Do you believe in global warming?

1. 68

   BuffaloGal1960posted 10 years ago

   Do you believe in global warming?
   
   Do you think the numbers are falsified?

   replyreport
2. 78

   LillyGrillzitposted 10 years ago

   Climate Change and global warming are not a religion or belief system. For six years a group of scientists and environmentalists wrestled with trolls and liars who were always trying to dismiss global warming, and would come up with anything, including fraud and personal attacks to get people to ignore what is happening to our only habitat.
   
   Everything we warned would happen, has happened. People would rather count their humanitarian positions on religious "belief" so they do not think they are held accountable...
   
   For the simple minded let me make it to where they may "get it."
   
   You know how when you look at the television weather map, and the background is green, brown, red or white? Those are an indication of the ground temperatures. For the last four years it has been bright red most of the time. This means, the ground is too warm. There is not much cooling going on, and we are feeling the effects - belive it or not.
   
   The land mass loss is so phenomenal that 100's of 1000's of animals are losing a place to land, rest, eat and breath. It is probably mostly over now, but a few weeks ago over 30,000 walrus were stranded off of the Alaskan coast with no where to land. Starving to death, Mammals not much larger than us...
   
   This is happening so fast now that in months we can see the difference by looking at our handy dandy Google Earth Maps.
   
   If people acknowledge it - they must take responsibility, and that means stepping away from their screens and doing something different, they will not do that until forced to by nature.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      BuffaloGal1960posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      As for Christianity, the Bible clearly states that we are to take care of the land so if one believed in the Bible, they would want to take care of the land.

      replyreport
   2. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Happily, many evangelical churches are coming to that same conclusion. They carefully disassociate themselves from "environmentalists" (of which I'm one), but as long as we're all working to care for the earth, there needn't be any differentiation.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Ground temperatures and air temperatures are very different. Global warming has aimed at industry. Based on what you say, shopping mall, parking lots and greater urbanization for a growing global population is the problem.

      replyreport
   4. 78

      LillyGrillzitposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I am stunned at the "belief" system that has been created by those who have chosen blindness, and now a strong delusion has come upon them. Do you think it is impossible to kill a houseplant? Does a human have no effect on the outcome of a garden?

      replyreport
   5. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Of course human have an impact. Never denied that. Human intervention accounts for much of the land loss. Global warming as a solitary cause has not been proved to my satisfaction. It is an element of climate change. That view is reasonable.

      replyreport
   6. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      The recent, drastic level of climate change is a combination of earth and human activity. Ice core and earth core analyses have helped us chart past cycles. This current one has gone way beyond, and much of it can be attributed to human activity.

      replyreport
   7. 45

      Ericdierkerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Watergeek, I understand where you are coming from but I recently visited a place where 2 inches of rock represented 1 million times how long man has been around. That two inches was found near a mile deep in the GC.

      replyreport
   8. 77

      Goodpalposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      The thought that the planet also belongs to those who lack technology (humans and non-humans both) appears to have lost in the debates revolving around CO2 levels, global temperature and talk of trees as carbon sticks holding back CO2.

      replyreport
3. 93

   watergeekposted 10 years ago

   It isn't a matter of "belief." It's a matter of evidence: weather maps, seismic records, numbers and locations of floods, numbers and locations of fires, and all of it compared with past records. We're breaking records all over the place. I was just reading an article in the LA Times about how summer night temperatures in Phoenix AZ used to average around 90º. Now they're searching for nights that it goes below 100º. Daytime temperatures are up to 110º for at least 30 days of every year.
   
   Do I believe these figures and the many others I've seen the last several years are accurate? Yes I do. You can't mess with calibrators all over the world to fake figures. You can't fake photographs taken from satellites that corroborate photographs taken from aircraft worldwide, that in turn are corroborated by instrumentation.
   
