Come to think of it, I'd wager that global warming deniers could be easily convinced that 2 + 2 does, in fact, equal 5...
Most global warming deniers live in the South United States. Perhaps it is just a coincidence that the South is lagging far behind in terms of k-12 education and the fact that many southerners believe that humans lived in the same time as dinosaurs...
@Pindar, you are not citing scientific evidence. I can go outside right now and draw sweeping conclusions about the climate without making legitimate measurements. Would you agree that I would be wrong in doing so?
@A Product Of Evolution, I just noticed your comment to Cameron about your teachers. If I were you, I would transfer out of that school. These teachers are not helping your education, and this is why the US is so far behind the rest of the world.
@Ian, you just criticized someone for not accepting the fact of evolution and at the same time you cited a conspiracy theorist/not science site? That's hypocrisy if I've ever seen it.
@Jeff, if anything, that money going to government coffers is for ANTI-global warming research and funded by Exxon and other companies that benefit from the use of fossil fuels. Also, do you honestly think that your state represents the entire world? Winter weather will still exist, and it may become more extreme as the overall climate changes. Expect more violent storms and extremely hot summers, along with your normal winter weather. Scientists make these measurements and analyze them. Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I doubt that you are a scientist and have the knowledge to make conclusions about the planet's climate.
http://www.weather.com/news/weather-wint...
Your last comments indicate more understanding. Humans are a part of the environment. It is indeed indisputable that we have an effect. So does the beating of butterfly wings. Changing the temperature? Very small effect. Our perspective is limited, and the weight assigned to our role is exaggerated by the "experts" to fit their agenda.
Since 1750, the addition of GHG accounts for less than 4 watts per square meter. Human contribution to carbon dioxide is 14 percent since 1850 (see cdiac links). Humans are responsible for about 0.1 degree of 0.6 degree of total (natural and human) heating in the last two centuries. Not worth a headline, actually.
Hi there,
I am a final year student in the University of Huddersfield and am currently undergoing my final year dissertation. I am at the stage of doing some primary research and need as many responces as possible. If you could possibly take 2 minutes out of your time to fill out my questionnaire based on the green initiatives of hotels, that would be great.
Any answers you put are all confidential and I have no way of finding out who has answered what. Just copy and paste the link into your browser, found at the bottom of this message, or click the link.
Thank you if you manage to spare a couple of minutes, I really appreciate any responses.
Amy
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/11h19pDR...
Sadly I think by this statement alone
"Both my biology teacher and my RE teacher do not believe in evolution"
It would seem you have fools for teachers, someone with such a poor and biased understand of science should not be teaching a biology class. Perhaps you should point out that Evolution is no longer disputed even parts of the church now accept it. Science certainly does, about the only ones who don't are fundamentalist christians in the U.S., they even tried taking the matter to court and pitting their invented theory of intelligent design against it, they lost.
As for "Evidence that humans have NOT contributed to Global Warming" sadly they sound a lot like the anti evolution crowd, always looking for excuses but never able to produce anything that holds water. Denier have tried blaming volcanoes, clouds, cosmic rays and a host of other things as well also (of course) the large number of conspiracy theories that try to blame greens, governments, communists, or Gore and a host of individuals, they offer no real evidence and frankly even the sad scientific theories they put forward fail at the smallest examination.
As a guide I invite you too look back through old questions here you will see many of the lead deniers here flip flop from one theory to the next, they do this all the time, this is not the sign of someone who really believe what they are saying if they blame volcanoes one day, Al Gore the next and so on.
I don't like using blogs (that's more a denier thing) but this one keeps a list of the many theories deniers have put forward and it is quite long.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...
Now deniers could say this blog can't be trusted, but the theories are one these same deniers have tried to use here many many times over years, so that would be a little funny, they could claim it's only a blog, but given almost all denier evidence comes from just blogs that would be even funnier.
Science is observing, experimenting, making hypothesis's and observing evidence that confirms.
This is not happening with climate change.
Co2 is a very minor part of our atmosphere 0.039% and the hypothesis that it act as a greenhouse gas and warms our earth although likely is not proven, it could even cause cooling, we need strong empirical evidence that links Co2 with temperature rise (we have not yet got that evidence).
That humans cause heat is proven by heat island effects, but how much compared to natural forces is not known.
There is satellite evidence that the earths bio-mass is increasing (probably due to Co2) even taking deforestation into account, this could be causing a cooling.
Apart from all that, what is the evidence that more Co2 and some more warmth is bad, it could be beneficial.
I'm always very skeptical about any perceived environmental condition that can be alleviated by contributing more tax revenues to government coffers with no oversight on how it's spent.
The upper Midwest U.S. is still slogging through the longest, coldest, snowiest winter/spring in almost 20 years. In Wisconsin where I live this years average temp for March was a full 20 degrees below what it was last year. Last spring we were 10 degrees above normal and it was a sure sign of man made global warming. What I want to know is how man is causing this unusually COLD spring we are having now. As long as there are government plans to charge carbon taxes I will continue to believe global warming is nothing more than a HOAX!!!
I would state that man made CO2 emissions have gone up steadily for the past 16 years but the temperatures have not gone up with them.
In 1988 James Hansen predicted where global temperatures we would be at if we stopped increasing all green house gas emissions by the year 2000. We are BELOW those temperatures.
http://climateaudit.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/hansen-1988_annotated.png
1. You're confused as to what actually constitutes evidence and 2. it's logically much more difficult/impossible to prove a negative.
Give this a read, it's pretty clear cut and outlines the lack of evidence linking man to controlling the weather.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/sh1/the_s...
You'll find that there is actually zero evidence linking man to climate.
