Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The poll was released a day after 18 scientific organizations wrote Congress to reaffirm the consensus behind global warming. A federal government report Thursday found that global warming is upsetting the Arctic's thermostat.
But while the evidence appears clear, only about a third, or 36 percent of the poll respondents feel that human activities — such as pollution from power plants, factories and automobiles — are behind a temperature increase. That's the first decline since 2006."
The article clearly states that BELIEF in human impact on global warming/climate change is down despite scientific evidence to the contrary. It does not in any way say anything about the phenomenon being a hoax. Just wanted to make sure we're being clear.
"The poll was released a day after 18 scientific organizations wrote Congress to reaffirm the consensus behind global warming. A federal government report Thursday found that global warming is upsetting the Arctic's thermostat.
But while the evidence appears clear, only about a third, or 36 percent of the poll respondents feel that human activities — such as pollution from power plants, factories and automobiles — are behind a temperature increase. That's the first decline since 2006."
The article clearly states that BELIEF in human impact on global warming/climate change is down despite scientific evidence to the contrary. It does not in any way say anything about the phenomenon being a hoax. Just wanted to make sure we're being clear.
I just wanted to highlight this for ya Tony&Claire89:
From your source:
"The poll was released a day after 18 scientific organizations wrote Congress to reaffirm the consensus behind global warming. A federal government report Thursday found that global warming is upsetting the Arctic's thermostat.
But while the evidence appears clear, only about a third, or 36 percent of the poll respondents feel that human activities — such as pollution from power plants, factories and automobiles — are behind a temperature increase. That's the first decline since 2006."
The article clearly states that BELIEF in human impact on global warming/climate change is down despite scientific evidence to the contrary. It does not in any way say anything about the phenomenon being a hoax. Just wanted to make sure we're being clear.
Is that clear enough? Or would you rather read your own links before posting them from now on?
This is making MANY people rich if it were not for the money being made you would not hear diddly about GW. I have read both sides and I am not sure what the deal is but I do know this whole buying carbon credits and business being able to buy and trade how much crap they can put in the air seems more like a scam.
Basically if I have enough money I can do whatever and pump whatever I want into the air. What a joke just like this whole GW stuff.
From the article:
Quote:
Under cap-and-trade, a price is put on each ton of pollution, and businesses can buy and sell permits to meet emissions limits.
When an agenda's popularity heats up, it's a good thing because you can spin it positively. When an agenda's popularity dies down, just allude to flies eating **** or people eating McD's. Spin it like a top.
What the global climate does is completely independant of what people believe or don't. It is dependant on atmospheric physics and chemistry. The latter is influenced by human activities.
In so many cases there is a clear difference between "belief" and "fact"
You can believe that Obama is a secret Kenyan but that doesn't make it true
You can believe that 9/11 was an inside job but that doesn't make it true
You can believe that climate change science is a scam but that doesn't make it true
You know someone wise and smart would know that unless they are able to go though vast amounts of scientific data and expose themsleves to all the arguments and counter arguments you cannot have first hand knowledge who is right?
I don't have that knowledge or background. .........so I'll go with the 99% of scientists who make it a career to study just this very thing.
You can go with Hannity and Rush Limbaugh.....LOL
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