   About human involvement:
   1 - We built cities like Phoenix all over the world, whose construction, traffic, and factory output heats up the earth and the air. Have you heard of the "heat island effect"?
   2 - We sucked up the groundwater that used to cool the earth and then blocked its replacement. 
   3 - We chopped down rainforests all over the world that used to cool and moisten the air to help create rain.
   4 - Our pesticides are killing off the bacteria that water vapor condenses around to form rain - Pseudomonas syringae. (I've written a hub about it.)
   
   Rain cools, cleans, and removes carbon dioxide from the air. We have inadvertently redirected rainfall to areas that were already getting plenty, i.e. that were already cooled and cleaned, leaving their former locations dry. So the world is suffering from more fires that heat the earth, dry earth that heats the air, increased volcanic eruptions that heat everything, increased city and air traffic that heats more, and a continuation of air-drying chemical exhausts from factories and refrigerated trucks, etc. We may not be the only cause of global warming, but we sure are contributing a lot to it.

   replyreport
   1. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      We also release millions of tons of methane into the air each year from landfills, according to a hub I just read by cam8510.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      How did we redirect rainfall. If weather could be controlled, I promise you as a Louisiana resident, I can name a few hurricanes I have lived through that I would have liked to redirect--Katrina, Rita, Gustav and others.

      replyreport
   3. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Short explanation: Cities heat and dry the air above them, which drives water vapor high. Winds blow the water vapor toward cooler/wetter areas where rain still falls easily, like Louisiana, to add to what you are already getting.

      replyreport
   4. 69

      crazymom3posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I completely agree with you.  It isn't about  belief at all. You don't have to be a scientist to see the recent changes in weather patterns in the last few years

      replyreport
   5. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Crazymom3, you made the point that needed to be made. You cannot use 3 or 4  years of data to address the issue of climate change (which includes global warming). There will always be sporadic changes. Thus you have to look at the longer history.

      replyreport
   6. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      That's true. The carbon dioxide level reached its historical peak in the 1950's and has shot straight up since. We've had the 20 hottest years in history since the 1970s, 10 of those during the last 12 years per NASA. http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence

      replyreport
   7. 90

      savvydatingposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      watergeek, the point of the article is still relevant... " for most citizens, knowledge about science comes largely through mass media, not through scientific publications or direct involvement in science." This problem is now worse. You did not read

      replyreport
   8. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Reading NASA's website is about as direct an information source as a non-scientist can get, since they produce many of the readings from their own instruments worldwide. BTW I do most of my own research, rather than read popular news.

      replyreport
   9. 90

      savvydatingposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I am acquainted with a scientist who worked at NASA. and who says global warming is not significant and he has data to back up his claim.. Anyway, my point is that there is no consensus, but there is a great flow of grant money to prove otherwise.

      replyreport
   10. 93

       watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       It's true, there's no consensus. I really hope people take action without waiting for one, though. Can you imagine what would happen to our country if we waited for consensus on anything between government officials? (lol) Same with scientific folks.

       replyreport
   11. 90

       savvydatingposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       I thought you were referring to the prevailing belief of consensus. But it is true that consensus will not be reached and that it has nothing, at this juncture, to do with scientific truth. I encourage all to read Professor Carter's excellent book.

       replyreport
   12. 93

       watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       BTW I run an environmental group with members who are scientists at the Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL/NASA) in Pasadena, who push me even harder than I want to go to deal with climate change. NASA's site (& charts) speaks for itself. You saw the link?

       replyreport
   13. 61

       Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Who funds their research then?

       replyreport
   14. 90

       savvydatingposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Yes, I saw the site, watergeek. It is funded by the IPCC., whose members are senior civil servants and other academics and which began, in part, by the UN. The climatologists are hand picked by the IPCC.

       replyreport
   15. 93

       watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Although JPL's research is used by the IPCC for their own data analyses and reports, it's actually funded by NASA, along with some seed funding from the American Recovery & Investment Act: rcmes.jpl.nasa.gov/about/overview

       replyreport
   16. 61

       Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       So as I said its funded by tax $.

       replyreport
   17. 90

       savvydatingposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Dr. Richard Lindzen, America's pre-imenent physicist warned of the governments "extraordinary pressure to stifle dissent" on global warming:  http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Counter-C … 1906768293

       replyreport
4. 61

   Silverspeederposted 10 years ago

   After taking my temperature for the next 10 weeks would you be able to tell me how many illnesses I have had in my life? Even more important could you tell me how I was going to die?
   These climate scientists get paid by governments, the governments then increase taxes based on the so called facts these climate scientists extoll. Self interest at the very least.
   
