1. 

Generally the real debate is to the amount of AGW and future warming. We know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and thus will cause some warming. A doubling of the CO2 concentration shoudl only increase the temps by 1 degree. The question then becomes what are the positive and negative feedbacks. Positive feedbacks would work towards making the 1 degree change per doubling of CO2 to more change, while negative feedback would ahve the opposite effect.

I tend to hold a moderate view, though many warmers call me a "denier". In modeling the past 60-100 years, the warmers themselves have used LINEAR regression. During the past 100 years, the temps have increased by 0.8 degrees, with the lastest warming since the real increase of CO2 emissions over the last 60 years has been around 0.6 degrees. A linear trend would then indicate that the next 100 eyars, we should see about a 1.0 degree rise.

A 1.0 degree rise is not particularly frightening and will certianly not lead to the disasters discussed by the wamers. BUT, it is of note and we should reduce our CO2 emissions.

The warmers believe it will be more than 3.5 degree change by 2100. They place the positive feedbacks as being much stronger than the negative feedbacks to the tune of quadrupling the warming caused by CO2. Now I just don't buy this. First, what they are doing to arrive at these conclusions are using surrogate data, like tree ring data. These surrogate data are not very consistent with each other and not very consistent with current temperature. Further, this presumes an unstable earth. The earth has supparted life for an extremely long period of time. If the system were unstable the temp would have shot down to Mars-like or up to Venus-like well before now. Realize that they are talking about changing the atmosphere by 0.02-0.03% which equals 200-300 ppm.

Therein lies the problem with the debate. It has come down to is GW occurring or not.

It is occurring, but it occurring does NOT mean the end of the world. It does not mean some climate apocalypse. You don't need to give your kids nightmares or worry about the end of the world. the science they have supporting some humne-caused warming is good. The science backing the apocalyptic changes talked about in the media is nothing. Even the science backing the IPPC 3.5 degree change is little more than wild guesses and models 97% of which are overestimating.

So recycle, reduce and reuse. Help to make the world a better place. But DON'T stress out about this.

Try to avoid high polution releasing vehicles

arguments against Global warming

1 . our most reliable sources of temperature data show no global warming trend .

2 . Global climate computer models are too crude to predict future climate changes .

3 . Efforts to quickly reduce human greenhouse gas emmision would be costly and could not stop earths climate from changing .

Then there is the fact that the globe isn’t even warming anymore and the small amount of warming experienced from the 1900’s to 2013 timeframe was negligible and well within the envelope of normal

Jim Z pretty much nailed it! Temperature is the defining issue.

I will add that this all started as a political issue in Great Britain. Margaret Thatcher wanted energy security and thought she had found it through nuclear energy. She didn't want to have to worry about oil cartels or coal miners controlling prices on energy. If CO2 was found to be causing Global Warming, then she would have that energy security. British Parliament gave the Royal Society millions to research it and the IP CC sprung out of that. Since then, the United States has become the major financier to the United Nation's IP CC. Our democratic Government recently gave them over $100 billion.

"We ain't got no money, but we sure can give it away!"

Global warming is real. The earth's climate has been warming steadily since the end of the little ice age in the first half of the 19th century. During the medieval warm period before the little ice age the earth's climate was warmer than it is now. These are natural cyclic oscillations due to solar activity and the Atlantic multidecadal oscillation and the pacific multidecadal oscillation. Much of the earth's severe weather patterns are due to the AMO and PMO.

There is absolutely no real world empirical evidence that humanity has done anything to change the earth's climate. Every shred of so called evidence of AGW is confined in some academic theory based research studies and computer climate models. None of it is from real world observation. There is no weather or climate occurring now that is unprecedented or out of the ordinary.

Most of the AGW theory itself has been completely debunked by real world observations. The infamous Mann hockey stick graph has been proven to be created using very questionable and selectively manipulated data. But we know the graph is wrong merely because the past 17 years of climate data does not conform to it.

