Anthropogenic Global Warming

[godf]

elprincipe said:

Mnementh said:

Kytiara said:

Contrary to popular belief, AGW is still a scientific THEORY, not FACT. There are scientists on both sides of the debate.

That's actually true, there are scientiest, that does not accept the fact, that there is a global warming or that it's caused by humans. But as far as I know, no scientist who works on the field of climatology is in this group. So can you name a scientist, who is researching climate, that does not support the theorty of AGW?

Dr. Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado, someone who's been doing climate research for over 30 years (and thus is old enough to remember the "global cooling" alarmists of the 1970s).

Go here: http://climatesci.colorado.edu/main-conclusions/

Pielke has explicitly denied being a skeptic, and said:

 "the evidence of a human fingerprint on the global and regional climate is incontrovertible as clearly illustrated in the National Research Council report and in our research papers (e.g. see http://blue.atmos.colostate.edu/publications/pdf/R-258.pdf). "

 Humans are causing climate change.

 He does doubt some of the scientific conclusions arround global warming, and believes the current consensus exagerates the impact of CO2 emmissions, and downplays the impact of other human activities.

 

"1. I don't believe it or disbelieve it.  I think we don't have enough evidence to say conclusively either way."

If the IPCC reports are true, and we go on polluting anyway, as we're not certain enough, we will cost millions of people their livelihoods, homes, and means of supporting themselves.  We will not be certain we're causing climate change until well after it's too late to do anything about it.

Some people in the developed world seem willing to take that risk, knowing that their governments will have the resources to allow them to adapt.  They know that they are taking a risk with the lives of others.  This is especially ammusing when it's conservative Americans who had just supported the invasion of Iraq as, while the evidence of their WMD program was shaky, it was a risk that could not be taken.