   There is no doubt man has not done the best for the earth but all the doomsday warnings are more to do with governments hungry for tax rather than what's actually happening.
   
   The earth is millions of years old, taking its temperature for a few years proves nothing.
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kYiVIGJKaU
   If you are easily offended please do not watch.

   replyreport
   1. 68

      BuffaloGal1960posted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Excellent comment.

      replyreport
   2. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I disagree. I worked in water conservation for four years and know many leaders in utility companies who are serious about conserving resources to reduce climate change. I know city officials in and around Los Angeles who are taking action too.

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      How many of the bottled water companies have you stopped then? And how many of the utility companies have accepted rationing to their users? Has LA stopped all private vehicles within the city limits?

      replyreport
   4. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Silverspeeder, this is a democracy. You can't forbid people to drive. You can create alternatives. That's what LA has and continues to build: Public transport, bike paths, etc. Also, nearly all the water companies here ration in some way.

      replyreport
   5. 61

      Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      What alternatives? Stop flying, stop driving, stop flushing the John?
      Where would your democratically elected government get their tax collection from if half the people stopped driving for instance?

      replyreport
   6. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      You're not making sense. Alternatives mean choices, e.g. LA is continuing to expand the Metro, which is heavily used. They're turning the LA River into a real river with bike paths and building more within the city, which lets people bike to work.

      replyreport
   7. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Data from 50 to 100 years ago when compared to today's data is not really valid because of instrumentation, better calibration and more specific protocols to insure accuracy.

      replyreport
   8. 61

      Silverspeederposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I'm not making sense? So how many vehicles have LA taken of the road then? And where do they build the bikes? In green factories I suppose. And are they building the cycle paths out of renewable sources like wood? Its not me who is not making sense.

      replyreport
   9. 83

      bethperryposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Great comment!

      replyreport
5. 50

   icvposted 10 years ago

   ya.. global warming is a real matter happening in the world. actually sun is the ultimate source of light and temperature. the existence of sun is very vital for the survival of the world.... the problems of global warming emerged because of the activities of human beings. due to the activities of some people, there occurred holes on the surface of ozone. so, it badly affected the temperature condition in the earth........... further the deforestation is ensured the cause for global warming.   here the concept of sustainable development is very important ...  you read my hub  http://icv.hubpages.com/hub/WHY-SUSTAINABLE-DEVELOPMENT

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Goodpalposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Precisely, sustainable development is the answer to all ills of the planet. It means shifting the focus to development of people and look at the per capita consumption of natural resources across the world.

      replyreport
6. 37

   edhanposted 10 years ago

   I do believe it is true. From all the signs and happening around the world, we should seriously take action to prevent further disaster that we had already created. It will be doing for future generation so they do not suffer for all our wrongdoings.

   replyreport
7. 61

   jojoluvsjonposted 10 years ago

   I am not a scientist so this is purely my un-scientific answer about global warming.
   
   There are some alarming things taking place throughout the world that I am sure contribute to the eroding ozone layer. More vehicles on the roads and rainforest destruction just to name two. I am sure there is "something" to all of these things contributing to the earth warming. 
   
   However, I also remember being a child in the 1970's and being told that an Ice Age was coming. Go figure. Could scientists be that polar opposite in their thought process only a decade or two apart?
   
   Finally, I do believe that the earth goes through climate cycles. I live in Western PA and this once was a tropical paradise when the dinosaurs ruled the earth (it's snowing here now).  Could we possible be in a cycle change?
   
   So I guess I have more questions than answers in regards to global warming.

   replyreport
   1. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      You know, this has been a really good conversation. Everyone has contributed their own thoughts and triggered a rethinking for others, myself included. Could it be that the earth is realigning &/or we are discovering new things about how it opera

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I think you have summed it up very well. It has been a good discussion, more intelligent and less attitude than I have seen in a long time.

      replyreport
   3. 77

      Goodpalposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      The well-being of the planet and the climate that affects all of us is not an issue of scientists only. It is every ones's issue.

      replyreport
8. 78

   electronicianposted 10 years ago

   Everyone always has to believe that man-made global warming or believe that it isn't happening. Can't we all just stop believing and be reasonable? The evidence suggests that it is very likely that it is happening, but then again scientific evidence is also always changing and developing and there are alternative scientific narratives. I think we should just act as if it is probably happening and refrain from descending into belief in either direction.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I almost totally agree with you. There are things that have been done & will be done, such as reducing emissions, trying to rebuild wetlands, etc. Everyone is more environmentally aware. We just need to allow time and not focus on short term resu

      replyreport
   2. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I agree too. The belief thing turns into a competition, a who's right or wrong thing, that takes up the energy we could be using to create more earth-healthy lifestyles.

      replyreport
9. 67

   Ceegenposted 10 years ago

   We had an ice age, and historical evidence of grapes growing where they now can't grow, points to the fact that the earth has always had a changing climate. So in that regard I believe climate change is real.
   
   But climate change because of human influence? Not so much. I don't think we're that important, that powerful, as to be able to compete with natural processes that change the climate. Maybe if we made a conscious effort to destroy all life on earth by detonating every nuclear weapon at the same time, in an equidistant pattern around the entire world, then humans would have probably made a dent in the earth's climate. Maybe. Either that or it'd just kill off all the humans, at least.
   
   I don't think scientists really have a clue what is going on. Either that or they are intentionally not investigating certain things, because they know it would validate something other than anthropomorphic global climate change. Because if people found out it wasn't humans causing climate change, then what kind of job would these scientists have? They wouldn't be able to fear-monger everyone into submission to the cult of death, which preaches population reduction, "New Age" stuff like Gaia worship, and aliens.
   
   And no I'm not joking, some of those enviro-cults have some pretty far out beliefs, and it scares me more than Islam. Muslims I can deal with, and even reason with, but environmental cults think I'm a cancer that needs to be eliminated. There's no reasoning with that kind of "logic".

   replyreport
   1. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Wait. I'm an environmentalist. I'm not a cultist, and I don't think you're a cancer that need to be eliminated. I don't know where you got that from.

      replyreport
   2. 67

      Ceegenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      You might not be, but they are out there. Ever see the UK commercials promoting the idea that climate deniers should die? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I do not agree with all that is put forth by the global warming/climate change group and will debate that when needed.. Resorting to name calling is needless and denying that some changes are taking place is bad science and bad journalism.

      replyreport
   4. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I haven't seen those UK commercials, Ceegen, and wouldn't support them if I did. I agree with you/Larry that pointing fingers is a waste of time and energy, no matter who's doing it. The group I lead doesn't. We focus on constructive action.

      replyreport
   5. 67

      Ceegenposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Disturbing UK commercials:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=569aAr1yQUc
      
      And that's just the tip of the iceberg. It gets crazier.

      replyreport
   6. 93

      watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Those are absolutely disgusting Ceegen!! You are right. They were obviously created to antagonize people against climate change. But they do bring to mind the bombing the US is doing in the Middle East for oil.

      replyreport
   7. 77

      Goodpalposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Ceegan, you have a reasonable argument and let's stay within reason. There are always extreme elements around any global issue.Muslims are as valuable as the environmentalists if we know them beyond labels. Let's not debate CC or GW as labels either!

