A. As has been pointed out before, it's science, not politics. Or at least it is science and SHOULDN'T be politics.

B. When did I say "ZOMG ITS A FACT END THREAD"? Methinks the denialist doth protest too much.

C. "They have never been scientifically PROVEN. They are all THEORIES." Just like gravity, evolution, and plate tectonics, right?*

I want you to read the following two paragraphs very carefully so that you might comprehend what I am saying this time:

"I'm not going to bother putting pages and pages of data up here but I am going to say that the huge number of renowned scientific organizations supporting one side of the "controversy" and utter lack of them on the other side may not make it a fact, but it's damn well close enough to fact for me to take their word on it. Certainly it's enough for me to take their word on it over the media or politicians or whatnot.

"There is no dispute in the mainstream scientific community that humans are affecting global climate and that the effect is higher temperature."

It is of course your absolute right to believe whatever you wish, but you do so in defiance of settled scientific opinion.

There is no serious debate in the relevant scientific communities about the existence of human-caused global climate change (increase), and opinions in the debate that does exist, that concerning the EXTENT of that change, range from "bad" to "really bad" to "catastrophic".

You are perfectly free to disbelieve the conclusions reached by EVERY MAJOR SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTION WITH AN OPINION ON THE SUBJECT, but you do so in defiance of scientists across the (rapidly warming) planet.

I am not an expert. You are not an expert. I think the experts are right. You think the experts are wrong. Do you see how my position could be considered somewhat stronger than yours?

* I somehow missed that you actually do think that evolution is also not real.

Now the thread is starting to get into "let's belittle eachother's religious beliefs" territory.

Perhaps it's time for it to be locked? (again?)

What I hate the most about arguments over Global Warming and Evolution is the fact that there are people out there who do not know what a Theory is. They seem to think it is is a Hypothesis or an Idea.

A theory has to be tested several times before it is a theory

A theory is:

A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.

In the case of global warming we understand the nature of methane and carbon dioxide. We have an understanding of the percipitation cycle we also have an understanding of SSTs and how they regulate earths temperture. To expect Micro predictions is foolish and improbable to predict somethign on a larger scale is far easier because much of te varitions we observe everyday is chaotic.

There are mountains of evidence that support both Globabl Warming and Evolution and the reason why people tend to state them as fact is that both theories are Universially accepted.

Once again a theory is something that has some supporting evidence. that Nuclear power Plant runs of something that is a theory. the Sun's energy source is somethign that is just a theory(Fusion).

I can sort of understand the resistance to accepting Global Warmign because it means a change in behavior but the resistance to Evolution completely befuddles me. It doesn't change anything.

B) This is _very easy_ to prove and has been proven time after time in many smaller and larger scale ecosystems with painstaking rsearch. I'm not going to participate in this discussion, however.  It is a pity for mankind that too many people like you are simply playing ignorant and cause problems that will not touch us, but future generations.

And yes, I actually HAVE met people (already many years ago) from the US house of representatives whose lines of reasoning was the following: "I don't have to care for the environment. The apocalypse is near and I as a good christian will be going to heaven etc etc.". It is very frightening to see these people seem to multiply faster than is acceptable.

He probably believes in creation rather than evolution (creation doesn't have to throw evolution entirely out the window though) - and you are trying to equate those that espouse to a belief in creationism (instead of evolution) to those who think the earth is flat...that's not cool.

But I suppose anyone who has religion as a major component in their life should belong to the flat earth society, right? /sarcasm

Just try not to insult other people's beliefs.

OMG its a fact what is this 1993? we are all going to die.

As I've said, I have no doubts that many use this issue as a means for political gain. And yes, it does work on many as you've pointed out (those who claim as fact). But, if we put celebrities and 'celebrity scientists' aside, there is, or rather was, a debate on this issue for quite some time. There are, however, still researcers out there who reamin very skeptical and those who, as they should with any theory, reserve their final judgment the same as you do. And as always you have the nutjobs who claim the two extremes.

Of course this isn't fact, but that doesn't mean that there isn't enough evidence to be concerned over or believe it to be true. Evolution is a theory, and while I believe it should be continued to be studied, as it is a theory, I have read enough about it to accept it as true.

