<p>Glabal Warming is a scam…how much money do you think Al Gore gets to fly his private jet to some conference for some wind turbines to show a power point. Spokespeople for ‘green’ companies pick the facts that sound bad and ignore the ones that sound good…for instance, that glaciers are melting, yes they are but they are also growing in others…a lot</p>
<p>People buy into scams because people are stupid. If global warming is a scam, and they have actually bought into it, then it is because people are stupid.</p>
<p>Yeah, I’ll take some right-wing extremists’ claims over the vast majority of reputable scientists’ opinions.</p>
<p>Eh, didn’t it go 1) scientists interpret findings and declare human involvement in climate change, followed by 2) politicians and businesses jump on a business opportunity and ride mass hysteria?</p>
<p>Because if politicians started all of this, it wouldn’t have had the substance to continue as a debate for this long. They would’ve had to hire scientists. And since not all scientists are unscrupulous, and since these principled scientists would very likely refute any false findings, I would conclude that global warming has scientific evidence backing it.</p>
<p>Of course, I could always conduct my own research on climate change. Work with whatever information the internet provides and draw my own conclusions, instead of citing other scientists / politicians.</p>
<p>Who cares? Seriously. Why are you so attached to your gas guzzling SUV? </p>
<p>Regardless if global warming is real or not, conserving resources is a good idea.</p>
<p>I couldn’t believe it when I saw this thread “re-born”, but I agree with pandem.</p>
<p>I hear that if you close your eyes, plug your ears, and repeat your political views to yourself, you can successfully change facts to whatever you want to believe.</p>
<p>Global warming is real, that is not debatable.</p>
<p>Anthropogenic Global Warming is debatable.</p>
<p>But I think the bigger overlying issue is we’re screwing up our planet. That is the truth, whether AGW is occurring or not.</p>
<p>I’m somewhat disturbed by the lack of any real response to the note that the climate hasn’t seen much change since the turn of the century. Given the lack of reliability in the ground-based sensors (the majority of which do not come even close to meeting the regulations put in place by the organization in charge of them), it’s hardly an unreasonable point to bring up, or a minor one to contest.</p>
<p>Scientists get paid ‘lots’ of money to get results on global warming. Needless to say, going green is one of the most cost effecient choices to make…I am looking forward to buying a land rover later in life though.</p>
<p>godfather you have it the other way around, the scientists that produce results ‘for’ global warming are funded by the green companies that make wind turbines and **** like that that will never solve our problems. </p>
<p>Here’s a nice fact, a Toyota Prius causes more ecological damage than a Land Rover Discovery because of the lengths that the company goes to make it. They have to go mine for nickle for the baterries and ship it all over the world for processing, then take it to Japan for building.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Show me. There is a difference between scientists working for companies (such as Toyota, Exxon, etc) and scientists running research at major universities. UC Berkeley was given a multi-million dollar grant by BP to study greenhouse emissions and it found, being led by Dr. Inez Fung, that there has been significant CO2 increases over the last decade directly correlated to human activity. See my explanation at the end of page 5 of this thread.</p>
<p>
Yeah, I heard that. Too bad, but the point is… so what? You keep bringing up these points, like the Prius and Al Gore’s jet, all of which are valid, but that really has no point in the discussion. Just because Al Gore is a hypocrite doesn’t mean that all the evidence supporting GW is wrong. Just because Toyota, a company based on profit just as all others, is putting cost benefits ahead of ecological impact, doesn’t change the science.</p>
<p>The problem is people aren’t (because they don’t want to or they don’t have a sufficient scientific background to understand it) looking at actual scientific article. People need to read articles in APJ, Nature, and other direct-research papers. Instead they are listening to their parents or whatever right-wing commentator who has absolutely no knowledge on the science but instead orates his/her own opinion, one not based on credible evidence.</p>
<p>Man-made global warming is nothing but a scare tactic employed by the left to control ignorant people.</p>
<p>^ agreed</p>
<p>[PRIUS</a> OUTDOES HUMMER IN ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE](<a href=“http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14304]PRIUS”>http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=14304)</p>
<p>^thats on the ‘green’ prius</p>
<p>I do not really care about hypocritical spokespeople. My point was that people will pay others huge quantities of cash to say what they want to hear. Like the scientists for Exxon, the scientists for GE will get the results their companies want and need. </p>
<p>And if you don’t trust articles by paid scientiest and you want good ‘unbiased’ researchers, here’s an article from MIT
[Is</a> Global Warming Part of Earth’s Natural Cycle: MIT Team Says “Yes” -A Galaxy Insight](<a href=“http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/06/is-global-warming-part-of-earths-natural-cycle-mit-team-says-yes.html]Is”>http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2009/06/is-global-warming-part-of-earths-natural-cycle-mit-team-says-yes.html)</p>
<p>I do not maintain that Global Warming isn’t caused by humans or that it is, we do not know what causes it; us, cars, the natural cycle of the earth, oceanic currents, the SUN? We do not even know if this so called Global Warming is having any effect AT ALL. I live in Texas and it’s ****ing hot now. We are experiencing the worst drought in 20-some odd years and many people say its attributed to Global Warming. People weren’t running around yapping about climate change then, they weren’t doing it during the dust bowl either…why should it be different today? </p>
<p>Global warming is another way for someone to make undeserved money, period.</p>
<p>I like to think I’m a scientifically-minded person, and I don’t think global warming is as large a problem as it is made out to be in the media. Sure, pollution is bad for the planet, and for the people living on it. You’d have to be a little out there to say pollution is good.</p>
<p>I would be interested to know how much of the predicted consequences of global warming were formulated using computational software models. I imagine that quite a bit of it is, in which case I my skepticism is increased.</p>
<p>Has anyone listened to George Carlin’s rant on the environment? It’s great and completely true. The earth has been around for millions of years. We aren’t destroying it.</p>
<p>Why do so many people believe the global warming is a scam?</p>
<p>Lazyness perhaps. If we deny the problem, we don’t have to do something about it.</p>
<p>the greenhouse effect is overhyped, true. The earth is NOT going undern tomorrow.</p>
<p>But saying it’s not a problem is bull****.</p>
<p>There are a million serious problems with the world. Why should global warming get more attention than them?</p>
<p>^ and who said it should? No one is advocating that global warming dominate other issues. Things become “newsworthy” when changes or new developments occur. its the same with global warming, genocide, cancer, etc. Your solution is “don’t talk about global warming because… there are other bad things too”?</p>
<p>^ Straw man.</p>