promotion image of download ymail app
Anonymous asked in EnvironmentGlobal Warming · 7 years ago

If there are thousands of scientists that disagree with global warming. than why is the debate over?

Keep in mind that I'm not a scientist and have no clue if its true or not. Just wondering what you think. No name calling.

10 Answers

  • 7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Because the greenies have an agenda whereas they get rich and they are not going to let anyone stop them. If your livelihood was selling snake oil and you were getting rich and powerful selling it, wouldn't you want to quash any truth?

    NOTICE: Everyone on this site should be aware that Trevor has been caught in three dirty bold faced lies on this subject. He once said that Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck were on this petition project. When that was proven wrong, he came back with, "well they were at one time." When that was proven wrong he picked out some of the people and said they were insignificant, the first one,that he was merely an inventor. I went to the very first one and lo and behold the man had degrees longer than your arm. I checked no further. He is a proven liar on this subject.

    What kind of person would illegitimately demean other people like that and puff up 75 out of 77?

    THAT GUY: Here is the list of signers in alphabetical order, where you should find 'Mickey Mouse' if it were there.

    Michael A. Michelson, Dwight W. Michener, John J. Michlovic, Steven M. Michnick, Brooks A. Mick, MD, M. B. Mick, Tim K. Mickey, Joseph J. Mickiewicz, Ronald J. Mickiewicz, Harold S Mickley, PhD, Michael C. Mickley, PhD, Donald V. Micklos, MD, J. G. Micklow, PhD, Klaus A. Miczek,

    Gail F. Moulton Jr., Eldridge M Mount II, PhD, Jerry E. Mount, MD, Michael G. Mount, Paul Mount II, William H. Mount, Roger B. Mourich, John R. Mow, Joel E. Mowatt,

    Notice I included the place where Mickey would be found and Mouse would be found. Mickey Mouse is not there.

    This is where Eva Braun would be

    Stanton H. Braude, PhD, Arvid J. Braun, Bruce A. Braun, David Braun, Frank J. Braun, Harvey H. Braun, Jeff D. Braun, Jeffrey M. Braun, Jennifer L. Braun, Thomas E. Braun, Wesley J. Braun, Kennethe Martin Brauner,

    Do you see any Eva there?

    This is where you would find Fred Flintstone.

    Timothy J.R. Fletcher, MD, William J. Flick, Robert Flicker, Stuart Flicker, Carl E. Flinkstrom, DVM, John L. Flint, William T. Flis, M. R. Flitcraft, Richard Kirby Flitcraft II, John R. Floden, Gary Flood, Harold W. Flood,

    Do you see Fred Flinstone in there? No. So that means that you have lied to the Y!A community. Where did you get your talking points, from Trevor? He did the same thing.

    Trevor: You were caught with your pants down. Now man up! Prove that Mickey Mouse was on that list. I proved that it wasn't. Why should anyone believe you after you got caught lying so blatantly. I see you have a disciple. Ha! Ha! It isn't the Oregon project that is a fraud it is you.

    Listed under Eldridge Milford Mount III's educational qualifications:

    Ph.D. Chemical Engineering, May 1979

    Thesis Advisor: Dr. Chan I. Chung

    Thesis Topic: Plasticating Behaviour of Solid Polymers at Processing

    Conditions: Experimental and Theoretical Study

    Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering

    Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy New York 12181

    M.E. Chemical Engineering, May 1976

    Thesis Advisor: Dr. Chan I. Chung

    Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering

    Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy New York 12181

    B.A. Chemistry, May 1972

    Department of Chemistry

    West Chester State College

    West Chester, Pennsylvania 19380

    And you insinuate that he is a mere inventor, not worthy of passing judgement of climate decisions. Are you ready to give up?

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    The 13 leading national science academies, the associations of the top scientists in each of their countries, stated that human causes to climate change is "indisputable". Think about that, the closest possible to all the scientists in the world chose the specific word "indisputable". That was 4 years ago and the science has continued to consistently prove it.

    Even if the Oregon Petition was not a fraud, remember that it was circulated in 1998. Most climate research was done after 2001; it was still in it's infancy in 1998. It is totally understandable that some scientists were skeptical, even if the early theories have since been proved-out. Signatures from that time have no bearing on current beliefs based on recent research.

    There are still debate about future rates of warming, sea level rise and specific effects of global warming. But the basics of the theory - that the environment is rapidly warming and that humans are at least most of the cause - have very very few educated doubters. That much of the debate, at least among experts, has been over for at least five years. It is only people who don't know any thing who think there is this big group of climate experts out there who doubt it.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Trevor
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    Hello Phillip,

    The Petition Project (also known as the Oregon project and the OISM Project) is a con, the entire thing is a fabrication.

    The man behind it is Professor Frederick Seitz. During his career he worked for R J Reynolds Tobacco and had the job of promoting smoking and denying it was harmful. Later on he was paid by Exxon via seven different front organisations (George C Marshall Institute, SEPP, Accuracy in Media, ICEE, CFACT, the Advancement of Sound Science Coalition and the Independent Institute) to deny that global warming was happening.

    In 1997 Seitz created a mailshot that he made to appear had come from the respected National Academy of Sciences, in fact, it had absolutely nothing to do with them. The mailshot was circulated at random and people were asked to sign and return it.

    The original wording of the petition asked the US government to reject the Kyoto Protocol. After signatures were collected the wording was fraudulently changed so as to appear to be a petition opposing the global warming theory.

    Because these were simply forms that were returned in the mail there was no verification procedure in place, literally anyone could return them. The names of the people who have signed the petition are on the Petition Project website – pick some at random and see how many real scientists you can find amongst them.

    Here’s the first ten people on the list for whom information can be found:

    • Earl M Aagaard. Biologist, creationist writer.