      replyreport
10. 84

    M. T. Dremerposted 10 years ago

    I've heard that efforts were made to emphasize the impact of global warming as a means to get people to act before it was too late. Kind of like saying 'the volcano is going to erupt on Tuesday' when it is really going to erupt on Thursday. People are slow to change and if you don't start early, we're all going to burn in the lava. So, I think this is where a lot of mistrust comes from in regards to global warming. Powerful people underlined the issue hard and fast, and when it was revealed they were exaggerating early, people assumed the whole thing was a hoax. But, the consistent evidence shows that we're still on that path.
    
    Yes, the earth goes through a flux of weather patterns, but we have a far bigger impact on the environment than we realize. Rabid consumption has led to wasteful mining and burning of fossil fuels and its been going on for decades. We can either try to fix it, or just pretend it isn't happening and accept the inevitable death of the human race.

    replyreport
11. 86

    aviannoviceposted 10 years ago

    Without a doubt there is global warming or climate change.  Fact:  methane gas goes into the atmosphere and changes the chemical composition of the ozone layer.  Fact, this is a massive irruptive year for birds.  What are pelagic birds like South Polar Skuas and the murrelet doing in land-locked Oklahoma?  For more info supporting my claim, view  http://aviannovice.hubpages.com/hub/Glo … e-Any-Hope

    replyreport
12. 82

    dashingscorpioposted 10 years ago

    Wind chill in Chicago is -15.  I don't believe in global warming (today).
    I imagine compared to the "ice age" the world has never stopped warming up. It's unclear whether or not global warming is the result of man's actions or if it was destined to happen over the course of billions of years.
    My guess is if man had lived in the dinosaur age and witnessed them dying off he would have blamed himself and tried to do whatever was possible to prevent them from becoming extinct. We hate to admit it but sometimes things are not in our control.

    replyreport
13. 77

    Goodpalposted 10 years ago

    There is no thermometer to measure "Global Temperature" directly. So I leave that aside. What everyone is seeing is loss of seasonality of annual weather pattern everywhere. In some places people are experiencing climate they never imagined.
    
    If this is what the term "global warming" implies, I certainly believe in it. But in my view, many things have been mixed up; for example, high speed of resource depletion by use of technology, people consuming lot natural resources than ever before, cutting forests for commercial gains, loss of biodiversity, and so on.
    
    I doubt if temperature change alone can justify everything happening in the nature which sustains us. The root cause is the resource guzzling lifestyle of people in the name of development. Temperature or CO2 are just the symptoms.

    replyreport
14. 83

    Freeway Flyerposted 10 years ago

    I don't think that the numbers are deliberately falsified. There seems to be a general consensus that human behavior can influence the climate. But considering all of the wild climate fluctuations that have occurred throughout the history of the planet, there are probably a multitude of factors, which are not fully understood, that can incluence climate. So it's possible that other forces will outweigh what humans are doing to the climate.
    
    I hope that the climate doomsayers are wrong. Because if they are right, it is probably already too late to avoid the consequences.

    replyreport
15. 66

    Tusitala Tomposted 10 years ago

    Watergeek is right.  We are stuffing up the world.  We will continue to do so as our human population explodes.  In 1936, when I was born the world had approximately two billion inhabitants, in seventy years it pushed out to around seven billion.   It will go up.   We will continue to cut down forests, poison the earth, fish out oceans, polute the ground and the air.  I know this all sounds pessimistic but this is the way things are going.
    
    Unless there evolves - or comes about by some means - a world-wide government which can bring in and enforce Draconian laws to gradually reduce our population growth, I don't see a lot of hope for us human beings - or the animals, birds and other species we're rendering into extinction.
    
