Prev Next
Featured Quizzes
Politix Daily Headlines
Featured Debates
Issues

See all 17 issues

People
White House

See all people

HOT AIR

Does This Graphic Prove Climate Change is Real?

Next>

by Mary Noble

Senior Editor t

The image above was created by National Science Board member James Lawrence Powell, who looked at 14,000 scientific papers on climate change. Which must have been a fairly mindboggling endeavor.

His goal was to test the oft-made climate-skeptic claim that there's still a debate among scientists as to whether man-made climate change is real. His result suggests there's no debate - just an overwhelming deluge of papers supporting the idea of man-made climate change.

Of course, the result might not prove climate science is real - it might just prove that scientists are conformists. But that's unlikely to be the case, since the world rewards controversial scientists much more than it celebrates conformists. Scientists get famous through breaking the mold - like Darwin and Einstein. So any scientist with good evidence against climate change would be likely to publish it ASAP, so as to win fame, notoriety, and hefty research grants.

Via Slate.
Like this article? B Vote Up
?

Does this image convince you that climate change is real?

View results

Comments (view in Forum)

  • Xenocracy
    !
    The Climate Is Worldwide, So Why Can’t The Conspiracy Of Global Warming?
    Do Some Homework And Read The Farmer’s Almanac With Its 200 Years Of Weather History/Research And You’ll Find That Climate Change Happens…But Why Should You Care,,It’s Over!! You Already Think The Mayans Got The End Of The World Prediction Right!!
  • Xenocracy
    !
    @Zazziness You Lost This Discussion With The First 9 Letters,,,( www.epa.gov )…
    Maybe If You Stop Getting Your Info From A Government Run “Kiddie Site”, Then
    Maybe You Could Have A Grown Up Conversation..But A Least It’s A Step Up From “Chicken Little”!!

  • View all 6 replies >

  • u
    RobertJHarsh
    !
    Bad question. I refused to answer. I do not believe climate change is real and the question makes the assumption the person answering believes in climate change. The graphic is B$ as well. Google easily reports way more than 24 people reject the fallacy fantasy that is global warming/cooling/change/etc.
  • Zazziness
    !
    It isn't talking about number of people. It's talking about the number of articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals by scientists working in the field.
  • CanisCanemEdit
    !
    @Zazziness - With all due respect, the graph is biased. Follow the money trail. The peer revewal system is just a group of people shaking hands and sharing funds.

    One could make the same graph and argument about the current religious climate of the United States...if you are simply talking only to Christians.
  • Zazziness
    !
    @CanisCanemEdit Nope. That's not even remotely close to how science works, or publication in a scientific journal.
  • Zazziness
    !
    @Cool_voter It's like the deniers are waiting for the entire world scientific community to suddenly yell "Bazinga!" ;-)

  • View all 45 replies >

  • drpeeper
    !
    Simple facts liberals hate.

    1) The Climate does change- has for billions of years- we humans have nothing to do with it. Remember- the mid-west was under a mile thick sheet of ice / glaciers- melted and formed the Great Lakes. ALL before a Styrofoam cup- or car ever existed.

    2) The folks the past 15 yrs pushing Man Made Global Warming- were exposed as frauds 2 years ago. Pushing an agenda for research $.

    I am amazed at the generation of liberals, who in the 60's70's never trusted government. Now, they follow along like little lemmings chirping away. Maybe question your beliefs every so often. This new internet thingy helps to research where you may be wrong.
  • Zazziness
    !
    @drpeeper Simple facts you hate: It is not news to anyone that climate can change without man. Scientists are saying that this time it is changing because of our activities and have reams of data to back that up.(See above graph for some idea how MUCH data.) 2) Yes, a scientist was caught fudging some data. That does not prove "the whole thing is a hoax." Data before and since has only confirmed climate change is happening. Since in another thread you just mentioned you've made up your own version of history and anyone who accepts the history they teach in school is mistaken, you've demonstrated you have no problem discarding expert testimony and hard evidence if it gets in the way of what you want to conclude. That means you are a very poor judge of what is and is not scientific evidence.
  • drpeeper
    !
    @Zazziness Fudging some data? Remember, all of this information was subject to Freedom of Information requests, and they were deleting information that would harm them. They were deleting information and fighting the release. So it's a hoax.

