Al Gore. Hes a HUGE p*ssy. Tipper isn't much better
Hard to put a hard start date on AGW. It's like asking when the Environmental Movement was hijacked by Socialists, or when did Liberals take over Public Education. The answer is it happened over time.
Now that said, you can make some generalizations regarding the chart of MGT below.
The Greenhouse effect was proposed in 1824 & is widely accepted by Warmons & Skeptics alike. The planet is warmer because certain gasses absorb & reflect heat energy. Now the big player on Earth is water vapor, but CO2 is on the list.... on Mars & Venus CO2 is the major player because both there atmospheres are over 95% CO2. On Earth CO2 is around 0.04% with 0.01% being regarded as the human contribution.
Now one would think that's not very significant, but with the Environmental movement of the 1960 highlighting many detrimental effects of human pollution, concerns arose that rising CO2 levels might be seriously affecting temperature
And the Global Temperatures cooperated with this view. From ~1975 to 1998 the MGT rose by about half a degree. Bu just as widespread support for cracking down on that evil CO2 was building, the MGT plateaued. Global Warming magically became Climate Change. Skeptics became Deniers. And AGW became a Religion.
Most the Climate scientists who spent ~25 years watching Temperatures rise were already convinced.
They did not see the plateau as a cause for questioning AGW, merely something to be explained away.
And Socialist world wide, on the verge of declaring CO2 a pollutant which would put them squarely in charge of most Free Market Energy gladly funded anyone firmly aboard the AGW bandwagon & savagely debunked as moronic anyone skeptical of this 'truth'.
So that's where we stand.
The belief did not spring from nowhere, because the MGT did rise for ~25 to 30 years. But what we have today is a few Climatologists doing honest research, while the vast majority are simply out to prove AGW is real & dangerous. They are not generally aware that this is 'pathological' science & will be absolutely be fired should they come to the conclusion it is. AGW is funded by folks who WANT it to be true.
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warmin...
According to the BBC, a few hundred Mesopotamian farmers burning wood and the Methane given off by their animals gave rise to Global Warming thousands of years ago.
What utter bollox.
The first published paper that showed it was already happening was by Gilbert Plass in 1955. It has since been proved.
Your ignorance of physics does not change physics.
You are sorely misinformed. Global warming does, indeed, exist. It was "started" (that is, first figured out) by a scientist named Svante Arrhenius, in the late 19th century. It became the general scientific consensus somewhere around the '80s. And people continue to believe it because it's happening, and virtually every climatologist on the planet agrees that it's happening.
If you want more information, try here:
http://www.skepticalscience.com/
http://aip.org/history/climate/summary.h...
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...
http://www.realclimate.org/
Sorry but you are poorly informed (probably to many denier blogs or watching foxnews)
The science of climate change is quite solid despite the best rants of deniers they have made no real impact on that science and frankly apart from personal attacks on the scientists and making up story's about fictional beach front houses they claim Al Gore bought.
Get informed
http://climate.nasa.gov/
I have posted just one scientific source post one back that claims it's not happening (hard to do as there are none) there are of course many blogs and sites deniers have created but none of them are credible and they have little to no published work (in peer review) that even try's to claim AGW is not happening. Deniers do from time to time post sad lists of papers they claim dispute AGW, but most in fact (if you look them) do any such thing and are in fact address small points.
The games blogs play was never more evident that in this question post earlier today
A denier blog claims a scientist said one thing and a denier here posts that comment
http://notrickszone.com/2013/02/03/top-s...
Yet a direct translation of the original has the scientist saying the exact opposite
http://translate.google.com.au/translate...
This is an old tactic deniers have used many times, a scientist where I work, who is a world leading expert on ice was selectively quoted by a denier blog on Antarctic sea, say he was stating AGW was not happening.
Yet in his full statement he also talked about Antarctic glacial ice and was quite clearly not commenting against AGW as the denier blog was pretending, these people are the actual liars, they keep pretending scientists are and sadly it is not very hard to show that.
I tried to post the translation to the above notrickzone site, but strangely (not really) they refuse to post my comment, do you really need it spelled out for you who the ones really producing the garbage are?
Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose."
