Are people that are concerned about the fake global warming scan ,concerned about the earth or themselves?
For those that wish to actually learn something about the real science behind global warming, please start here: http://www.aip.org/history/climate/summa… The science of global warming was established way back in the 19th Century and relies on basic radiative physics and quantum mechanics. It is supported by numerous observations and laboratory experiments and has been analysed and argued over in the peer-reviewed literature for around 150 years by 1000’s of top scientists. The only “scam” being perpetrated is by the anti-science, pseudoskeptic denier lobby, who regard stealing private e-mails, sending death threats, forging data, misrepresenting research and telling outright lies, as valid tactics to challenge the real science.
Global warming is actually a good thing, scam, fake or not, the rest of the world is not concern with climate change. We are all concern of human induced toxic pollutants, such as PAHs, to give just an example. Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), known as Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons or Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons, the incomplete burning of fuels by vehicle and aircraft, or factory waste incineration. The aromatic part of chemical bonding PAHs pollutants are known carcinogenic or mutagenic to human animal lungs, liver, skin, and kidney damages or known as cancer. The human activities alone now account for about half of the cancerous PAHs (just below a million metric tons), in addition to volcanic activity. To cut a ‘wedge’ out of the graph of rising emissions will have to halve world population, else the world will have to eliminate waste incineration and factories or vehicles and aircrafts. According to recent research data from Beijing, China alone responsible for about 133,0
I am very much what would normally be considered an environmentalist, or a liberal on that subject in the lights of most people. However, I do find that the global warming scare is indefensible. It is not demonstrated to be either manmade or essentially harmful in its action. My biggest concern for a very long time has been that the failure of the AGW theory to live up to its hype, as is inevitible for a failed or inaccurate and overblown idea, will have huge repercussions on the credibility of the entire environmental sector. that is, things that are clearly demonstrated to have adverse consequences for the environment, the health and well beaing of mankind, and nature will be seen to be less important, and less credible, because of the inevitible failure of the hyped AGW issue. Already I have seen this, with a recent question in YA asking if evolution (of all things) is as equally flawed a theory as AGW. It hadn’t occured to me that all science would suffer because of the flawed scie