    Global warming is but one symptom of the great illness humanity is suffering - too many people on a finite earth.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Are you suggesting that all the research aimed at making us healthier so we can lie longer should end. Other that limiting the number of children per family, which would be impossible and immoral, I do not see any way of reducing the population.

       replyreport
    2. 93

       watergeekposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       There's something about unhealthy life circumstances that makes people (and animals) breed more. Research has shown that most people in developed countries voluntarily reduce their child-load to just two or three, knowing that they will survive.

       replyreport
    3. 77

       Goodpalposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Average number of children per woman depends upon the state of development of the society and people (reflected in the economic growth, gender equality and women empowerment). So development of poor nations is the key,if human population is a threat.

       replyreport
    4. 0

       Larry Wallposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       I am no expert. However, before the Pill, families in this country were larger than today. In undeveloped countries, health issues, not choice, probably count more for lower birth rate.Also people live longer, using resources and taking up space.

       replyreport
16. 60

    TexasTornadoposted 10 years ago

    weather change is a natural condition....man's touch is so minute it has no bearing on it

    replyreport
17. 58

    Angela Kaneposted 10 years ago

    Yes I do believe in global warming. The weather is volatile and getting more erratic every single year. With all the chemicals and toxins in our air today, the atmosphere must taking a hit.

    replyreport
18. 73

    lone77starposted 10 years ago

    Yes and yes.
    
    We have had global warming, and now, if I understand the figures right, we're experiencing some global cooling. Climate fluctuates naturally. Nearly 12,000 years ago, we had skyrocketing temperatures worldwide over a relatively brief period that lead to the final end of the last Ice Age.
    
    I also think that the Corporate Party, United Nations and their bosses have ordered numbers to be falsified, but that's nothing new. Ego is a part of mortal life. Ego is selfishness.
    
    Falsifying the numbers can yield a multi-trillion dollar windfall, if they can sell the numbers to the various governments. All numbers? Not necessarily. They can leave most numbers alone. They can be strategic about it.
    
    Just by knowing human nature, you can readily assume that someone is going to want to take advantage of this. This human nature has already reared its ugly head in numerous areas.
    
    Let me give you an example from a slightly different field. I just finished watching a video on YouTube.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xv_IaLHwgAQ
    
    This video shows that autism is caused by vaccines. Yet, the pharmaceutical companies (Big Pharma) don't worry, because the government has created a law that protects them from lawsuits, just as they protected Monsanto from lawsuits recently for their GMO crops which have been proven to cause cancer (gigantic tumors in rats). The awful truth is shown in another video:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShJTcIlTna0
    
    Falsification is easy when you have billions of dollars to pay off government officials, or if government officials used to work for your company or hope to have lucrative careers in your company in the near future. Falsification is easy if your company's owners also own the major news outlets and even the "peer-reviewed" journals. Retracting articles critical of your company's products is easy when a former employee of the company is planted in the executive staff of the journal being targeted.
    
    We also have the falsification of WMDs which allowed us to invade Iraq. And Nick Rockefeller had told the late Aaron Russo that we were going to have a major event which would allow us to claim Iraq and Afghanistan in the near future (this was late 2000). 9/11 let us do that.
    
    And 9/11 was another falsification. NIST scientists lied! On WTC7, the building fell at perfect free fall for the first 8 floors of collapse. Free fall means zero resistance. Solid steel never offers zero resistance.

    replyreport
    1. 77

       Goodpalposted 10 years agoin reply to this

       Even if falsifications are rule than exceptions, any ordinary person can tell that the annual seasons are showing sign of disorder and local weather is now more predictable than say 2-3 decades ago. Of course, "who to blame" is the issue of debate.

       replyreport
19. 41

    pramodgokhaleposted 10 years ago

    Yes i believe because weather cycle has changed. Timetable of Monsoon we experienced in India and found we suffered. One end of India faces famine, drought and other end deluge. For layman this change is visible.

    replyreport
20. 64

    wingedcentaurposted 10 years ago

    This essay is in response to a question asked by the hubber, BuffaloGal 1960: "Do you believe in global warming? Do you think the numbers are falsified? But what is it to "believe" in anything? read more

    replyreport