Question:
Global Warming doesn't exist. Anyone agree with me?
2006-07-14 17:47:22 UTC
Okay, so I feel like I'm the only person in the world who doesn't believe in Global Warming. Personally, I think people who believe in that **** are extremely gullible.
35 answers:
Engineer
2006-07-14 20:21:19 UTC
Dear Froggz,



Unfortunately you are not alone. I have to say that since I started following Yahoo Answers I have been flabbergasted at how many people hold opinions similar to yours.



I would like you to indulge me in a thought experiment. I will suppose for the sake of argument that you are correct and that global warming does not exist. Let us further assume that most of the world fell for it and decided to try to prevent it by taking a number of actions, which I will list below:



1) Increase auto mileage to an average of 300 mpg by mandating plug-in hybrids.



2) Convert all transportation over to bio-fuels like ethanol and bio-diesel. By pass the peak oil problem.



3) Create a new farm and refinery industry to make ethanol.



4) Stop paying money to the Middle East for oil. Disrupt terrorist financing.



5) Eliminate pollution emissions from power generation either by capturing the emissions or by replacing power plants with solar and wind power.



6) Create a new solar power industry that is now the worlds largest new industry and employer.



7) Make all new homes so that they do not require central heating (heat from the sun) and so that they generate all of their own energy. Utility bills $0/year. Reduces the demand for energy and reduces electricity costs for industry.



Suppose all of these efforts turn out to be unnecessary. Which of them do you find so objectionable and without other merit? To me these steps promise



Prosperity - lots of new jobs in a new energy industry.

Clean air and water - less disease and premature death.

Reduce energy demand and therefore cost - frees income to spend in other ways

And just possibly also reduce the impact of global warming



If I am wrong and there is no global warming then we would just have to settle for prosperity, a clean environment, and some extra pocket change that we used to spend on energy.



Suppose on the other hand we decide not to try to prevent global warming. What if it is real? What then?



Is that a risk you really think we should take?
tom_2727
2006-07-14 19:23:59 UTC
Well, I have to admit that I'm skeptical too. As far as I'm concerned, these scientists have to prove 3 things to me before I would actually accept that we need to spend big bucks trying to limit greenhouse gas emissions.



1) Is there "global warming"?



Well, there seems to be a lot of evidence for this. Ice core trends, shrinking glaciers, rising air/ocean temperatures. But how extensive is the warming, and what will it be in the future? There's models that predict this, but they don't agree, and they're being updated all the time to reflect new data.



2) Is "global warming" caused by the increase in human related greenhouse gas emissions?



Well we know that humans have increased the emission of greenhouse gasses since the world industrialized. And we know that there are some models that say that adding greenhouse gasses would cause global temperatures to rise. But then again there is no model that can possibly come close to simulating all the variables that could potentially affect global temperature. Might be it's just a coincidence. Might be, if the data showed the earth was cooling, that scientists would invent models explaining how humans are causing it. And they'd demand greatly increased funding for further research.



3) How much would the world need to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions to prevent some horrific "Day After Tomorrow" type catastrophy?



I really don't think that even Al Gore claims to have an answer to this question. This is the reality. If we did implement draconian controls to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we don't KNOW if that would actually do enough to have any measurable effect on global warming. Kyoto was talking about reducing emissions back to 1990(?) levels. Well, that's a lot more than we were producing in the year 990 and before. Would it even slow down the rate of warming? The reality is that no politician is going to take steps that would DEFINITELY ruin his nation's economy in order to POTENTIALLY reduce the effects of global warming.



So there you go. The quandary of "Global Warming" in a nutshell.







In reply to the guy below me:



Look just because I think global warming is over-hyped doesn't mean I don't care about the environment. I just think we should be concentrating our efforts on solving REAL environmental problems that are here today instead of wasting effort figuring out how to pump CO2 into the ground, or trying to make a quick buck scamming the carbon credit market.



Renewable energy? Great.

Biofuels? Those make good sense.

Higher mileage standards? Sure.

Reduce dependence on foreign oil? Absolutely.

