| “There is absolutely no proof of that global warming is caused by man. These left-wing kooks think that man is so important that he is doing what only god can do.” |
There’s no much doubt that the earth is warming up in most places. Most glaciers and ice-caps are receding and will be gone by the end of this century.
The people who make the noise against global warming say there’s no proof it’s caused by man or energy usage. And in the strictest sense, they’re right: we don’t know.
But that’s twisting science: the pure scientist never knows until there’s a mountain of data with no unexplained variants. That will be about 100 years from now. By the time every scientist agrees, it will be way too late to do anything about global warming.
Weather and the atmospheric are unstable systems, so forecasting is an inexact science even with the biggest computers in the world. Even so, 100% of peer-reviewed scientific papers on global warming — the ones that count — conclude that man’s energy consumption is the driving force behind global warming.
Instead of bickering over obscure scientific trivia, figure this issue out for yourself a different way: what do the people on one side or the other have to gain from this argument? Do the people on the “man is responsible” side have anything to gain? If they’re right, they will have to change their lifestyle in unattractive ways.
Do the people on the “global warming is just a coincidence” side have anything to gain? Seems to me that the oil and automobile industries that fund that side of the debate have a lot of profits at stake.
Find out more…
-
WGBH: Nice interactive overview
-
WikiPedia: Long, but balanced article
-
eMagazine: This is the “man is responsible” side
-
The Disputed Chart: There’s junk science on both sides of the debate