    Remember- expert testimony from those with an agenda ( and those silly liberal petitions signed by scientists who have no climate science experiment)

    How about this. Get the 10 Best Climate Scientists in the world- Have them donate their time. No pay- Provide all the necessary equipment- give them 1 year- and get their result. I can guarantee you it would end the man made global warming debate. WHICH is why it will never be done. Because it's a cash cow for other governments.

  • View all 15 replies >

  • PoliticalSpice
    !
    We should be addressing pollution, and not sit around debating this unless we are scientist. Pollution should be minimized, what does arguing about climate change accomplish. I favor planting trees, insulation to conserve energy, re-forestation. Solar panels on every sunny building. And tecnology to minimize particulate matter and carbon from fossil fuel. Sewage to methane conversion plants. I don't want, as Gore supports increasing the use of nuclear to address carbon emmissions.
  • Zazziness
    !
    I think you're right. Arguing about this without taking action is like debating if the house is on fire just because we're surrounded with smoke.
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    I said long ago that if people continue to tie cutting fossile fuel use and pollution to Climate Change, it will go nowhere. There are reasons enought to do it, giving people an out with an issue so large people can barely comprehend it or is not good for the cause...
  • Tralee
    !
    Pollution is not climate change, I agree, clean water is good, clean air is good, and I totally deny that they cause any climate change.
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    @Tralee

    You can actually run experiments to show what happens when certain gasses are trapped in a closed system like the atmosphere and sunlght hits them...

    facts are fun!
  • PoliticalSpice
    !
    @Tralee You deny that sir pollution causes climate change. Can I ask what your credentials are? Have you actually done any studies? The whole point I was making is this is a silly argument. Air pollution is bad. Let's minimize it for the reasons we can agree on, and stop causing more carbon emmission in the form of hot air by arguing about something we do not agree on.

  • View all 11 replies >

  • jmann88
    !
    @Cool_voter well I'm suprised that they don't tax humans on passing gas. Cus of methane being released. Give it time. It will probably happen
  • u
    crusader
    !
    I do beleive in natural climate change but not man made climate change. Therefore this graph does nothing to prove anything they are trying to claim it proves. Humans do harm the environment but do not affect the climate.
  • Zazziness
    !
    It always flabbergasts me when someone says this. Of course organic life's intake and waste products have an effect on the climate. Climate and environment are interactive.
  • John_Matrix
    !
    @Zazziness

    There is a cause and effect connection you speak of but there still isn't sufficient evidence to support humans as the cause of such a massive change. Especially when you consider all of the greenhouse gases people drone on about are about 95 to 97 percent, naturally produced. The climate is far too complex and our understanding of it is still in its infancy to make concrete claims either way.
  • u
    crusader
    !
    @Zazziness They do interact but not necessarily as a cause and effect. Tehy claim coal burning plans in America creates global warming and those areas will be most effected by the global warming. If that is true why didn't global warming or climate change occur on a grand scale in Iceland after the latest volcanic explosion. That burnt more carbon than many power plants combined do in one year.
  • u
    crusader
    !
    @Zazziness Pollution effects air and water quality but their is no evidence if changes the weather patterns. Also how can they prove what the weather was like before it was recorded, they can only theorize about it. Did some cavemans fire bring us out of the last ice age? No, I think the cycle just reversed and it got warmer.

  • View all 7 replies >

  • Politicskid
    !
    And no, it doesn't. We've got to remember that scientists are funded mostly by people who want a predetermined outcome, and that can cause bias in there experiments. I'm not convinced that, given the evidence, we need to sacarafice billions in attempt to slow global warming. If anything, leave that job to a non profit. People shouldn't have to pay to keep the world cooler if they don't want to!
  • blue_yahoo
    !
    Of course climate change is real........that's what climate does. It has always changed and will continue to change till the day the earth is destroyed by the sun's explosion. Antartica used to be tropical and Kansas used to be an ocean. What makes people think that the climate we have today was always the way it was or that it's not in a constant state of change is beyond me.
  • o
    Sharpshooter
    !
    The Poll question reflects the reason the graphic exists.... there is no way to disagree with the predetermined result.

    The answers are "Yes I agree with the graphic" or "I agreed with the graphic before seeing it"

    What happened to "The graphic doesn't convince me" or "The graphic reflects a bias" as possible answers?

    Obviously POLLING wasn't one of the author's fields of study, or was it?
  • Zazziness
    !
    I think the author was trying to tell you something -- that it is long past time you understood that it is happening. Choosing to deny it is not a choice any more.
  • o
    Cool_voter
    !
    @Zazziness the people denying it today are the same kind of people denying that the earth was round.
    You will be in history books.... Just not forte beat reasons...
  • o
    Sharpshooter
    !
    @Zazziness Climate Change is the new name for the old scam, Global Warming.

    The climate of the planet runs in cycles within a larger cycle.

    There was a period of Global Warming during the 13th and 14th Century... cars, factories, lightbulbs, cell phones?

    The Ice Age ended with a period of Global Warming... again, cars, factories, lightbulbs, cell phones? Man?

    Smaller cycles within the much larger cycle of cooling of the earth simply caused by the physics of the planet getting older.

    Global Warming would happen with or without Al Gore and his Carbon Trade Exchange scam. Futures Exchanges were invented to allow traders to make money on something they don't own. Starting with Tulips in the Netherlands to Frozen Concentrated Orange Juice.

    The real science and real physics don't support Global Warming as an issue, the money from the CTX simply bought the science they needed.

    Instead of answering me with statistics from flawed studies, explain the disconnect from historic information and the laws of physics. Figures often lie and liars ALWAYS figure.

    This poll is a perfect example of preloading for a desired result.

  • View all 14 replies >

  • u
    SmedleyButler
    !
    This debate is not whether the planet has warmed, it has for thousands of years. This is about continuing feudalism (corporate socialism) in a new and insidious way. The force behind this, is the old parasites, rulers of the world, the silent scourge to mankind, the Rothschilds. Even when they find evidence of a whole civilization (doggerland) under the sea between Scotland and Denmark, they still insist that this issue is about carbon and man made global warming. Their explanation for this new find is it was wiped out from a tsunami and the sea didn't retract.
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/articl...
  • Zazziness
    !
    I have no idea why people can understand the climate can change but they cannot understand it can change for different reasons. A fire can start naturally from lightening strike but that does not mean mankind cannot go out and start fires on their own.
  • u
    SmedleyButler
    !
    @Zazziness Just about the whole world reduced their carbon footprint since the end of the industrial revolution and the current drastic pollution reduction technology, but the seas continue to rise. The ice caps on mars are shrinking too. So much for the solar cycle right? Got to get those martians to pay carbon taxes to the Rothschild banks too I suppose?
  • Zazziness
    !
    @SmedleyButler No, in fact carbon emissions have increased worldwide since the industrial revolution as more and more nations became industrialized.

  • View all 12 replies >

  • o
    Cool_voter
    !
    Why is that?
    Greenhouse gasses?
    Our deteriorating ozone layer?
    Rising sea levels an melting ocean ice's?
    What is it that isn't convincing you
  • MRMacrum
    !
    Same with me. I will agree our insistence in polluting the environment by our insatiable and clumsy use of energy does nothing to blunt the change. But the planet was born from change and will continue to change constantly throughout it's life span. Whether we are still on board or not will not matter. I think we need to be more sensible in our exploitation of the planet if for no other reason than to milk the human needed resources for all they are worth. It is not a question of will we wear out our welcome, it is just a question of when and will we have the foresight to have seen it coming and adjusted our plan accordingly.
  • WMCOL
    !
    @Cool_voter

    Annual natural caused forest fires and volcanoes do more damage to ozone layer than humans do in a hundred years. China and India pollute more than most of world combined and it increases each year as other countries reduce emissions.

    Anyone for going after the worlds manufacturers and service providers so we can pay $2000 for a cell phone, or the same for a 42" TV, or more for a computer, or 5 to 10 times as much for just about everything we use in daily life just to get an insignificant reduction in damage to ozone layer?
  • o
    Cool_voter
    !
    @MRMacrum milking the planet for all it's worth is a silly concept.
    To think we have no part in change...
    Let me steal a point here.
    The oxygen in our ozone was created by micro organisms during the development of this planet. That are smaller than we, and successfully changed the environment, and climate.
  • MRMacrum
    !
    @Cool_voter - I have no illusion we have done our part in helping the change in a negative direction. But to assume we will ruin the planet is ridiculous. The only thing we will ruin is our environment on this planet. We will ruin for ourselves. And milking it for all it's worth is all we have. Our time is limited. How we handle that limitation will determine how much time we have left. More or less. At some point we will have to migrate or die.