Better building code standards to increase energy efficiency? Great.

Tighter emissions standards for lead, arsenic, mercury? Yes.

Gasoline tax? I would love to see this.



None of those good ideas require a global warming boogeyman to convince people of their benefits.
2006-07-14 18:00:18 UTC
I tend to agree with you...though it depends how one defines global warming. The planet has indeed warmed by one degree Celsius since the mid 1800s. Unlike the alarmists, however, my belief is that this is a natural cycle....or if humans are contributing at all, it is a rather insignificant portion of it.



For the person who said the polar ice caps are melting...they were smaller in the 1930s than they are today. No, Al Gore isn't going to tell you that little bit of inconvenient truth. Also, for 90% of the history of life on Earth, the planet didn't have any ice caps AT ALL. In fact, that we have ice caps now is UNUSUAL in the grand scheme of things. Silly alarmist humans look at a snapshot of what the planet is like right now and think this is the only possible safe condition for the planet. What utter rubbish. If anything is NORMAL, it is a warmer planet...not one that is cycling in and out of ice ages as we have been for the last two million years. BTW, look at the fossil record...the planet is a happier place for all the cute little plants and animals when it is warmer. How can anyone possible think that ice age cycles are GOOD for life????? That's not what the fossil record shows.
dr_nicuk
2006-07-15 06:35:23 UTC
I agree and disagree with several comments to this question, and then got bored of reading the rest.



Firstly, I would like to point out that global warming and holes in the ozone layer are completely unrelated.



Secondly, yes, we are in fact in cycles with wamer periods and cooler periods (ice ages), we just happen to be on a warming limb. So clearly global warming is occuring as a natural process.



The key arguement is weather mankind is accelerating the effects of this warming process due to the burning of fossil fuels and other carbon-containing products.



However, at the end of the Victorian era, scientists believed global warming was occurring, yet at that point in time global cooling was occurring and a mini ice-age took place (the RIver Thames froze).



So there is alot up for debate, but the earth is certainly warming, but is it at an unnaturally increasing rate?
vane2812
2006-07-14 18:27:51 UTC
I am so sorry but the global warming is here and affects everyone in the planet .If you see the movie Ice Age 2 that's what gone happen with the world . The humans are species and like the dinosaurs we are go to get extinguish like they do and many others species do. Read more about these BIG PROBLEM and you would see the real problem.Who thinks like you are so ignorant. And we are the real problem with our activities the global warming it's gone to be more for 2100. Other changes including a rising sea level and changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation.these changes may increase the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events such as hurricanes, floods, droughts,heat waves tornados. And many other consequences.So if you don't know about that please shut up.
Rebekah
2006-07-14 17:51:23 UTC
Polar ice caps are melting, slowly but they are. Records show that the last 10 years have been the hottest since they first started keeping track of the heat. You choose what you want to believe. Personally I think it's 90 something degrees in an area that's usually 80, not global warming, more like heat wave, but it's warm nontheless!
Dwayne
2006-07-14 17:56:07 UTC
Global Warming exist there is just nothing we can do about it. We may try delaying it, but you can only push mother nature so much and she will take something else to keep a balance.



History has shown us that the Earth has been through thousands of the mini climate cycles. We have just been fortunate enough to have been born when the earth is in the middle of her cycle.



Non the less she will heat up then cool down regardless of how much jumping we do.
2006-07-14 19:22:59 UTC
Hallelujah! Sanity at last!



I love the environment as much as the next guy, but human caused global warming is bologna.

It is ridiculous how much money is being, well I guess not completely wasted, but think if the Kyoto money was going to Africa!





And consider this:



Temperatures have been on the since the ice age, historical accounts and tree ring patterns indicate medieval European winters were far harsher than modern winters. In other words, the Earth has been warming long before "Satan" introduced the SUV.



Eskimos rely on their snowmobiles just as much as we rely on automobiles.
Bill Hart Electric
2006-07-14 17:54:06 UTC
Up until now I believed in it. We live next to a creek and it use to freeze every year during winter and you couldn't break the ice with a hammer. It hasn't frozen since 2000 now. The reason why I don't believe n it was because the temperture was really warm last winter and really cold this summer. It was so cool this summer that we had to use a heater to get our pool to go above 70. Isn't global warming suppose to make it warmer....
axford
2016-12-06 16:55:03 UTC
it truly is actual. it truly is only the lower than knowledgeable human beings that believe that there remains any controversy even as it is composed of international Warming. From a medical perspective, international warming isn't any longer a arguable issue. There are some scientists which doubt that GW is human led to, in spite of the indisputable fact that the vast majority agree that international warming is led to by technique of starting to be CO2 degrees whch all started together because the business revolution.
cptbirdman
2006-07-14 18:20:14 UTC
I don't think Global warming (to be understood: the process of Human interaction with the environment causing a substantial and damaging effect on the Earth affected by the rise of earth's average temperature) is impossible. But I don't believe there is substantial evidence to support the claim. And I believe that the process was strung together by environmentalists to cause the average joe to get more involved in "protecting the environment".



While "Global Warming" has cause the creation of the pseudo-science (fake science) called climatology, (The study of the change in the earth's biosphere, which concentrates on reporting disputed results, influencing the public with opinionated logic, and by showing data that is convenient to their point) I do believe this movement has sparked more people to think about recycling and being more productive. As prices rise in crude Oil per barrel, the bogus phenomenon known publicly as "Global Warming" has helped people to produce cars that are more oil efficient, causing a smoother and more internationally competitive economy. This drive has also advanced the human race in alternative fuel sources.



Although these things are productive results, there are also damaging effects. As scientists more commonly conduct experiments with knowledge of what they should (want to) have as results, data becomes unreliable. And as the public falls into stride of believing everything mainstream science says on the spot, skepticism (the heart of human evolution), slowly begins to fail human civilization.



I think people need to think about things before they begin to believe them. This phenomenon started as an idea and since it was publicized in "Popular Science" everyone believes it.



If you do not believe me, check out data sets on these sites. But I must warn you to look at the data and not the reports, because the scientists who wrote one report listed as my sources tell the reader that all of the data supports Global Warming, while anyone with a brain can see the data contradicts Global Warming. The last one attempts to show that the last "hill" shows how much humans have added to the CO2 content of antarctic ice sheets but fail to recognize that several peaks at almost regularly-spaced intervals show these occurances. Might it take a 3 year old to realize that we might be at the peak of one of these intervals? And that the rise that tries to prove Global Warming starts WAAAAY before we are capable of starting the industrial revolution???



Put simply, there is no global average temperature deviation for the last two hundred years. Their is no connection between the change in CO2 emmissions and the rise and fall of average temperatures. There is no trend in sea level rise, globally.
2006-07-14 17:51:55 UTC
It's not a matter of "believing". It's not a friggin' religion. Some scientists found some stuff out and you can take it how you will. Personally, I'd like to err on the side of doing the earth some good just in case they're right.
2006-07-15 13:35:13 UTC
If you think global warming does not exist...you are living in a fantasy world. Maybe if you spent more time reseaching global warming rather than Gorillaz you would have some clue as to what is going on in the world.
2006-07-14 18:00:12 UTC
If you believe that the caps are melting then you believe in global warming. Do you want to debate global warming, or man's role in global warming? Let's start at the same place.
Atheist
2006-07-18 00:41:26 UTC
Read, for example, this:

http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx?id=17057&ch=biztech



This is not a matter of agreement or belief. Leading scientists know that humans are main contributors to global warming. Science is not about believe, I hope you are not one of religious people which chose to believe or not believe instead of know or not know. Read this link, you can easily find more. Son of a president and big business may be biased, but science is not.
-RKO-
2006-07-14 18:50:56 UTC
Duh...I don't agree with you.



The scientific community agrees that it's a reality. Many have even applauded Al Gore's movie as exceptionally accurate. But, I'm sure you're smarter than all those insipid scientists.



