• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you believe in global warming?

Do you believe in global warming

  • Total voters
    85
Lord of Planar said:
If I recall right, we covered that before, and there was a year or two that had more papers reciting cooling than warming.
Click to expand...

My recollection is that was based on swapping "expecting cooling in the future" with "talks about past cooling."

And several "skeptics" stubbornly refused to even acknowledge there's a difference between those two.
 
I tend not to believe anything, but I do accept the evidence presented in support of global warming.

Believing in stuff is how genocide happens.
 
Threegoofs said:
Lucky for us, scientific truth is fixed, whether you believe it or not.

And given that the vast majority of experts know AGW is a fact and is a looming problem, your declaration of belief is just waving s giant flag of ignorance.
Click to expand...

'Scientific truth' is fixed alright, by scientists lusting after funding and willing to manipulate the facts, which they like to call 'raw data', until they coincide with the prevailing orthodoxy. What that 'vast majority of experts' knows is where the money comes from.
 
Yes, climate change or global warming is an actual thing.

Do I believe in all the reasons given for it or the solutions provided to combat it? No.
 
Sweden said:
'Scientific truth' is fixed alright, by scientists lusting after funding and willing to manipulate the facts, which they like to call 'raw data', until they coincide with the prevailing orthodoxy. What that 'vast majority of experts' knows is where the money comes from.
Click to expand...

Yes, all science is wrong because scientists get paid. I agree.
 
When I was a much younger man I loved to gamble and went on many
trips to Las Vegas. I don't any more,but while I was there I saw many
huge bets being made,of course none of those were by me.
But you are the biggest high roller I have ever encountered.
You are willing to wager the possible lives of your children and
grandchildren and perhaps the welfare of the planet on the word of a guy
who has a BS in Economics from Wharton,over the opinion of 191 countries
who have signed the Paris Agreements, and the opinion of the Union of Concerned
Scientists with over 200,000 members many of those with PHD's.I'am pretty
sure a discussion of this with it's far reaching implications and so much on the line...would not be
described as believing..... which is a concept of blind faith
How exactly did you become so convinced?
 
Sweden said:
'Scientific truth' is fixed alright, by scientists lusting after funding and willing to manipulate the facts, which they like to call 'raw data', until they coincide with the prevailing orthodoxy. What that 'vast majority of experts' knows is where the money comes from.
Click to expand...

It's a giant conspiracy!
 
Moderate Right said:
Are you planning on forcing China and all polluting nations to comply?
Click to expand...

They already seem to be acting on the issue. Only the US GOP pretends it's a myth.

Seems like we should be a leader, and take responsibility for our own actions. I thought you were all about that.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
I believe that not believing in global warming is akin to being a conspiracy theorist.

We have plenty of evidence that the earth is warming. The question is, how much of that is caused by man, and how much is just the natural long term climate change of the earth that can be tracked for millions of years? Probably a lot of the latter and some of the former.
Click to expand...

We have plenty of evidence it's caused by man too.

https://xkcd.com/1732/
 
Threegoofs said:
They already seem to be acting on the issue. Only the US GOP pretends it's a myth.

Seems like we should be a leader, and take responsibility for our own actions. I thought you were all about that.
Click to expand...

The devil is in the deatils.

Have you actually read their action plan?


.....

Yes, I know. You didn't. You let a journalist opr blogger tell you what to believe.
 
Nilly said:
We have plenty of evidence it's caused by man too.

https://xkcd.com/1732/
Click to expand...

Part of it is caused by us. Like the Captain said, the question is how much is natural, and how much is caused by man.

There are also other man-made causes besides greenhouse gas emissions.

Aerosols in general have both a cooling and warming effect, dependent on type, size, and altitude. Soot in particular is a nasty one. Since it is "coal black," it warms everywhere it is present. It is especially nasty on the northern ice. The change in albedo makes the radiant energy melt the ice far more than any greenhouse gas changes.