Looking back at this now, after rereading my post, I agree,  that it doesn't really make sense that we are arguing about this. We have essentially the same reservations on the theory, just a different level of acceptance of it. You were aiming for those who said it was fact, I was too quick to jump the gun, my apologies

Final-Fan said: A. As has been pointed out before, it's science, not politics. Or at least it is science and SHOULDN'T be politics. B. When did I say "ZOMG ITS A FACT END THREAD"? Methinks the denialist doth protest too much. C. "They have never been scientifically PROVEN. They are all THEORIES." Just like gravity, evolution, and plate tectonics, right?* I want you to read the following two paragraphs very carefully so that you might comprehend what I am saying this time: "I'm not going to bother putting pages and pages of data up here but I am going to say that the huge number of renowned scientific organizations supporting one side of the "controversy" and utter lack of them on the other side may not make it a fact, but it's damn well close enough to fact for me to take their word on it. Certainly it's enough for me to take their word on it over the media or politicians or whatnot. "There is no dispute in the mainstream scientific community that humans are affecting global climate and that the effect is higher temperature." It is of course your absolute right to believe whatever you wish, but you do so in defiance of settled scientific opinion. There is no serious debate in the relevant scientific communities about the existence of human-caused global climate change (increase), and opinions in the debate that does exist, that concerning the EXTENT of that change, range from "bad" to "really bad" to "catastrophic". You are perfectly free to disbelieve the conclusions reached by EVERY MAJOR SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTION WITH AN OPINION ON THE SUBJECT, but you do so in defiance of scientists across the (rapidly warming) planet. I am not an expert. You are not an expert. I think the experts are right. You think the experts are wrong. Do you see how my position could be considered somewhat stronger than yours? * I somehow missed that you actually do think that evolution is also not real.

This belief that all major scientists have decided on the issue is a fallacy.

What we do have is a lot of "science journalists", "comittee panelists", and politicians who have decided and have used their political weight to gain the endorsement of scientific organizations. Just because an organization endorses a theory does not mean its community and members have as well. These organizations have to play the political game or they lose funding, thats no secret and to be a legitimate scientist you have to be part of these organizations to be taken seriously..again no secret.

But more over, Science is not now and never has been about "consensus". Its about facts, theories, and the practical tests that prove those theories correct. If anthropogenic global warming is a fact then where are the scrutinized tests that prove that theory? And how many times has it been reproduced and by which scientists and groups? Those are the things that matter.

Some examples?

Roy Spencer is the Weather Satellite Team Leader for NASA and brings up valid points about the greenhouse effect specifically as a cause. He points out that if the greenhouse effect were the cause the heat would be trapped in the troposphere and it would be hotter there than on the ground. But the opposite is true according to his satellite readings and research, the troposphere is cooler than the ground readings that are taken.

John Christy who iirc is a Professor of Atmosphereic Science and points out that of all of the greenhouse gasses C02 accounts for an utterly insiginicant percentage (far less than 1%). Where as water vapor accounts for some 96% of all greenhouse gas. So are we to believe we should fight water vapor emissions? Should I stop boiling water?

There are others who point out things like the Medievil Warm Period, a time in the middle ages when its much warmer than it is now. Yet this time period, even without the benefits of air conditioning and modern medicine was considered to be an era of great prosperity and growth. So why are we so afraid of rising temperatures?

Realize that the things I have pointed out aren't actually debated by the scientists. These points aren't in contention, and yet somehow we are to believe that carbon emissions are the problem and that if it gets much hotter we are all in big trouble.

Now if you want to tell me we have energy problems and we should conserve? I'm all for that, but don't come running to me screaming about global warming and carbon emissions. I'm not buying it.

fiction fiction fiction
it's as stupid as Year 2000 bug, aint the weather started to get warmer since ice age?

why the weather is getting warmer? it's simple as ABC
i'm suprised that so many educated ppl believe those bogus theories from environmental groups

there is nothing to do with human, dont over-estimate ourselves, it's all because of the activity of the sun! The sun emit more radiation from the past thousand years thats why the earth is warmer.