No the science is quite clear about global warming and the fact we are causing it.
As more evidence has become available over the existence of global warming debate has moved to further controversial issues, including: The social and environmental impacts The appropriate response to climate change Whether decisions require less uncertainty The single largest issue is the importance of a few degrees rise in temperature: If I change my thermostat a few degrees, I'll live fine.
The trees over there on the north side of the slope are already 5 degrees cooler than the trees on the south side of the slope.
So the point is that one or two degrees is about the experience that we have had in the last 10, years, the era of human civilization. There haven't been--globally averaged, we're talking--fluctuations of more than a degree or so.
So we're actually getting into uncharted territory from the point of view of the relatively benign climate of the last 10, years, if we warm up more than a degree or two. Schneider " The other point that leads to major controversy—because it could have significant economic impacts—is whether action usually, restrictions on the use of fossil fuels to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions should be taken now, or in the near future; and whether those restrictions would have any meaningful effect on global temperature.
Due to the economic ramifications of such restrictions, there are those who feel strongly that, even if global warming is caused solely by the burning of fossil fuels, restricting their use would have more damaging effects on the world economy than the increases in global temperature. And it is required for the way we live, the way we work, for our economic success, and for our future.
Fred Palmer " Conversely, others feel strongly that early action to reduce emissions would help avoid much greater economic costs later, and would reduce the risk of catastrophic, irreversible change. Kyoto Protocol Main article: Kyoto Protocol The Kyoto protocol is the most prominent international agreement on climate change, and is also highly controversial.
Some argue that it goes too far in restricting emissions of greenhouse gases; others argue that the cuts in emissions it would introduce are far too small.
Furthermore, it has also been argued that it would cause more damage to the economy of the U. Additionally, the high costs of decreasing emissions may cause significant production to move to countries that are not covered under the treaty, such as India and China.
As these countries are less energy efficient, this could cause additional carbon emissions. Senate voted 95 to 0 against the treaty. The deniers are wrong: The doomsayers are also wrong: Legislation to control global warming that once had a passionate but quixotic ring to it is now serious business.
Congressional Democrats are increasingly determined to wrest control of the issue from the White House and impose the mandatory controls on carbon dioxide emissions that most smokestack industries have long opposed.
List of Kyoto Protocol signatories Is global warming beneficial or detrimental? In response, some note that the belief in beneficial effects and doubt of extreme warming should be independent if these conclusions were in fact neutrally derived from scientific research.
Funding for partisans Both sides of the controversy have alleged that access to funding has played a role in the willingness of credentialed experts to speak out.
Some global warming skeptics, like the George C.Look, if you still have any doubts that global warming is a political issue, ask yourself why it cuts right down the line left and right like every other issue does. Most, but not all, among those with more personal concern about climate issues say the Earth’s warming is due to human activity.
They are largely pessimistic about climate change, saying it will bring a range of harms to the Earth’s ecosystems. Global warming is the number one environmental issue of our time, yet some prominent politicians have refused to accept scientific evidence of human responsibility and have opposed any legislation or international agreement that would limit greenhouse gas emissions.
Global warming is the number one environmental issue of our time, yet some prominent politicians have refused to accept scientific evidence of human responsibility and have opposed any legislation or international agreement that would limit greenhouse gas emissions.
The complex politics of global warming results from numerous cofactors arising from the global economy's interdependence on carbon dioxide emitting hydrocarbon energy sources and because CO2 is directly implicated in global warming—making global warming a non-traditional environmental challenge.
Most, but not all, among those with more personal concern about climate issues say the Earth’s warming is due to human activity. They are largely pessimistic about climate change, saying it will bring a range of harms to the Earth’s ecosystems.