Land use changes have been thoroughly studied for changing vegetation types, but almost nonexistent for evapotranspiration when we replace the natural landscape with buildings, asphalt, and concrete.

I started a thread covering the idea:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/environment-and-climate-issues/269596-evapotranspiration.html
 
It comes down to a few issues

Do you accept that carbon dioxide acts as a greenhouse gas?

Has humanity through the burning of fossil fuels released into the environment billions of tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gasses over the last 200 or so year's?

The answer to both is yes, the question can be is how much of an effect it is going to be not that it will not have an effect
 
Deuce said:
Yes, all science is wrong because scientists get paid. I agree.
Click to expand...


No, some 'science' is being perverted. This is a tragedy and a crime. It is science and its sister, technology, that is Homo Sapience' glorious achievement.

We have reached a point where even to ask questions - like "Why have all the climate predictions over the last 25 years been wrong?" - can be career destroying.
 
Sweden said:
No, some 'science' is being perverted. This is a tragedy and a crime. It is science and its sister, technology, that is Homo Sapience' glorious achievement.

We have reached a point where even to ask questions - like "Why have all the climate predictions over the last 25 years been wrong?" - can be career destroying.
Click to expand...

Yes. Even one simple question reflecting stubborn and willful ignorance of well established science can be career ending for even the most well established scientists. Just ask Nobel prize winner James Watson, the legendary Nobel laureate who ended up having to sell off his Nobel prize and becoming a pariah of the scientific community after saying just one stupid thing.

Scientists are often humble as a group and shy away these days from calling the results of their latest theories and models "ultimate truth", no matter how many mountains of data they have for them. They are always open to new observations and data, better theories and models, and thoughtful new questions, etc... but don't let this openness and humility fool you. These are no license for any kind of foolishness. They do not suffer fools gladly who remain stubbornly, willfully, and dangerously ignorant of what we do already know, who have not diligently done their homework, and who keep questioning well established science as if they are some bold clever questioners of the status quo. The scientific world is a pretty unforgiving place that way.
 
Last edited:
Bucky said:
I for one do not believe in global warming as global warming is not a religion.
Based on my observation over the past 18 years, we have seen no significant warming. I want to look at objective numbers, not subjective opinions from politicians.
Click to expand...

I have an aquaintance who makes a (rather good) living buying hotels, improving them and selling them again, who accidentally provided some useful information.
You can check ski resorts world wide, and see if their average number of days with snow are increasing, decreasing, or staying about the same.
Most do statistics on this for business reasons, as it affects value and pricing. Doesn't say anything about what percentage is man-made, but I'm told there is a clear trend.
 
When I was a much younger man I loved to gamble and went on many
trips to Las Vegas. I don't any more,but while I was there I saw many
huge bets being made,of course none of those were by me.
But you are the biggest high roller I have ever encountered.
You are willing to wager the possible lives of your children and
grandchildren and perhaps the welfare of the planet on the word of a guy
who has a BS in Economics from Wharton,over the opinion of 191 countries
who have signed the Paris Agreements, and the opinion of the Union of Concerned
Scientists with over 200,000 members many of those with PHD's.I'am pretty
sure a discussion of this with it's far reaching implications and so much on the line...would not be
described as believing..... which is a concept of blind faith
How exactly did you become so convinced?
 
The question is not ''Do you believe in global warming?'' but ''Do you understand global warming?''.
If someone don't understand, that's him/her problem.
 
Right now it's -11 celsius outside here and it's going down to -16 tonight.

I think that global heating or cooling is possible.

I'd like to see it warm up some right now.But it looks like that's not coming until Spring starts.

:lol:
 
shrubnose said:
Right now it's -11 celsius outside here and it's going down to -16 tonight.

I think that global heating or cooling is possible.

I'd like to see it warm up some right now.But it looks like that's not coming until Spring starts.

:lol:
Click to expand...

About -7 C at my place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom