I am wondering how some people believe that Climate Change/ Global Warming is fake. Also, how do people say that Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth is made up, if the graphs are correct?
And if the sceptics are right, how come most people are divided, if the evidence is there?
The graphs are not correct, the fact are made up or misrepresented and most of it was a well orchestrated pack of lies.
For example, the 4 polar bears that drowned because they lost their habitat, They really drowned because they were caught in a strom., There has been no drop in the polar bear population.
For example The sea level rise he predicted of 20 meters. We are currently seeing 2 mm per year. He was off by a factor of 100.
For example, all of the ice that he showed being lost in the Artic. He neglected to mentions that ice is always lost in the Artic during the summer and coems back in the winter and that the loss in overall sea ice in the artic has been balanced by the gain in sea ice in the Antartic.
The amount of temp increases that we have seen is 1 degree over the last 100 years, half of which is not attributable to man.
So what is the evidence that has us divided? The entire scare of global warming is the runaway global warming predicted by models. Nto actual data, but computer models.
Now while computer models are good at modeling well understood problems, the climate is far from well understood. Scientists have admitted that there understanding of the climate is not great. These models have also failed to make valid prediction and certainly did not predict the recent 10 years of no significant warming.
Is there global warming? Yes
Is it going to continue? Still debated.
Are human contributing? Yes
Is that contribution significant? Still debated.
Is the world going to flood and global warming create an apoclypse? Certainly not.
Nonfiction makes a good point though. People have picked sides and facts that support their viewpoint. It is hard to come to a common ground. For example I think limiting fossil fuel use would be a great thing to do, but I’m not to keen on the scare tactics that have been used and I am especially leary of the gov’t taxing us during a recession. You would think this is a middle ground, but I have been told that I am a “denier”. Luckily other “deniers” have not started insulting me for my viewpoints.
I’m more curious how anyone can possibly still believe that humans cause climate change when there’s never been any proof of such a claim.
As to Al Gore’s movie, he cut out parts of those graphs. His movie is almost completely a lie. He made up most of the stuff and his speculations are simply that… speculations.
Also he reversed the ice core samples information. Clearly global warming comes before increases in CO2. He told the situation backwards on purpose. He has an agenda.
If he really believed there will be flooding on the coasts, why would he buy so much coastal property.
Also, he plans to become a billionaire when cap and trade passes. Follow the money and you’ll find the hoax.
Read up on the subject. Don’t be fooled. It’s all about money and power.
Part of the issue is that many of those who recognise the problem have been proposing the wrong measures to fight global warming and thus putting off significant segments of the population.
Now it’d be nice if people would just look at the evidence and make their decision based on that, but that’s just not how most people decide what to believe, instead they base things on what they already believe.
The fact that some of the people (very few climate scientists, but most of the activist groups you’ll have heard of) who are saying we need to do something about global warming are only using it as a means to get other objectives that the rest of society doesn’t want probably have a lot to do with it (individualists and hierarchicalists tend to be the ones with their values the most threatened by what those who want something other than global warming solved want).
The forces of industry are strong and the Global Climate Coalition, comprised of some of the planet’s worst polluters like Exxon, worked hard to spin out bogus studies “refuting” global warming, none of which could stand up to peer review.
Pliant, corporate-owned media try to “balance” the two sides of the global warming debate, even though within the peer-reviewed science, there is absolute consensus that global warming is real.
Joe Public doesn’t understand the difference between peer-reviewed science and pseudo-science purchased at the behest of industry, and so many Americans continue believe that the evidence for global warming is inconclusive. They’re responding to a particularly dishonest form of public relations.
This is exactly the same tactic that Big Tobacco used to confuse the link between smoking and cancer, which was already well-established in the 1930s. Look how long, though, it took to get smoking banned from schools, hospitals, and the workplace.
Climate change and global warming isn’t the hoax. The graphs were correct many of the conclusions made looking at the graphs were wrong. Exaggerations about weather patterns being out of the norm and then topping that off by relating it to man made global warming, that’s the hoax. Developed nations are responsible and those countries that are not developed are suffering because developed nations are causing global warming, that’s the hoax.
Stating that people who don’t believe in AGW believe that climate change is a hoax is a feeble attempt to discredit them.
Yes, Antarctica is melting. It is also growing on the other side.
CO2 has no effect on climate whatsoever. Never has, never will.
Since they first began recording about 10 years ago, the Earth has actually cooled.
There was an Ice Age a few million years ago,and a “Little Ice Age” only recently- who says there can’t be the opposite?
The reason, as stated above, is MONEY. It’s the whole “the-world-is-going-to-end” complex where if someone even slightly suggests we might be in danger, everyone goes into panic mode, and in the process, deals out loads of cash for hybrid-this and Al-Gore-DVD-that. I’m not saying that throwing millions of gallons of CO2 into the air won’t be a bad thing, but it’s not going to affect our climate.
I’m not saying that it is a hoax, but you have to admit that there are reasons to be skeptical.
1. Al Gore constantly pushes this agenda, but he himself hasn’t done his apart at home. He has done the “Do as I say not as I do” routine. Isn’t it sad the George W. Bush’s house uses half the energy of Gore’s home? His electric bill every month is more than the average American has in one year.
2. Al Gore’s data was flipped on purpose. The causes and effects were switched around. It’d be like switching a kid’s grades and study time around in a graph. With this graph you could say that bad grades cause kids to study less. He also conveniently left out any data on the sun’s involvement.
3. The best argument. The government is heavily involved in it. Usually the government gets involved in helping the world, at such a high level, if they get something out of it. They usually don’t care about the results, unless it endangers their re-election.
4. The below normal temperatures that hit America the past few years. I do of course know that the temperatures over the past decade were still higher than normal, but the past couple years were not at all. Because of this, many people lack any faith in what people are saying.
Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if we humans were part of the problem. But I doubt we are the main reason. A major warming happened while the dinosaurs were here (actually began just before the largest dinosaurs). No humans were here to start it.
People should recycle, reuse, conserve, etc. if global warming is true or not. I don’t need Al Gore to tell me that.
Because when greenhouse gases went up over the 60s and 70s, Global Temperature went down. According to scientists that worked with the Manhattan Project, we could detonate one hundred nukes simultaneously and not change our climate. How could anyone possibly believe in Global Warming if that were true. Secondly, pollution is impossible to stop. Cars will always emit something unless they are fully electric, then they become electric waste and will have to be disposed of.
Now, why don’t you tell me why people DO care about global warming/ climate change. I’m listening.
Al Gore would tell you that he offsets all his carbon emissions and is therefore carbon neutral. As the advocate for global warming that he has set himself up to be, he should be setting a better example. I get the impression with Gore that it’s a case of ‘do as I say, not as I do’. As with any ex president or vice-president, there will be times when a private jet is the only practical option, largely for security reasons. Equally however, there must have been instances when he could have flown commercial, gone by train or car or probably even conducted his business via the internet. I don’t know if Gore has opted for solar panels and / or a wind turbine, if he hasn’t it would be interesting to know why not. Does anyone know if he has such things?
The answer is in your question.
When they realised that global warming predictions were wrong, they re-branded it as “climate change”.
Smart move because the Earth’s climate constantly changes so now they’re right whichever way it goes.
The Ice Core charts suggest that another ice age is imminent… every 120,000 years or so we hit a peak like the one we are now at, then there’s a sudden drop. To me that looks like nature preventing catastrophic global warming – Let’s just let Mother nature do her stuff, she’s far more experienced than any scientist on either side.
Even if humankind is facing a catastrophe, it’s nature’s way of starting over [a bit like forest fires], and we can not do anything about it.