Why is it that everything confirms global warming and nothing can falsify it? What is global warming now?

What is it? It's a conspiracy - yes, a conspiracy (SHOCK HORROR SHOCK) - to shut down industrial economies, perpetrate mass-genocidal population reduction, and implement a fascist global government. This is not speculation, nor a "conspiracy theory," but is rather an irrefutable fact, based on statements from the top environmentalists themselves: http://www.green-agenda.com/ Global warming as a faux-popular movement has also taken on nearly every aspect of a religious cult.

That guys talks about how people aren't educated then says there is a warming trend. The earth has been on a cooling trend since 2004 or earlier. We are no warmer today than we were 100 years ago, before the introduction of significant amounts of pollution, and we are much cooler than we were millions of years ago. It is perfectly natural to have cooling and warming trends. Globalresearch.ca has this time line: 1882 - 1910 Cooling 1910 - 1944 Warming 1944 - 1975 Cooling 1975 - 2001 Warming 2001 - present cooling Global warming is a tool used by politicians to gain more power, corrupt scientist to gain more money, and corrupt businesses to sell you stuff you don't need. A matter of fact if you do a little research you will see that in the 70s alarmist were spouting off about Global Cooling and how we were going to be in an ice age; now, its global warming. Some people are Just suckers and get sucked into all the hype. Thirty years from now everyone will be laughing about global warming, but by then we will have already spent millions of dollars on this fake disaster. Nini - ah...global warming is not called climate change. Global warming is climate change. Global warming is called global warming. Also there is no evidence to support your claim.

Intellectuals question, rather than blindly accept what they're told. We questioned the information and was told the science is settled. We questioned until Global Warming wasn't so much Global Warming as it was Climate Change. We questioned why, when initially told to look at the weather as an indicator. Now we're told it's about trends rather than how cold or hot it is. Never mind we've been cooling for years. So, the best argument is that the naysayers are uneducated buffoons. 1. Science is never "settled". 2. If Global Warming were the threat we're told, they wouldn't have to change the name to "Climate Change". 3. The climate is a living entity that changes because....it's a living entity. Therefore, you cannot accurately argue that there isn't Climate Change. Cool trick, huh? 4. A true intellectual debates the argument with facts and answers questions. They do don't stand on the pulpit and pound their fists and insist on blind faith. Sounds more like Sunday at church than a discussion in Biology class doesn't it? 5. If you truly, truly feel that everyone needs to be on board to enforce meaningful change, why shut people up and shut them out for questioning the information? Seems the best way to gather all to your side would be to make them understand through meaningful discussion. When you call someone stupid and shut them out, you're going to gather defiance rather than buy in. 6. If spending our way into poverty for the sake of the environment is a good idea, why exactly aren't those in Darfur worried about Global Warming? Oh, that's right, they have better things to worry about. Maybe we need something take up our time so we stop worrying about silly things like telling Mother Nature what her job is.

I get your drift, and it is what I have been trying to say for a long time. The whole thing is a farce and a ruse to tax us to the hilt. Lets face it, Politicians have nowhere else to go, that is until another dreamed up hypothesis can be found. It is not worth the millions being spent and will not counteract nature.

The only people that attribute specific weather events to global warming are those who aren't very educated about the subject. Whether it's cold in your back yard or if you have snow is irrelevant to the discussion. You have to look for trends in the long term global climate. If you do that, you notice a very significant warming trend and that is cause for concern. It doesn't appear to be a "natural" trend since those are fairly well accounted for. As for spending money on trying to stop it, almost in it's entirety, that money is well spent, even if Climate Change isn't that severe a problem. Would you rather the government spend that money on oil industry subsidies and tax breaks for exploration, or would you rather see it spent on researching and improving newer, cleaner energy sources? Edit: Why are there so many deniers lying about hurricane seasons? John Q: "You forgot hurricanes. The 0.00000 hurricanes we had last season proves AGW, but so do the ones we had the year before." If you mean 2009, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Atlantic_hurricane_season#Season_effects There seem to have been three, not zero... And 2008, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Atlantic_hurricane_season#Season_effects I count *eight*, not zero... So are you lying or clueless? _

Do you know what kind of a scientific theory has every possible outcome as proof of its validity? A phony BS theory, that's what kind of a theory. And look at some of the comments "only uneducated people draw conclusions from weather" - FINE. GREAT. So why when it was hot were we always being told that the heatwave was a sure-fire sign of global warming - where were you then with you "weather isn't climate" comments? .

You forgot hurricanes. The 0.00000 hurricanes we had last season proves AGW, but so do the ones we had the year before. The idea is that we'll never know if we stopped it. If it has no definite end then alarmists can claim that it exists, no matter what, which will mean tat they'll have an endless source of income. The earth could freeze over and Al Gore would still be talking about AGW. That's why it's now called 'climate change'.

global warming is a money making job breaking scheme, that has put 1/4 US citizens out of work, by sending all of our jobs over seas, this hoax makes Maddofs fraud look like nothing Al Gore should be sharing a cell with Maddof.

No localized event proves global warming. You are perhaps overwhelmed by paying to much attention to people who know nothing and those who try to make too much of any one event or any one comment. What proves global warming is the global warming itself. Even with all the snow in places having winter, the earth as a whole has warming dramatically over the past 6 months. We contine to break the record every day for the warmest ever recorded on that day. There are natural reasons contributing to the huge peaking we are having -- almost half a degree warmer than just a year ago -- but over a longer period the trend is undeniable. There is no doubt among people who know what they are talking about that man is causing our environment to warm. We can't even call that consensus anymore, it is unanimous, there is nobody challenging that anymore. But there is a lot of research still ongoing as to what the effects are and will be. Even if it is proved that warming causes more or less snow in North American, it would take decades of data to show that trend -- one snowy year means nothing more than one snowy year. The fact that one piece of data fits a hypothsis does not mean it proves the hypothesis until all other explanations can be elimated. There are a great number of known and unknown natural factors that lead to unusual weather in any one place and natural factors have not been eliminated as the reason for more or less snow in D.C. (and never will be eliminated). But in the bigger picture, all known possible natural causes of the ongoing warming trend have been eliminated as explanations for all the warming.