Another claim proven false is that Antarctic ice is melting quickly causing the oceans to rise. This is not true. Antarctic ice area has been breaking records. This last season Antarctica ice had increased to almost .8 million square miles above the 1981 to 2010 average. The ice is not melting. It's been expanding. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global-sno...

Some AGW alarmists love to spew crap about the 10 warmest years on record were between 1998 and now but considering that there has been absolutely no global warming for the past 17.5 years this means that the coldest years on record had to have also occurred during the past 10 years as well. Just look at the midwestern US states are dealing with as we speak. One has to ask himself if it is so damned hot then how is there record breaking cold temps in Antarctica and how is record breaking area of sea ice forming? We've all been told the exact opposite is happening but real world evidence contradicts the AGW claims.

The truth behind AGW cultist movement is purely political. It is about using climate change as a straw man to fully implement a new world order under the guise of UN agenda 21. The 2009 climate treaty that failed was essentially UN agenda 21 being implemented in a binding international treaty. Those pushing AGW theory and the solutions to solve a concocted problem are totalitarian in nature. Just read the draft proposals of the failed treaty and the text of UN agenda 21 and see just how totalitarian society would be if those were fully implemented.

The thing is... it's a complicated subject. Any really simple answers are going to be, to a greater or lesser extent, wrong (though we can aim for a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie-to-chi... type of wrong answer, that is... wrong only in the details, not the essential concepts)

In the atmosphere, carbon dioxide (CO2) acts kind of like a blanket, keeping in heat from the sun. More CO2 in the air is like having a thicker blanket. And humans have been putting more and more CO2 in the air, by burning fossil fuels (which had been storing carbon deep underground) and cutting down trees (which had been storing carbon in their wood).

So, kind of like putting a thicker blanket on your bed while you're in it, our air's holding in more heat, so it's getting warmer. Because climate and weather are very complicated, and the world is very big, this isn't as even of a process as putting a blanket on your bed--there are still going to be cold days, months, or even years, and it's even possible for some areas to be colder than they would have been without AGW (because some *other* area is even *warmer*). But, on average, temperatures are rising.

Don't expect to understand all of it from any for-dummies explanation. There are people with PhDs in relevant subjects who don't understand all of it. It's probably better to find reliable experts and trust their judgement than to go with what "makes sense" to you, because it's likely that you don't have enough background and information to truly figure out what makes sense in terms of the actual science, unless you're willing to learn enough about the subject to gain real rather than merely superficial understanding.

Arguments against global warming:

It is term that is meaningless unless properly defined. It can't be warming unless there is a time frame. Has it warmed in the last 18 years? Not much if any.

Has it warmed in the last 1000 years. Based on a recent report the MWP was 1 deg C warmer than today and it is backed by many proxies which are things that let you try to figure out the past climate.

Has it warmed in the last 8,000 years. No. It was warmer 8K years ago

Has it warmed in the last 10 million years? No

Last 100 million years? No

Last billion? No

Last 100, Yes but it warmed a similar amount the previous hundred years which could not be credibly blamed on humans.

AGW (anthropogenic (man caused)) is all about pushing an anti-human, anti-freedom, anti-free market agenda.

People can't argue against the climate changing. They can debate whether or not human activity is the primary cause of it. Climate is never a static thing, it is always changing. It is comical to read what people claim is the earth's "normal " climate. What do they base their claim upon? Why couldn't we have been living all of this time in an abnormal earth climate period? Probably arrogance and a smidgen of lazy thinking has led most people into assuming the past couple of hundred years' worth of weather has been normal.

Jim Z "Has it warmed in the last 8,000 years. No. It was warmer 8K years ago

Has it warmed in the last 10 million years? No. Last 100 million years? No. Last billion? No

Last 100, Yes but it warmed a similar amount the previous hundred years which could not be credibly blamed on humans.

AGW (anthropogenic (man caused)) is all about pushing an anti-human, anti-freedom, anti-free market agenda."