EDIT if you're getting 'facts' from skeptical science then you're way off target as it's a very biased political blog and you are missing the point. So what if there's been the odd warm year, some nice weather or some ice melting, it is not proof that somehow it's all caused by man's tiny addition of a trace gas to the atmosphere. You seem not to understand that if you start measuring temperature from the coldest point in 6000 years then you have to expect some warm years, do you not?
All of the world's temperature measuring organisations such as the UK met office are saying there's been no statistical warming for at least 17 years, and that's despite upwardly adjusting the figures. SO why has co2 gone up and temperatures haven't ? Anyone who dabbles in physics should have alarm bells ringing at that !
And as for the so called cure; please explain how paying more for everything and relocating industry to China is supposed to control the weather ?
Man made global warming is far from indisputable, in fact it's backed by zero evidence, what is indisputable is that you seem to have a rather bad case of green religion, which can be difficult to get better from.
Your teachers are either morons for suggesting this, or whatever administrative protocol they are working from was drawn up by morons.
I can see that you fully understand the ridiculousness of this question, as stated in your post. However, here's a suggestion on how you can respond.
Contact your headteacher directly. Better still, start a petition and involve pupils, parents and even teachers. Make sure your school stops teaching rubbish to future generations. This is harmful stuff indeed.
lets see, nasa has measured heat increases on other planets and moons. the axial tilt has changed a tad (normal fluctuation). the sea level has been rising for 10 to 12,000 years due to glaciers melting.
It's a school thing. We had to do evidence FOR and evidence AGAINST. But if there's proof for one side, how can there be for the other? The truth is that CO2 levels HAVE risen and we HAVE played a part in it: through overpopulation, deforestation etc., and anyone who doesn't see that is ignorant to the ways of science. You can't have an opinion on a fact.
I realise that the Greenhouse Effect occurs naturally, so I can give examples of how natural events can cause Global Warming, but I need 'evidence' that says that humans are not contributors, or at least only minimal contributors.
Since GW is a reality and already effecting the planet, the fact that your teacher would assume there is proof against GW is an oxymoron I mean "go figure"
SO just use the idiotic myths the deniers use as proof and consider it to be proof for your project
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...
'
Humans have contributed to global warming and on a large scale. That is a given outside of extreme religious thinking or anti-science blogs. You could try and bring up details with less certainties in them such as the feedback of water vapour and clouds but, as time has progressed, the feedbacks and effects have become more noticeable.
i was always of the understanding that, as you said, if there was definitive evidence for one side of an argument, you cannot argue that it is FALSE, only that there are other factors. Is your school asking you to write a report on how Darwin was the devil too?
There is no such evidence. There may be differences of opinion about how much humans have contributed, but there cannot be any doubt about the IF.
1. You're confused as to what actually constitutes evidence and 2. it's logically much more difficult/impossible to prove a negative.
Give this a read, it's pretty clear cut and outlines the lack of evidence linking man to controlling the weather.
http://jonova.s3.amazonaws.com/sh1/the_s...
You'll find that there is actually zero evidence linking man to climate.
EDIT if you're getting 'facts' from skeptical science then you're way off target as it's a very biased political blog and you are missing the point. So what if there's been the odd warm year, some nice weather or some ice melting, it is not proof that somehow it's all caused by man's tiny addition of a trace gas to the atmosphere. You seem not to understand that if you start measuring temperature from the coldest point in 6000 years then you have to expect some warm years, do you not?
All of the world's temperature measuring organisations such as the UK met office are saying there's been no statistical warming for at least 17 years, and that's despite upwardly adjusting the figures. SO why has co2 gone up and temperatures haven't ? Anyone who dabbles in physics should have alarm bells ringing at that !
And as for the so called cure; please explain how paying more for everything and relocating industry to China is supposed to control the weather ?
Man made global warming is far from indisputable, in fact it's backed by zero evidence, what is indisputable is that you seem to have a rather bad case of green religion, which can be difficult to get better from.
Your teachers are either morons for suggesting this, or whatever administrative protocol they are working from was drawn up by morons.
I can see that you fully understand the ridiculousness of this question, as stated in your post. However, here's a suggestion on how you can respond.
Contact your headteacher directly. Better still, start a petition and involve pupils, parents and even teachers. Make sure your school stops teaching rubbish to future generations. This is harmful stuff indeed.
lets see, nasa has measured heat increases on other planets and moons. the axial tilt has changed a tad (normal fluctuation). the sea level has been rising for 10 to 12,000 years due to glaciers melting.
It's a school thing. We had to do evidence FOR and evidence AGAINST. But if there's proof for one side, how can there be for the other? The truth is that CO2 levels HAVE risen and we HAVE played a part in it: through overpopulation, deforestation etc., and anyone who doesn't see that is ignorant to the ways of science. You can't have an opinion on a fact.
I realise that the Greenhouse Effect occurs naturally, so I can give examples of how natural events can cause Global Warming, but I need 'evidence' that says that humans are not contributors, or at least only minimal contributors.
Since GW is a reality and already effecting the planet, the fact that your teacher would assume there is proof against GW is an oxymoron I mean "go figure"
SO just use the idiotic myths the deniers use as proof and consider it to be proof for your project
http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument...
'
Humans have contributed to global warming and on a large scale. That is a given outside of extreme religious thinking or anti-science blogs. You could try and bring up details with less certainties in them such as the feedback of water vapour and clouds but, as time has progressed, the feedbacks and effects have become more noticeable.
i was always of the understanding that, as you said, if there was definitive evidence for one side of an argument, you cannot argue that it is FALSE, only that there are other factors. Is your school asking you to write a report on how Darwin was the devil too?
There is no such evidence. There may be differences of opinion about how much humans have contributed, but there cannot be any doubt about the IF.
