The Democrats have expressed a far greater acceptance of the Global Warming Anthropogenic Hypothesis (GWAH) than the departing Republicans. After all Gore is one of them. With the election of Obama and Democrat majorities in Congress coupled with the threat of Washington's willingness to throw huge sums of taxpayer money around as if without limits, motivated this relook at Climate Science and its accompanying policy to see if anything has changed since Bush.
Climate Science is far too complex for almost anyone to understand. It is this complexity that continues to fuel the debate. Because of this reason the majority of policymakers and the public have accepted what they think or have been told the best minds have concluded. After all, would an organization as prestigious of the Nobel Prize committee have awarded a peace prize to a non-creditable recipient, such as Yasser Arafat or Al Gore?
Everyone has been told, "The debate is over!" The facts however do not support that claim. The number of reputable scientists defecting from the infamous consensus grows. More than 750 notable scientists have publicly voiced disagreement with the GWAH, many of them previous members of the IPCC.
Almost no one disagrees with observation that the world is undergoing Global Warming. The planet has always experienced major swings in its climate, which has never been stable and has either been warmer or colder than the present. Earth appears to be on a warming cycle since the middle of the nineteenth century - no surprises. The contention is the cause of the change and whether it is harmful.
The popular claim is the current warming trend is driven by the rise in carbon dioxide concen-trations in the atmosphere and the source of that increase is human activity. What most people don't realize is that conclusion is not supported by any scientific proof. It is pure conjecture.
The hypothesis is carbon dioxide contributes to the greenhouse effect which warms the planet. Carbon dioxide has been increasing and planetary temperatures have been increasing. Natural effects (that we understand) are insufficient to cause the magnitude of the temperature anomalies. Therefore argumentum ad ignorantium concludes, carbon dioxide is the culprit.
As the defections from the GWAH increase, it's proponents have become more shrill in their challenges, apparently suspecting an approaching tipping point in public opinion. Two popular tactics are: 1) to call carbon dioxide a pollutant, and 2) to demonize researchers with conflicting evidence as shills of the carbon industry.
The first claim is so absurd it is astounding that it appeals to anyone with a basic knowledge of high school biology. Carbon dioxide is a trace gas absolutely necessary for life on Earth. The second claim is the standard ad hominem attack. If it isn't possible to discredit the evidence discredit the researcher.
These Web pages examine the more popular claims of Global Warming, examining the best argu-ments both pro and con. Before viewing what is here, read the Skeptics Handbook by Joanne Nova These Web pages are "work in progress" that continually change based on our research of BOTH sides of this argument. Read the evidence by clicking on the hyper-links (underlined Red/Orange words). Lots of VERY interesting and informative YouTube lectures and videos are included.