Consider this:



Perhaps not for a generation or two, but eventually when the polar ice caps melt, cities on both coasts of both major oceans will be flooded, devastated by horrendous hurricanes, and subjected to all kinds of other natural disasters. You might not live to see it, but your grandchildren or great-grandchildren or great-great-grandchildren might.



I'll bet you don't recycle, either, thinking that it's perfectly okay to have all your trash picked up and buried in a landfill. Well, again, you might not have to deal with it, but your descendants surely will, as landfills begin to leach toxic poisons into our waters and into our air. That cute little 2-year-old grandson you think is so adorable now? Imagine him in sixty years when he needs an oxygen mask just to be able to breathe, all because of our insensitivity to the environment back in 2006. But we were just too damned lazy to REcycle, REuse, and REturn aluminum cans, cardboard, newsprint, plastics, tin cans, styrofoam cups, paper, asphalt, cooking grease, steel, telephone books, and all kinds of other recyclable materials. Why inconvenience ourselves? Let those darling little grandchildren and their kids deal with the mess we left this world in; after all, we all thought Earth's resources were infinite. We all thought the planet could sustain itself REGARDLESS of how much damage we inflicted on it in the past one hundred fifty years. We all snickered at the idea that there might be a "hole' in the ozone layer (what was that, some kind of planetary air freshener?).



We all thought it was okay for oil companies to drill for oil in the Alaskan tundra, even if it destroyed the migration patterns of the caribou. Caribou weren't nearly as important as our having enough $3.00-a-gallon fuel for our $60,000 SUVs. So what if the extinction of the caribou also killed off thousands of native Eskimo tribes that depended on caribou for food, clothing and shelter. WE were the more IMPORTANT ones!



Yeah, global warming is just a passing fad, something that goes on for centuries in various cycles. Why would anyone believe that our industrial pollution, fuel emissions, and "disposable' society helped speed up the natural process?



Nature (or an intelligent designer, or an evolutionary process, or God) selected human beings as stewards of the Earth. In the past century-and-a-half, we have failed miserably at our job.



But, BY GOD, we sure enjoyed living in $300,000 homes that we overheated in the winter and over-cooled in the summer, driving $60,000 gas-guzzling SUVs, and tossing out things that probably still had years of good use left in them!



Yeah, global warming isn't real......it's all those stupid scientists who are of touch with reality! -RKO-
cdf-rom
2006-07-14 17:53:40 UTC
Certainly not in the sense that Al Gore believes. Please refer to my previous Best Answer on this topic (search through my old BA's to about three months ago, and you'll find it.) It's well worth reading, but it is rather long and I don't like having to type it over. I support my statement with references take from NASA, the Smithsonian Institute, and National Geographic magazine.
Poncho Rio
2006-07-14 18:08:29 UTC
I find it amazing to see how many people attack you over a simple question.

Liberals only have 2 methods of debate:

1. reverse psychology - trying to prove something by proving the opposite doesn't always happen.

2. name calling - trying to scare you away from asking questions



Global Warming does not exist except in text books, science fiction, and Discovery Channel.
2006-07-14 17:50:04 UTC
How can you not believe in global warming? It exists, ok? Pollution in the air can't just leave the environment alone. I mean, something has to happen.
2006-07-14 17:52:41 UTC
You are an idiot. The glaciers in the north pole are melting as we speak. The polar bears may become extinct. Learn before you make an opinion. Think before you speak.
Sleeping Troll
2006-07-14 18:00:44 UTC
Global warming is a fact, the question is how much do human activities have to do with it, I personally think not much.
2006-07-19 14:35:12 UTC
Global Warming does exist.



