Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Can someone tell me where I can find solid evidence for AGW?
Like a website or a video.
By the way I'm more interested in the science aspect of it rather than rhetoric, as I am often put off the idea that AGW exists by their videos always showing hurricanes and tidal waves at the beginning, as if there was never a stiff breeze, nor a ripple in the ocean, before we started burning fossil fuels. I feel it compromises the argument's credibility.
Facts only please.
I'm never gonna be able to read all this in time to pick a best answer, so I'll have to leave it to a vote.
Thanks to everyone who answered though!
9 Answers
- MTRstudentLv 61 decade agoFavorite Answer
You can read the full IPCC reports for yourself and follow their references to see that it's not just all computer models. They're supported by most of the scientific community:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on...
I randomly selected a hundreds of scientific papers and skimmed through them. NONE of them rejected human global warming, 80< accepted it, or provided evidence in support:
http://www.geocities.com/nd_wtf/AGWlist.txt
http://www.geocities.com/nd_wtf/Paperpositions.txt
Nature has a good climate science page:
http://www.nature.com/climate/index.html
You can also look up papers to your heart's content on googlescholar:
unfortunately most require subscription
- 1 decade ago
I applaud you on your open mindedness to this question. Actually looking for evidence and not just following everyone else like sheep is something fewer people seem to be doing nowadays. As to your question, I'm afraid you've set yourself a very difficult task. Not just because of the mountain of rhetoric that also comes up when you search for pro-AGW proof, but also because there just doesn't seem to be a lot of scientific evidence supporting AGW (believe me, I've looked). Your best bet is to find a comparison of the two arguments from years ago before this became a political issue, I suggest scientific journals and magazines. I hope you come to a satisfactory conclusion on this topic and remember to keep your mind open to both sides of the argument and have a look at some of the anti-AGW stuff.
In case you're wondering what my opinion is, I think warming is a natural process that's actually beneficial for humans and the environment.
- 1 decade ago
There s none!
The UN's IPCC bases its dire forecasts on nothing more than computer models that regard the earth as a flat disk bathed in a constant 24 hour haze of sunlight, without north and south poles, without clouds and without any relationship to the real planet we live on.
Despite much rhetoric and research over the past two decades, there is still not a single piece of actual evidence that the now-maligned carbon dioxide molecule causes global warming (or "climate change").
To over 40,000 scientists from around the world this is no surprise, for no such evidence can ever be found.
Carbon dioxide, at less than 400 parts per million by volume, does not and can not influence either the atmospheric temperature or the climate in a measurable way. Only laboratory experiments with heat lamps can make carbon dioxide do what climate change proponents want it to do, that is, warm the flasks that contain CO2. Yet this is not principally how the open atmosphere gets heated and no laboratory experiment can mimic actual air dynamics or be extrapolated to represent them.
Any and all evidence that has ever been presented to support the idea that carbon dioxide has an effect on global temperatures has been biased, opinionated and based on an agenda that pre-emptively dismissed alternative explanations.
Computer simulations regard the earth as a flat disk, without North or South Pole, without the Tropics, without clouds and bathed in a 24 hour haze of sunshine. The reality is two icy poles and a tropical equatorial zone, with each and every square metre of our earth receiving an ever varying and different amount of energy from the sun, season to season and day to day. This reality is too difficult to input to a computer.
Source(s): Analytical chemist Hans Schreuder : http://www.tech-know.eu/NISubmission/index.html - andyLv 71 decade ago
You can't since everything that points to AGW uses assumptions and faulty feedback loops to prove their theories. Take a look at the hockey stick graphs that show temperatures for the past 2000 years always being cooler then today even though there is written evidence to the contrary.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- DarwinistLv 61 decade ago
Well, there is this, from Jim Z, in answer to one of my recent questions. I found it pretty convincing!
http://www.anecdotoff.com/engine/modules/imageprev...
Seriously though, there are some good links from Tom A and MTR. Read them and you will see consistency from this side of the debate. Interesting links from Will T too.
I've also had a quick look at the link from jd61 on the 'skeptics' side and it represents outright denial at its finest! To quote from this link, "After all is said and done, it will be found that carbon dioxide does not and can not affect either the global temperature or climate change. Carbon dioxide has no climate forcing effect and is not a greenhouse gas and neither is water vapour."
I mean come on! Even most skeptics would disagree with that!
- davemLv 51 decade ago
Sorry, I can't help you find solid evidence of global warming. Nor can anyone else here.
There's "evidence" from "scientists", but it's full of holes and highly disputable, which is the reason they refuse to debate it. Then there's the politicians who've hijacked the theory for financial gain and social change. It's all rather sad.
However, if you ever find some good, solid evidence that it's actually happening (proof would be better) please feel free to share it with this group. Proof would end the discussion and I wouldn't feel so cheated paying taxes to support the fight against CO2.
- ?Lv 51 decade ago
The National Academy of Science and NASA
http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/climate_change...
- 1 decade ago
the short answer to your question is you cant, try searching the internet you will find mountains of conflicting evidence from both sides of the argument. the only fact is ,yes the earth is going through a warming period at the moment as it has previously the only difference is we were not here during the last one this planet has been through ice ages and warming periods previously before any interference from homo sapiens, this can be varified using the fossil records from different countries. if i was going to be cynical i could say its both a great way of raising taxes and of holding back emerging economies who currently rely on the burning of fossil fuels e.g china & india
- Will TLv 41 decade ago
Follow this link:
http://www.maweb.org/documents/document.429.aspx.p...
and look at page number 16.
Pretty stern evidence, visit the below site to find out how to green up you life style, cut carbon, and become a more efficient consumer:
Source(s): brain