In the last couple million years, 90% of the time has been spent in an ice age.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitc...

In the graph, note how ice age cycles line up with eccentricity cycles.

It really makes no sense to talk about "normal" in terms other than the climate that America has experienced.

He seems to think it's all about politics.

Zippi62 "Jim Z pretty much nailed it!" Well, no.

Kano "CO2 is a greenhouse gas. greenhouse gases keep the Earth nice and warm" Works exceptionally well on Venus.

Eric "It is comical to read what people claim is the earth's "normal " climate. What do they base their claim upon?" Ummmm, the recent past, which is what we used to decide where to live, farm, build cities and sea ports.

http://science.kqed.org/quest/video/heat...

What would convince you that global warming is real? I agree with these folks.

1. You could look up what universities say. They have a reputation to uphold.

2. You could look up what various scientific organizations say. They also have a reputation to uphold.

Then look at which posters around here seem to agree with the reputable organizations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warm...

"The finding that the climate has warmed in recent decades and that human activities are already contributing adversely to global climate change has been endorsed by every national science academy that has issued a statement on climate change, including the science academies of all of the major industrialized countries."

https://www.google.com/#q=scientific+org...

https://www.google.com/#q=universities+g...

Let me know if there is still any question at all in your mind about what's happening with global warming.

Compare those references to posters around here.

That should give you an idea who you should believe.

Once you think that maybe global warming is real, you might consider:

http://www.rkm.com.au/ANIMATIONS/carbon-... <== here's the physics.

http://web4.audubon.org/globalwarming/im... <== this is why CO2 is a problem.

Plz speak in terms I understand aka dumb people words plz. Also what is the argument for it

In simple terms: Global warming is ******* our planet big time!

Flat out lies like Maxx posts. I have previously ask Maxx to explain one single point in his fraudulent movie from any active climate researcher who has not walked away from the statement the fraudulent video shows. He can't name as single one because facts and actually statements get in his way.

Maxx also flat out lies about Phill Jones. Every statement is a lie or a mislead. For example, in the legal case he points to, Al Gore won. Maxx is the kind of person who wants you to think he lost when in fact he won. The case was whether the movie is sufficiently accurate to use is UK science curricula. The judge found that is it and the movie is used in science classes in the UK and the US. Meanshile, the video that Maxx links to cannot be used in classrooms because it is not scientific. Consider the hypocrisy of this guy, he tries to claim a problem with one movie because it needs a study guide, but promotes a non-science debunked video that cannot be used in schools at all.

The case you ask about requires believing in a conspiracy of all academia, governments, publishing and anyone who studies physics. There are those here who continue to claim that all great scientists are Marxists, and others who claims they are all controlled by reptilian capitalists.

An actual case against global warming would be to show that the environment is not warming. That's especially the oceans where 90% of the heat goes. The case against humans as a cause requires an alternative explanation that explains observations. There are none. There are a myriad of conflicting contrarian ideas which have a very small following and which conflict with each other, and none of which can explain all observations.

The only real case is to claim that all science is a hoax and everyone in the world is in the conspiracy.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas

greenhouse gases keep the Earth nice and warm

Man is increasing GHG (CO2) which might increase Earths temperature by 1 or 2 degrees F

An increase of 1F or 2F is not dangerous and is probably pleasant.

Carbon taxes cannot alter the weather.

Co2 cannot cause droughts

Ignore the nonsense, the ad homs and the debunked movie from Madd Maxx. Global warming is happening

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010...

And we are causing it

http://c1planetsavecom.wpengine.netdna-c...

The ten warmest years in the instrumental record are 2010, 2005, 2009, 2007, 2002, 1998, 2006, 2003, 2013 and 2012.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

Only some planets are warming, not all.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-w...

One object in the solar system which is cooling, not warming; the Sun

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/gistemp...

decrease pollution

global warming is bogus, cuz gore lid.