Go to www.UNDOIT.org and sign a petition in

favor of stopping Global Warming!!!
2006-07-15 22:16:59 UTC
amazing that there are still idiots like you walking around

tell all the dead people in Northern China ,and Africa ,or Mexico .and India .that Global warming is not real

this is easy to say from an Airconditioned apartment.



in North Africa,India,Mexico ,millions of people are effected by land loss and desertification





in recent times thousands of people have died because of exessive heat,usually old people.in India ,Mexico and France,

deforestation causing desertification,the desert conditions causing very cold nights and scorching hot days



in china, thousands of what used to be farmers are running for their lives from the dust storms that have burried their towns and turned their lands into dessert,the globe where they were got to hot for them .

and instead of producing food they are now needing it from some where else,and they will drastically effect the world food prices when they start buying water in the form of grains ,at any cost destabalising governments, in some countries ,could be the result

(are you seeing more Chinese around interested in agricultural lands ,we do here in Mexico)



this was man made global warming because of over grazing and fertilizers, and they are not the only ones

collectively this planet is drying up ,the Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year

and all of the desserts we know are a results of mans actions ,and they are increasing ,not getting less ,in the dinosaurs days ,there were no desserts.



so as far as the food production is concerned Global warming or some of its effects are serious,rising seas result in landloss



each degree rise in temperature means 10%crop loss



more landloss because of desertification every year,we have less areble land to produce food ,for an extra 70 million people ,



and there is less and less water (because of deforestation),to irrigate this production ,

and there are less and less farmers to do it..

who are overpumping deep carbon aquifiers

who are plowing more and more unstable lands because they have lost so many million hectares to desertification ,

because of bad farming practises ,such as using fertilizers and heavy machinary or over grazing



RISING SEAS

The northpole is melting ,and we will know it without ice in our life times.

this does not affect the sea level because it is ice that is already in the water.but the melting ice from Green land and the south pole ,are another matter.



Global warming is in theory reversable,but it will mean global co operation between all countries ,and taking into account human nature and the world politics ,it is unlikely that this will happen,



At least not untill we are all in the middle of planetary disastres and it becomes a battle for the survival of humanity every where.



SOLUTIONS

if you want to help the planet ,plant a tree every week ,if everyone on the planet did we we would be able to reverse the destructive processes



reduce carbon emisions,and they are already working on that by alternative forms of energy and regulations on carbon producing materials,aerosol cans,burning rubbish,industrial chimneys,powerplants etc.



the capture of carbon and the production of water and assist the aquiferous manta.



the world bank pays large subsidies for reforrestation to capture carbon and the best tree for this is the Pawlonia



Waterharvesting projects ,such as millions of small dams.to redirect over ground waterflows from the rains into the ground to supply subteranian water supplies.



the protection of existing forrests.



stop building more highways,urban planning to include vegetation stop building cities encourage people to return to the land to conduct their business from there which now has become possible thanks to the internet.



education to motivate people to auto sufficiency by building more home food gardens.



education on environmental awareness

education on family planning to curb over´populaion



Agricultural education and improvements to follow the principals or sustainability and soil management.



more environmental or land ,design to prevent bush fires,such as--fire breaks



,more dams.regulations and control for public behaviour



alternative effeciant public transport to discourage the use of the internal conbustion engine



recicling wastes,limit water use
2006-07-14 18:40:06 UTC
People who don't believe in global warming are in denial and stupidheads! Period!



Despite mounting scientific evidence, the prospect of global climate change is not a big concern for many Americans. the April 7th Gallup Poll indicated that while 62 percent worry about global warming, only 36 percent think it will be a big deal during their lifetimes. What explains this? Why do so many Americans remain sanguine?



The Gallup poll provides some insight. First, it notes that whether or not you are concerned about global warming depends upon your Party affiliation. The pollsters found that 77 percent of Democrats worried about global warming versus 45 percent of Republicans. In an increasingly polarized society, Democrats and Republicans see things quite differently. This is true on most issues: Iraq, where 72 percent of Republicans think the US "will win" versus 29 percent of Dems, and the economy, where 60 percent of Republicans think economic conditions are "good or excellent" versus 20 percent of Dems. The mood of GOP adherents is remarkably different from that of those who support the minority Party. Sixty percent of Republicans are satisfied with the direction of the country versus just nine percent of Democrats.



This polarization may not make sense, but it does follow a certain logic: If you trust George W. Bush, then you accept his view of things. The President doesn't think that global warming is a big deal. Therefore, his supporters-about one-third of the electorate if you believe the latest polls-go along with his perspective. "George is our shepherd, I shall not worry."