    • Charles W. Aami. No trace.

    • Roger L. Aamodt. Oncologist.

    • Wilbur A. Aanes. Veterinary surgeon.

    • M. Robert Aaron (deceased). Electrical engineer.

    • Ralph F. Abate. Engineering Associate, bridge designer

    • Hamed K. Abbas. Plant pathologist and food scientist.

    • Paul Abbett. No trace.

    • Wyatt E. Abbitt III. No trace.

    • Ursula K. Abbott (deceased). Poultry scientist and breeder.

    • Bernaard J. Abbott. Researcher into tumours.

    • David M. Abbott Jr. Mining and geological consultant.

    • Frank D. Abbott. Radiologist

    As you can see, there are some very intelligent and highly qualified people but none of them have any connection at all with any of the climate sciences. Pick some of your own names off the website and see if you can find some that have any qualifications at all that would enable them to make an informed decision about climate change.

    There was another document that was somewhat more rigorous in the way it collected names and was supposedly only available to those who did have qualifications relating to climate science. This is the Leipzig Declaration. Professor Fred Singer is the man behind it. Like Prof Seitz, Singer was paid to promote the benefits of smoking then later paid by Exxon to deny global warming.

    Only 80 people have signed the declaration in the 18 years it’s been around, this number includes 25 TV weather presenters. A Danish newspaper contacted people named on the declaration and discovered that several names had been fraudulently added and that many had now changed their minds and accepted global warming was real.

    In 2010 the National Academy of Sciences conducted a survey of 1,372 climate scientists (real ones that have all published research papers) and concluded that “97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC (Anthropogenic Climate Change) outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers”.

    - - - - - - -


    You just can’t stand the fact that your beloved Oregon Petition is one giant fraud.

    You know full well that Mickey Mouse was named on the petition and the site itself has confirmed same, just check the archived versions.

    Where did I call any of the signatories insignificant – show me (you can’t).

    I called Eldridge Milford Mount III an inventor because that’s what he is, that was his job, that’s what he has on his own profile. What would you suggest we call him? And please list his “degrees longer than your arm” as he seems to have missed them off his own CV, website, blog and profile.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 7 years ago

    CLAIM: 97% of climate scientists agree that the Earth is warming due to human causes.

    Number of scientists included in poll result?: 75

    Total Number Of Scientists Polled?: 10,257

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 7 years ago

    anyone can sign-on and pretend to be a scientist on this petition. Very few credible scientists question global warming. Science is not done by petition, and the laws of nature are not subject to voting.

    I appreciate that you are not a scientist, but you should be able to ask a real scientist by visiting a university and chatting with a professor. At the very least you should read what NASA has on it's website.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    The facts are that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that without greenhouse gases the earth average temperature would be 33C colder (a giant snowball) and that we have added 40% more CO2 to the atmosphere. There is not one person who denies these facts and one can say that debate is over.

    However the debate is whether the temperature will rise by 1.5C or 4.5C by the end of the century and this depends on many factors although from what I understand scientist do not take into account a scenario where we are increasing our CO2 emissions rather then reducing them.


    In 2001, (12 years ago) Scientific American took a random sample "of 30 of the 1,400 signatories on the Oregon petition, claiming to hold a Ph.D. in a climate-related science."

    Of the 26 we were able to identify in various databases, 11 said they still agreed with the petition —- one was an active climate researcher, two others had relevant expertise, and eight signed based on an informal evaluation. Six said they would not sign the petition today, three did not remember any such petition, one had died, and five did not answer repeated messages. Crudely extrapolating, the petition supporters include a core of about 200 climate researchers – a respectable number, though rather a small fraction of the climatological community.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Global Warming is real, it is happening now, 97% of all climatologists are convinced that the current acceleration of GW is man made and the majority of the world's climate organizations are in agreement.

    The petition you have here has been circulating for months. these are not climatologists, they are simply people with PhDs That doesn't mean they are right and doesn't necessarily make them smarter than a high school graduate. Ignore it

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • That petition includes such eminent climate scientists as Mickey Mouse, Fred Flintstone and Eva Braun {AKA Mrs Hitler). Nuff said

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Pat
    Lv 4
    7 years ago

    As long as they keep presenting evidence to the contrary, warmists will continue to get funds for research. It's a multi-billion dollar industry.


    Man's contribution to the "greenhouse effect" is less than 1%. They (alarmists) are trying for 100%.


    Rolando Prico makes a case that man has caused CO2 levels to rise 40% when he has no facts to back it up. Here are the facts:

    CO2 has been rising since they started measuring it. I have yet to see it drop. All records show this continued rise. Temperature data for the past 140 years show a rise in temperatures from about 1905 to around 1940 of about 0.45 C degrees when human CO2 output was still relatively low. From around 1940 to 1975 global temperatures dropped by 0.1 C degrees when human CO2 output tripled around the globe during that time. To say that CO2 is driving temperatures up or down is a fallacy. The scares of a coming Ice Age were very prevalent during the 70s. There is no "direct corrolation" to CO2 rise. Temperatures will always fluctuate. It's called "Natural Variability".


    Dr. Ian Clark makes it very clear with Ice Core samples:

    "Ice core data from the Vostok Station (in Antarctica) shows warming causes CO2 to rise. It also shows that a rise in CO2 levels lags temperatures by as much as 800 years."

    Dr. Ian Clark – Dept. of Earth Sciences

    There have been several research studies on ice core samples that show the same results.

    End of debate!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • BB
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    Good question. I kinda wonder what the 'Settled Science' folks would do if the government said....okay....if the science is settled, then there is no longer a need to continue throwing $Billions of hard-earned taxpayer dollars at any further 'research'??

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.