jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (4 posts)

Why is there so much difference of opinion amongst scientists regarding global w

  1. Stella Kaye profile image89
    Stella Kayeposted 11 months ago

    Why is there so much difference of opinion amongst scientists regarding global warming?

    The ordinary person is often confused by Global Warming. How can anyone really decide one way or another in the face of so much conflicting evidence? There is the added factor of it being a political argument too. Many scientists believe we may already be at the point of extinction whereas others say we are just at the changing point of another natural cycle. If science is supposed to be factual then why such extremes of opinions?


  2. Wesman Todd Shaw profile image99
    Wesman Todd Shawposted 11 months ago

    First of all, the climate is always changing. It has always changed, and it always will change. If the climate stopped changing, that would still be climate change because the climate is forever changing.

    It's pure entitlement thinking to believe one should have the same climate on their planet as they had when they were young. It doesn't work that way. The climate always changes.

    The notion that human activity is inducing climate change is all that is up for debate, and if so, how much does human activity affect the climate? It doesn't really matter that much, because the big thing that influences the temperature can be seen up in the sky every single day.

    Carbon dioxide emissions? Sure, they are very very VERY small in regards to the composition of our atmosphere, but one big burp from a volcano can dwarf the amount produced by burning fossil fuels. It's not nearly so big a deal as our idiotic politicians would have you and I believe.

    1. Ericdierker profile image53
      Ericdierkerposted 11 months agoin reply to this

      Pinatubo eruption around 90 all the way down in the Philippines had us marveling at our sunsets and wondering about something funny in the air -- That was on the California coast.

  3. Ericdierker profile image53
    Ericdierkerposted 11 months ago

    You answered the question in you last five words. Opinions from a scientist are like statements of fact from a preacher. They got no business crossing over to the "I believe" meaning opinion area. The only men of "science" who should give opinions are physicians.
    Predictions in science are bogus. I predict the earth will rotate and the sun will shine tomorrow is absolutely incorrect. I have no scientific evidence of that -- merely roulette that it has happened in the past.

    If a person does not understand that the climate will change from wither to tither then they ignorant for whatever reason.

    If a person does not understand that man's influence is less than a volcano then they are ignorant by choice. But that does not change man's desire to keep the earth the way it is. That also is natural but against nature.
    The best areas to study are riparian habitat and tidal basins. These can change in a man's lifetime, with or without man.
    In fact the sad fact is money. Write a paper that says it is out of man's hands and there is no grant money. Write one about the study of how much of a huge impact man has and the funds flow freely. That is the truth of the matter.