Can we put all this BS about man made global warming to bed now that its been debunked?

It's not that it's been totally debunked, but questions are being raised that are shaking the level of confidence that many have in this "science. " Scientists are supposed to be disinterested observers and reporters, not passionate advocates. When they become invested in the hypotheses they're exploring, the process becomes corrupted, which is what I think happened here.My faith in AGW started being shaken years ago, but it's accelerated since.

I agree with Neal Boortz - I think that when global communism collapsed (because it's inherently wrong), those committed to its success were left ideologically homeless, and they infilitrated the environmental movement and pretty much took it over and redirected it to promote their ultimate goal - the destruction of capitalism and western civilization as we understand it. Look at Kyoto - it said that emissions from the developed nations were bad, but from the underdeveloped nations was okay. The atmosphere and global climate are secondary to these people - their hatred of capitalism and the west is all-consuming - they're obsessive about it.

So, no, to answer the question, we won't see the AGW movement dissolve for quite a while yet - they've simply got too much time and effort and money invested in it. Pressure must be kept on them, and those who dissent from the "party line" of AGW must calmly and reasonably present their position again and again. Sneering mockery of AGW works as well in persuading people as does calling those who don't believe in AGW, "insane.

It did not get debunked. It is still hard science, as it has been for twenty years or more. Claims that global warming are not man made are basically insane.

That is to say a deliberate refusal to look at the facts. The only explanations for climate change denial are greed and hypocrisy. Some people just want to earn as much as they can from coal or oil and don't care about the consequences for humanity.

Others just want to drive gas guzzling sports cars and trucks and don't give a damn. Either way, they have nothing to do with science. An overwhelming number of studies have accumulated in many related fields that put global warming beyond any doubt from a science or reality based perspective.

This is a science issue. It is not something leftists thought up. Leftists pay more attention to science than conservatives, and they are less concerned with protecting current industries and bad habits.

Otherwise there is no reason to consider global warming left or right. It just is. The left is more willing to propose and promote solutions.

When science, as with religion, becomes politicized, it gets compromised and suffers for it. I am not a climatologist, yet, as any other person, I hold a personal view on this topic which I have arrived at by reading literature on the subject, applying my lay analysis and incorporating some logic and common sense. One of the things that has always bothered me about the global warming argument was that the science involved has seemed to revolve around a focus of trying to prove it, affirm it if you will.In the process abandoning the basic concept involved in all other scientific hypothesis were an approach of trying to disprove the hypothesis is welcomed and encouraged.

The way that people within the scientific field who try to present a contrarian view to the hypothesis are viewed with scorn, dismissed as being insane is something I have never seen with anything else in the scientific realm. Science should be a passionate discipline that follows a dispassionate process, it should never be compromised as it has been on this issue, and it should never be politicized.

As soon as they came up with that brilliant dogma: "All the cold weather we have is caused by global warming," any rational discussion of the matter became impossible. How is shutting down all manufacturing and oil drilling because it is bad for the environment supposed to get us independent from foreign oil? That is another bit of dogma, the part on how global warming initiatives are going to get us free from foreign oil.

All the global warming initiatives are doing is taking wealth away from the owners of manufacturing and oil industries, and putting it in the hands of politicians. And killing all the jobs that people used to have.

I wasn't aware that it was debunked. To answer your question, even if a new and compelling study was released, I don't think the general public would put it to bed. We'll be fighting about this for a long time to come.

I don't think the question is relevant, honestly. Here's why: If the man-made global climate change crowd is WRONG, then the CONSEQUENCES of their being wrong, but getting their way anyway, are the following: -We will be less dependent upon foreign oil, thus giving the Middle East less of our money -The water will be cleaner -The air will be cleaner -We will have more jobs in our country, due to sustaining renewable energy systems -The ocean will be less acidic, thus preventing the collapse of the food chain If, however, your crowd is WRONG, the consequences will be the following: -We all die sooner, and take the rest of the planet with us. Who the F cares who's right or wrong?

The "worst-case" scenarios still make acting as if global climate change is at least partially man-made the correct course of action. Even if it global climate change is 99% natural, it is going to result in the death of mankind. We should at LEAST put the brakes on our 1%.

Any fool should be able to see that. By the way, anyone who thinks that "global warming" means that there should not be any more snow or extreme winters knows NOTHING about weather and climate. The problem is that the scientists who originally threw out the term "global warming" assumed that people are smart.

They're not. They need their little hands held as someone explains that an overall raising of the global temperature will actually cause extreme weather systems, a change in currents due to ice melting (resulting in warm air being unable to move as it used to), and can actually cause a second ice age in some parts of the world.

I don't think that it will be put to bed because it's good for business. There are many "green" initiatives that are putting people to work. There are companies built around being green and getting people to be more green.

Also, people feel better about themselves when they think they are going green and doing something to help the environment. In fact, whether true or not, the idea of global warming has made people realize the damage being done with current practices as they are. Since the beginning of industrialization, the toxic waste produced has had deleterious effects on the environment and people's health in more ways than just global warming.Gh cancer rates in specific areas, damage to water supplies, poisoned earth where crops grow, toxic chemical in our bloodstreams from birth, and a host of other environment related health issues are all around because of the unchecked industrial expansion that has taken place.

We are now able to begin to set right what has gone wrong. Whether it will help remains to be seen. Overall, global warming, whether real or inflated by the media and politicians as platforms, has opened up our eyes to the possible irrevocable damage that has been done to the planet.

We can't put global warming to bed because it is awake and alive. politicsdaily.com/2010/02/13/yes-global-....

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.