Quantcast

The Global Warming Skeptics vs The Scientific Consensus [infographic]

Read more: http://s3.amazonaws.com/infobeautiful/climate_skep...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Frank 2009/12/24 06:31:25
    Frank
    +3
    Excellent, excellent. Great use for arguing with global warming deniers.
  • Kino 2009/12/24 04:48:54
    Kino
    +3
    Great find, mrigor. That image is going to be stored on the ole hard drive.
  • Manwë Kino 2009/12/24 19:58:34
    Manwë
    +2
    Same for me.
  • flaca BN-0 2009/12/24 02:58:02
    flaca BN-0
    +3
    It's not about the fact that the temperatures are going warmer overall, it's the steep rate of the change, something that does not correlate with previous changes.
  • pbird49 2009/12/24 01:16:12
  • N2Longhair pbird49 2009/12/24 01:31:14
    N2Longhair
    +1
    That's what I'm talking about!

    Thanks pbird49
  • S 2009/12/23 23:51:24
    S
    +1
    There are some people who will argue that there is no mud around them as they sink into the mire. Mud, mire, call it what you will - those who cannot see that man's activities are affecting the environment, the planet and all life forms on it, are either blind, brain dead, or never leave their caves. Actually, even the blind can sense things by using their other senses. It is those in denial or those that have a vested interest in remaining in denial that continue to argue with reality. It doesn't really matter what they say, and since they have no credibility, those of us who do see what is around us, should stop trying to convince them or others mired in the mud. If it was up to me, I would let them sink; but unfortunately, the work and effort that will be put in by those who always rise to the forefront, will benefit them as well.
  • N2Longhair S 2009/12/24 00:20:11
    N2Longhair
    +2
    Men think to highly of themselves to think that we can impact the temperature of this planet with CO2 gases. This planet has survived and healed itself from volcanic eruptions that released more CO2 gases in a day than all that combined by the human race since the cave man. Climate change (global warming and cooling) are cyclical and will never remain constant.

    Polluting our water and land are a totally separate issue that we do have an impact on as occupants. Over time, the earth can still heal itself from these issues too.

    The picture below is a prime example of climate change histeryia. The fact is there are five-times more polar bears now than in 2007 and contrary to initial and flawed reports (admitted to by NASA) the ice melting figures were way off base.

    contrary initial flawed reports admitted nasa ice melting figures base

    I say Stop the the propaganda!
  • EdHunter N2Longhair 2009/12/24 03:29:01
    EdHunter
    +5
    Incorrect, Sir. It seems that you've deceived yourself into believing propaganda based on a fabrication.

    Volcanoes emit far more SO2 than any other gas. And the net impact of large volcanic eruptions is global COOLING. In fact, if you take all the CO2 emitted by all active volcanoes together, they don't account for any more than 5% of that contributed by humans.

    I would suggest you do some research, using objective scientific sources. You can start here:

    http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/h...
  • Frank N2Longhair 2009/12/24 06:34:36
    Frank
    +1
    The propaganda is from the anti-scince posers.
  • realist N2Longhair 2009/12/26 00:47:00
    realist
    the earth will be around long after we humans are all dead and gone just as it was here long before we were. it's not whether were killing the earth its whether its still inhabitable for us and the rest of the species.
  • Bastion N2Longhair 2009/12/28 00:04:06
    Bastion
    +1
    To quote George Carlin: The Earth isn't going ANYWHERE . . . . WE are.

    The Earth isn't in trouble - it will heal itself.
    But - humans are f***ked.
  • Denny 2009/12/23 23:27:32 (edited)
    Denny
    +1
    They need to explain the reasons the middle ages were so much warmer than we are now without all the extra co2. By the way fixing it so that detractors who do not agree with them having their reputations destroyed is not the answer to getting Scientific facts correct.
  • Frank Denny 2009/12/24 06:51:48
    Frank
    +2
    Did you read the entire chart?
    Sometimes scientists do get their reputations hurt, when they are exposed by other scientists as being un-scientific. In 1989 2 electrochemists -Martin Fleischmann and Stanley Pons reported that they had discovered a process to create "cold fusion". Their claims would have been a real breakthrough, and there was much excitement generated. Their results could not be replicated, and the 2 scientists and their methods were not peer reviewed well. They were wrong. Should anyone have worried about their reputations? It is the risk that is taken. That is why a scientist should always follow the process and not advocate. What has happened with conservative advocates who have used science lately is that when their results have been discredited- they take their case to an uninformed -scientifically- public and cry no fair. Of course their arguments can sound convincing and scientific to scientifically uninformed people like Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh.
  • Denny Frank 2009/12/24 07:17:39
    Denny
    That's not what I'm talking about and YOU know it.
  • Judi 2009/12/23 23:19:03
    Judi
    +1
    It was not that many years ago that people were worried about global cooling and exploring ways to warm the planet. And, according to records, 1934 was the warmest in the US on record. So, if you believe in global warming, maybe you should see what they did to change it.
  • ruby 2009/12/23 23:15:03
    ruby
    What is that?

About Me

mrigor

mrigor

CA, US

2007/04/06 00:00:00

View complete profile

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals

The Latest From SodaHead

News

Politics