiously follow and obey the religion of environmentalism.

  • The climate is always changing, with or without people, and human beings have an effect that is next to nil on the earth.

  • I’m right on the fence. From here I observe both sides. There are a few oddballs on the skeptic side like the group of skeptics who don’t believe there is even a greenhouse effect

    But I’m much more fascinated by the other side of the fence, those who are sure we are doomed unless we take action; a) now, b) within a year, c) within a decade, d) before Obama gets booted or e) all of the above These guys are continuously nipping at my heels but of course it might be because I throw rocks and stones at them from time to time. They really don’t like that.

    The interesting part is they say the science is on their side and they are all objective and calm and cool. Comparing what’s going on over both sides of the fence, I’d say the skeptics are much more calm and collected. For example, believers seems to come out with a new psychology study trying to figure out what’s wrong with the brains of those who are not on their side not to mention the daily doomsaying about some part of nature collapsing or about to collapse unless we act: a) now, b) within a year, c) within a decade, d) before Obama gets booted or e) all of the above

    Anyways, it’s all fascinating stuff.

  • I’m a skeptic. Actually there is no doubt in my mind, man-made Global Warming is a HOAX.

    Man-made Global Warming advocates have no empirical science to back their claim. And their advocacy movement has been mired in scandal since its beginning. Here are some things you should know:

    1) The Earth has been both much warmer and much colder in the distant past, long before the industrial age. Climate is indeed changing, but it has always changed and probably always will. These are obviously natural cycles that man does not and cannot control.

    2) Global Warming alarmists have been caught in one lie after another. Huge scandals have been continuously revealed since the early 1980’s when the campaign began. Some of these are listed below:

    3) Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth” was full of bald faced lies. Like the Polar Bears were drowning, or the Ice Caps were melting, or the oceans were rising — all lies. In fact a court of England ruled the movie was so flawed that it could not be shown to school children without a disclaimer.

    4) The ClimateGate affair exposed the utter corruption of the Warmist community with their exposed emails speaking of how they intended to “hide the decline” and how to manipulate data and the peer-review process in their favor.

    5) Then there is the fact that the globe isn’t even warming anymore and the small amount of warming experienced from the 19’s to 21 timeframe was negligible and well within the envelope of normal.

    6) During this same period of marginal warming, scientists also noticed that other planets in our solar system were warming. What do these planets have in common ? — the Sun.

    7) Phil Jones, head of the Climatic Research Unit, the Guru and High Priest of Global Warming himself admitted there has been no statistically significant warming. If anyone on the planet would have been aware of statistically significant warming it would have been Phil Jones and he admitted there has been none. (Game Over)

    8) Warmist like Al Gore refuse to engage in any formal debate on the issue. That’s because on the few occasions Warmist have debated openly, they lose, and they lose big. Lord Monckton utterly destroys them time and time again.

    9) Al Gore and other Warmists have stated clearly that they want to make CO2 the object of a global tax. CO2 is the perfect object for their revenue purposes because you literally cannot live without making CO2, after all, we exhale it. And current science has shown clearly that there is no correlation between the planet’s mean temperature and the concentration of CO2 in the air. Demonizing CO2 is all about the tax dollars, and that’s all its about.

    See the scam for what it is and don’t believe any of it.

    Polar Bears are doing fine:
    http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/190805/2…

    Perfect example of Warmist propaganda using polar bears to try and glean sympathy for their global scam.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLt0myO8X…

    Phil Jones admits NO statistically significant warming
    http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/1…

    35 major errors in Al Gore’s movie
    http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt…

    Court rules Al Gore’s movie unfit without disclaimer (11 major errors reviewed)
    http://creation.com/al-gores-inconvenien…

    Graph showing CO2 does NOT drive Temperature
    http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/…

    Warming on Mars — and Jupiter, Pluto, Neptune
    http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?ne…

    Lord Monckton destroys Warmist in debate (Video)
    http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andre…

    For the full story on the man-made Global Warming scam watch these:

    The Great Global Warming Swindle
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov0WwtPcA…

    Global Warming Doomsday Called Off
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=…

    ———————–

    Source(s):
    ———————–

    No Unusual Sea Level Rise detected in the Maldives
    http://www.marklynas.org/2012/04/where-s…

    Antarctic ice shelves not melting at all, new field data show (June 2012)
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/06/25/…

    Arctic Sea Ice is Not Melting – Dark Purple is 1% sea ice
    http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=…

    Sea Levels are Not Rising Faster than Normal
    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/0…

    ———————–

  • Where do you sit on the climate change debate?
    As a scientist, I am a skeptic as all scientists should be

    Do you think that humans are the cause of global warming or do you think that we not the cause and it’s a natural process?
    I have not been convinced that humans have caused significant warming. We know the climate varies naturally and there isn’t much in the recent trend that varies from the previous years.

    or maybe you just sit on the fence?
    Sitting on a fence can cause splinters. I guess it is like standing in the middle of the road, also a dangerous place. I don’t think it is wise to sit on the fence unless you define skepticism as sitting on the fence.

    Source(s):
    geologist

  • Leave a Comment