The fascinating question is why more of the rest of us, those who aren't Bush supporters, aren't agitated about Global Warming. It's easy to write off Republicans as mindless lemmings. But, why do so many otherwise rational Democrats and Independents disregard the dire warnings about global climate change? The answer seems to be that they can't deal with global warming in the abstract. And, so far, they don't believe it's impacting where they live.



The April 7th Gallup Poll contained some interesting data on this variation of NIMBY. It shows that among the top ten "specific environmental concerns," global warming ranks eighth; only 36 percent of Americans worry about global warming a great deal. However, 54 percent worry about "pollution of drinking water." In fact, what most Americans worry about are tangible environmental problems that show up in their neighborhoods: drinking water, contamination of soil by toxic waste, pollution of rivers, lakes, and reservoirs, fresh water for household needs, and air pollution. In other words, where Americans see tangible evidence of environmental problems, they respond. Problems like damage to the earth's ozone layer, extinction of animal species, acid rain, and global warming remain too abstract for most folks.



The Gallup results are similar to those reported by Time Magazine and ABC News on March 26th. However, the Time/ABC poll asked an interesting question that Gallup didn't ask: do you think global warming is affecting your weather? "Just over half of Americans (52%) say weather patterns in the county where they live have grown more unstable in the last three years and half (50%) feel that average temperatures have risen in their county." In other words, Americans are beginning to worry about the relationship between global climate change and the weather they experience.



What's maddening about these polls is that they don't show the relationship between where the respondents live-for example, if they live on the Gulf Coast-and their perceptions of global warming. Obviously, it makes sense for an American who lives in Berkeley, where the weather hasn't changed all that much in the last three years, to see global warming differently than does someone who lives in Central Florida or New Orleans. If you had a dramatic weather "event," in your backyard, then you would be expected to take global climate change more seriously than someone who hadn't experienced a hurricane, tornado, or prolonged drought.



So what difference does this make? It may not make a lot of difference on the Federal level as long as Republicans run the show. The most recent Gallup poll looking at "America's top problems" found that concern about the "environment/pollution" was down at the noise level, one percent, compared to Iraq, the economy, and corruption in government. Nonetheless, more and more Americans are concerned about the environment-if not global warming, in specific-and 62 percent feel that the Feds are doing "too little" to protect the environment.



What these polls do indicate is that the environment in general, and global warming in particular, are potent issues at the local level. They generate interest wherever American see pollution or radical weather change in their own backyard. Apparently, the rest of us can't be bothered, because we have too many other problems to worry about.
miketorse2
2006-07-14 17:51:44 UTC
It's not a f**king myth or anything. There is nothing to believe or disbelieve, it's proven scientific freaking fact. It's like saying you don't believe in gravity.
Philo
2006-07-14 17:51:26 UTC
You want company, read Michael Crighton's recent novel, State of Fear. Not only does he agree with you, he gives you dozens of graphs and websites for verification.
Aj
2006-07-14 17:59:11 UTC
wow. No global warming?



Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
2006-07-15 00:59:14 UTC
I agree with you, dear. But, then again, I have been dating the Easter Bunny for ten years. No, for real!
2006-07-14 17:57:47 UTC
do you even know what global warming is or how it happens?? oh yeah duh...i almost forgot ...there are alot of idiots on here ....naw ..lol...really its all made up and your the first one to figure it out ...lmao
Devon
2006-07-15 08:45:25 UTC
ok global warming IS a problem that is VERY real.
Am
2006-07-15 23:00:02 UTC
See my link, it will answer ALL of your Q in one blunt FU!

https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20060715103818AA0USh5



>|-p

:-(
ozzyfanjordan
2006-07-14 17:51:41 UTC
maybe you could go see AL Gores movie, and then see how you feel.
henry b
2006-07-14 19:09:41 UTC
you dummy, that other person is all worried about it, it must be true
Sumara
2006-07-14 19:02:18 UTC
You probably are the only one!!! :) -Ash
2006-07-14 17:50:21 UTC
I don't believe it.


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...