  • View all 7 replies >

  • Speedieg
    !
    I'm convinced climate change is real and that mankind has an effect. I'm am unsure if we are totally the cause or just a contributing factor. Climate change has occurred without our help in the past but there 7 billion of us so it has to have an effect.
  • twinertia
    !
    As a species, we have SOME effect upon the world's climate, probably in the fifteen (15%) percent range. As to what can be done about it? That's up to technological application(s).
  • Tralee
    !
    The poll is slightly slanted, LOL, the choice is YES! YES! YES! I believe in the new wave religion of Climate Change or This Graph CONVINCED ME, so Yes, Yes, Yes, I too now ascribe to the new wave religion of Climate Change. Now me, I look out side, gauge the weather, look at charts and remember The Little Ice Age, and go, hmmmmm, seems that the climate is too big of an entity for mere humans to effect/affect in any way and that it is more likely to be cyclical. Yes, despite being called a "Denier", I deny nothing, I totally believe that the world climate changes, I believe it is a natural occurrence and that as it gets warmer, it will also in time, get cooler. Greenland was called Greenland for a reason, and NOT because it was covered with white snow.
  • Zazziness
    !
    Did you know that at one point in Earth's history, there was no oxygen in our atmosphere? Know what put it there? Waste products from the single-celled organisms that lived in the seas. Thinking our waste products do not affect climate is like thinking pollutants disappear when you can't see them any more -- ostrich thinking, not rational thinking.
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    I remember when people said the same about acid rain..."oh, humans can't affect the weather." proof came we could. Then it was "well, maybe locally, but not far away". seems that was incorrect. then the deniers said humans couldn't affect acid rain across the globe, it is too huge and we are puny....that , too, was incorrect.
  • Tralee
    !
    @Zazziness @woodtick57 - Both of you miss the point, naturally occurring events, such as the creation of oxygen, are not MAN MADE and Woodtick, let's discuss "Acid Rain",
    ""Acid rain" is a broad term referring to a mixture of wet and dry deposition (deposited material) from the atmosphere containing higher than normal amounts of nitric and sulfuric acids. The precursors, or chemical forerunners, of acid rain formation result from both natural sources, such as volcanoes and decaying vegetation, and man-made sources, primarily emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) resulting from fossil fuel combustion.". In other words, also not entirely man made, it has and will happen in a natural way. To you new members, or old members, of the New Religion of Climate Change, please be happy in your new religion, bow to it, worship it and practice it. I have another religion and I am sure you two will grant me the same. Now, with all the hysteria, explain to me why "Global Warming" had to be changed to "Climate Change"? Oh, yeah, the earth is cooling now. So much for the seas are going to rise up and flood the coasts of America by 1990.
  • o
    woodtick57
    !
    @Tralee Yes, but with that acid rain, we can trace the exact nature of what is causing the acidity. Even track which exact plant the man-made pollutants came from.

    Science is fun!

  • View all 11 replies >

  • PNWest
    !
    I read a scientific study once that concluded that conservatives are happier than liberals. It falls in line with common sense. Ignorance is Bliss. I wonder how many of the climate change deniers posting on this thread understand what "peer review" means?
  • u
    seedtick
    !
    This is a phoney poll. Both answers are wrong. So, I won't check either one. Global Warming is a scam based on junk science. But, yes, climate change is real...it changes where I live four times a year. I've grown used to it over the years. As a matter of fact, I plan my yearly activities with these "climate changes" in mind.
  • u
    Belin
    !
    Climate change is real. It has happened many, many times in our planets history. I doesn't prove global warming is caused by us. That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to not pollute our atmosphere.
  • u
    Kellso
    !
    I suppose I'm one of the very few that realized it when Al Gore started preaching it several years ago. I can not understand how so many millions coudl have had their heads so far up their butts that they didnt see it also........... If we had tackled the problem 10 to 15 years ago, we coudl have slowed it down enough that perhaps Mother Earth could have taken over and reversed the destruction we caused. I'm not worried afor myself but I sure worry for my kids and grandkids.
  • R Load more comments...