This is not to prove or disprove global warming, but if you're only convinced because of Gore's movie, you might want to see this....

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

Its an institute, they are proven to be research groups that work for a specific political agenda.

Why should i believe this and not Al gore? Explain to me why, especially considering that most government's and scientists believe the IPCC and the UN.

Like i said, ok so do nothing then. Good luck defending your country from the millions of starving people who need to leave their country over drought and food supply problems in 50 yrs.

Fact and fiction.

There are facts behind global warming, but what we know, presented by the media, is nothing like reality.

Yes, so we should all try to cut pollution, hurting economies and people across the world, and watch the Earth continue to warm because that's what you think. I'm not going to listen to a former chair of Harvard who was ousted because of his politically incorrect ideas, I'm going to look at some mountains and form my own theory based on that.

Few people argue the validity of climate change. What many respected scientists are arguing is that it's a natural cycle.

So, in your perfect world, what happens if we drastically change our consumption, build alternative energies, fight pollution at every corner, and the planet continues to warm? At that point, you're the one who fucked our children by dedicating massive resources to something that didn't affect a damned thing in the end.

Find out what is causing it. Give dissenting scientists the money to prove their own findings. GET DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS.

Politicizing science is no different than what astronomers fought since the organization of the Catholic church... and look at how far that shit set us back as a functional race.

I'm wondering why you believe Al Gore over them... or many of the geologists, astronomers, meteorologists, etc. who constantly scream "WE JUST DON'T HAVE ENOUGH DATA!" in favor of a knee-jerk reaction that might cause more problems down the line.

I'm not saying this isn't man-made. I'm not saying it isn't a natural cycle. All I'm saying is that, up until this point, the only scientists who have been given the money to find out have been on one side of the camp.

Give money to the other side. Maybe then we'll find the "Inconvenient Truth" behind all of this. Because, from my college courses, bad things will start happening when oceans start letting go of their methane... Bad things. Let's find out why this is happening before we start snipe-hunting. At least then we'll be able to try to either fight it or adapt to it.

The world isnt really warming, the global climate is just changing. The warm and cold seasons have been pushed up about a month and areas that had tons of rain dont and areas which never get rain are starting to.

Global warming will go down as the biggest scientific fraud in history.

Which is probably why the world community started using the term 'Climate Change' instead of Global Warming. Which is what I thought this thread was about. Climate Change is defiantely fact (mainly becuase it's a natural occurance in nature). The issue is of the socallled rapid change, more so rapid then proven by the ice cores thing they do to look at changes in the earth atmosphere and temperature thingy...I don't know what it's called.

Then any scientists questioning it, along side that there are 15 times as many not questioning it. Glaciers are the biggest proof you need something is going on, they are melting at a rate not monitored before and only in the last 20 years but again the scientists and people who think it's not real are not questioning something is changing but the causes, it is a natural occurance or man made?

Again, I'm not argueing Global Warming, that phrase is dead. It was my mistake to assume Global Warming was Climate Change. Climate change it happening currently but it's the causes that are the issue here.

And on glaciers: http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0103/p07s02-sten.html

Key parts:

"Recent studies reveal that the Gangotri, which forms a mass of ice about 18 miles long, is retreating at a rate of more than 100 feet a year."

And

"While the Gangotri has been retreating since measurements began in 1842, the rate of retreat, which was around 62 feet per year between 1935 and 1971, has almost doubled."

It's always retreated, that's fine but why the increased rate in the lat 30 years?

There are many reasons why, i am a firm believer that the lack of a huge volcanic eruption is partly to blame as it usually has the effect of cooling the atmosphere as a whole (or so I've heard) and the last one we had was in 1991, Mount Pinatubo (category 6).