97% of climatologists believe the current acceleration of global warming is cause by humans
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/20...
More on consensus http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Dor...
SO humans have more than influenced GW.
The last ice age ended around 1670. The temperature of the planet always varies. CO2 warming has its limits : http://climateclash.com/the-limits-of-ca...
CO2 levels have constantly gone up since measurements have been taken in Hawaii (since 1958). From 1940 to 1980 the Earth was in a cooling period when CO2 levels were tripling. To say that CO2 emissions are causing the temperature of the planet to rise is a negligible concept. Since 1870 the average temperature of the planet has risen 0.75 Celsius. Catastrophic changes in the weather? Don't see it. Do you?
Influenced. That is a very good term. It is also vague enough to say yes. The answer to your quesiton is yes. Science supports the idea that humans have influenced global warming.
There is a great deal of debate about how much. Skeptics like myself might say it is more like peeing in hte ocean. Make a difference but is it meaningful? AGW propoants might say more like a hand grenade in a closet. It means everything!
Yes, science supports it. In fact, virtually every major scientific organization has made statements that say exactly that. Unfortunately there are people that intentionally spread wrong information (look at the answer from jim z). Here is a list of scientific organizations and links to the statements they have made:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...
Realistically, the argument is only about the AMOUNT of influence, not whether humans have or have not. No one disputes the effect of urban heat islands on climate. Jet contrails have been proven to influence climate. Among atmospheric scientists, there are none that dispute that carbon dioxide is a major greenhouse gas, and humans have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by about 40% over the past couple of centuries.
There is no evidence - period
There is zero evidence to link man's activities to climate. Some phd being 'sure' is not evidence and that seems to be the only argument being offered by believers. Solid facts do not rely on verbally attacking opponents, appeals to authority, arguments to ignorance etc etc
The so called evidence is nothing of the kind, it is in fact, quite simply political propaganda. Nothing more and nothing less.
The NAS, the U.S. science academy whose very purpose is to advise the nation on science has provided a pamphlet that summarizes the evidence. There is no knowledgeable person who can or does argue with the vast evidence that humans influence climate. You will have to narrow the question -- perhaps to the amount of warming or whether there is also a natural cause. But for a statement as broad as whether humans influence global warming, there is no example for your other side.
http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoi...
The idea came from science research, Where did you think it came from?
Science doesn't support it. Some scientists might look at the evidence and conclude it but there is very little compelling evidence. There are climate models that have been shown to be unreliable and little else.
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/001...
Yes. It is supposed by the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Does science support the idea that humans have influenced global warming? Provide specific examples that show how two knowledgeable individuals with differing opinions might argue.
