Can those people who deny global warming is taking place explain why glaciers are melting in most areas?
I am not one who denies global warming, but remember, in the past five hundred years volcanoes have placed more green house gasses into the atmosphere than in the entire history of mankind. We have only been monitoring climate change for a couple of hundred years. There is ample evidence that the earth goes through warming and cooling cycles that have nothing to do with us and that the ice packs at the poles have diminished in the past to 40 percent of their current volume. Animal expulsionn of methane and carbon dioxide is also a large factor, outweighing automobile output. There is ample evidence that the overall temperature of the earth is increasing, but there is also ample evidence that it did so before the industrial revolution, and if the sheer volume of greenhouse gasses is the cause then one would think after Krakatoa the earth’s temperature would have increased and we would have some evidence of that, unless your argument is that if we dump it all in at once the earth can han
No they can’t, nor can they deny the rise is sea levels, nor can they deny that man produces a lot of CO2, nor can they deny that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, nor can they deny that the greenhouse effect is real, nor can they deny that the real greenhosue effect is at least partially the cause of global warming. Someone, of course, can be found to deny all of these points. The Senator from Oklahoma comes to mind. But no one is harder to convince than a man who is being paid to hold the opposite view. Jury tampering is a felony because it makes a mockery of our judicial process. But in politics, the search for bought and paid for bias is not nearly as methodical as in the Courtroom. We find about .000001% of the corruption that exists. The Oklahoma Senator is a case in point.
It is enough for some people to point out that the earth getting warmer and cooler is cyclical. That is enough of an explanation for them. What these anti-environmentalists don’t spend too much time looking into is whether this current warming up is consistent with what has gone before (it isn’t), and whether the temperature and CO2 increase is consistent with what has gone before (it isn’t). It is also worth looking out for unbiased scientific reports and meta-analyses about global warming, rather than ‘scientific studies’ backed by those with a financial vested interest in fossil fuels or maintaining the status quo.
I think it’s not so much a case of denying it’s happening as standing against the proposals and measures being drawn up to contend with it. There are more reasons to suppose that what we’re seeing is a natural phenomenon made worse by eco-vandalism than a product of eco-vandalism alone. I really don’t think that the council dickheads fitting a microchip to my wheelie bin will do much about anything. Yet, from a human point of view, that seems to be the best our great and glorious leaders can come up with. If the so-called national leaders really wanted to save the world they would outlaw petrol today and close all the factories down to kerb all those deadly emissions. But we all know that isn’t going to happen. And if it did, those who moan about global warming would soon change their tune once the beer ran out or they had to knit their own jumpers instead of buying them online. Instead, the “responsible” world just plays at caring about it all. And the duty of care percolates all the