It (AGW) does exist. Global warming is the rise in the average temperature of Earth's atmosphere and oceans since the late 19th century and its projected continuation. Since the early 20th century, Earth's mean surface temperature has increased by about 0.8 °C (1.4 °F), with about two-thirds of the increase occurring since 1980. Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and scientists are more than 90% certain that it is primarily caused by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases produced by human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. These findings are recognized by the national science academies of all major industrialized nations.
However climate change deniers are either extreme free marketeers or conspiracy theorists
Although nearly all domain experts agree that human CO2 emissions are altering the world’s climate, segments of the public remain unconvinced by the scientific evidence. Internet blogs have become a vocal platform for climate denial, and bloggers have taken a prominent and influential role in questioning climate science. We report a survey (N > 1100) of climate blog users to identify the variables underlying acceptance and rejection of climate science. Paralleling previous work, we find that endorsement of a laissez-faire conception of free-market economics predicts rejection of climate science (r .80 between latent constructs). Endorsement of the free market also predicted the rejection of other established scientific findings, such as the facts that HIV causes AIDS and that smoking causes lung cancer. We additionally show that endorsement of a cluster of conspiracy theories (e.g., that the CIA killed Martin-Luther King or that NASA faked the moon landing) predicts rejection of climate science as well as the rejection of other scientific findings, above and beyond endorsement of laissez-faire free markets. This provides empirical confirmation of previous suggestions that conspiracist ideation contributes to the rejection of science. Acceptance of science, by contrast, was strongly associated with the perception of a consensus among scientists.
Below are some choice examples to show they are conspiracy theorist and their concept of a "better" world..
Quote by Phoenix Quill "Well what I would LIKE to see every person who believes in the idiocy of AGW permanently exiled from America,This fiscally destructive Socialist Religion simply has no place in a society of free men."
Exiling (free) people because they accept science, is an oxymoron.
Quotes by Sagebrush (a self proclaimed Christian and ardent AGW denier) :
"Execute all those who voted for OBAMA"
"Hire the handicapped, they are fun to watch!"
No follower of Christ would think those things, let alone post them publicly.
Global warming started when people started polluting the earth
Well...there does seem to be something../
When I was a late teenager..into my 20's..there was a NEWS statement about a hole--in the ozone layer../
The result was it was Fluro-carbons../aerosol..cans..products/
The acid rain of heavy industry was being throttled back--
===
Now--since this new thing--about global warming..
America has these huge forest fires--which I don't remember in my past..
Plus--space junk..
This brings me to some conclusion--about blocking../
High Altitude--Blocking../
Not a stationary--situation../
But--linked to the hole in the ozone layer../
===
Being a adult--now-a-days..
I just figure that Global warming is more about--creating a un-answerable..situation//
Create a thwarted pubic--in the current events/community../
===
Bring along some facts--that are just way up there out of reach../
stop listening to the lies from conservatives who spread lies from the fossil fuel industries who want people to think pollution doesn't hurt people or the planet
I mean, it doesn't exist. So, who started this garbage and why? And why do people continue to believe it?
Blame the sun, its the suns fault. I mean yeah us humans have contributed but if the sun looses 1% of its luminousity its back to an ice age.
It started around 1799...
"America’s First Great Global Warming Debate
Thomas Jefferson and Noah Webster argue over conventional wisdom that lasted thousands of years
............
"The date was 1799, not 1999―and the opposing voices in America’s first great debate about the link between human activity and rising temperature readings were not Al Gore and George W. Bush, but Thomas Jefferson and Noah Webster.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-ar...
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timel... Timeline
In the last century, scientists discovered that CO2 levels were rising and so was the global average Lo and behold a correlation and they have both continued to rise since about 1979. So GW theory came about and scientific consensus about man made GW was accepted as fact.
BTW the garbage comes from all you DA deniers who have no scientific proof of their beliefs, constantly ask distracting questions like this and come up with blog links, newspaper comment links, personal websites etc etc that have no basis in climate science fact.
http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/20...
provide proof of your claim that it does not exist. No point taking time answering someone whose opinion is already made up.
Only the most brain-dead deniers continue to maintain that global warming doesn't exist
I think perhaps it was Margaret Thatcher for various different reasons.
1 she needed more nuclear electric generation, so plutonium was available for weapons.
2 she needed something to divert attention from her failed policies
3 she wanted to use her Bsc chemistry degree to elevate her position as a stateswoman
I blame the plankton.
It couldn't have happened if plankton hadn't taken all the co2 from the atmosphere in the first place.
