‘Fake news’ or ‘inconvenient truth’? The global community agreed in the Paris Climate Agreement to recognise climate change as man-made and work together on a common response. They made their decision based on scientific advice, with 97 percent of climate researchers agreeing that the current period of global warming has been caused by human activity. The science on this issue seems to be settled. Is everyone convinced now?

Clearly not. The most prominent climate sceptic in the world is American President Donald Trump, who has tweeted that climate change is an invention of the Chinese designed to harm the American economy. He has also deployed the infamous “but it’s cold outside” argument. Others are more subtle in their denial, such as the Alternative for Germany (AfD) party which, in their election program, accepted that climate change is occurring but denied that humanity is influencing its development.

Why the doubts? The globally-recognised scientific body for climate research is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has been producing climate change reports on behalf of the United Nations since 1988. But the credibility of this organisation has been attacked. In 2009, errors appeared in the IPCC report. The IPCC argues that a small number of errors are unavoidable in a document of nearly 3,000 pages with over 1,000 authors. This might be true, but it was immediately seized upon by critics of the IPCC. It’s fair to say that few other branches of science are so politically charged as climate science.

What do our readers think? We had a comment from Jonathan, who finds it sad that there are still people who do not want to acknowledge man-made climate change. He thinks they block out the science because they believe otherwise they might have to change their lifestyles.

To get a response, we talked to climatologist Hans von Storch, Professor at the Meteorological Institute of the University of Hamburg, and Director of the Institute for Coastal Research at the Helmholtz Research Centre in Geesthacht, Germany. Here’s what he had to say:

We have no reliable empirical evidence about this; but we have done informal polls. It turns out that quite a few people who see themselves as sceptics are motivated by the rejection of political decisions made in response to climate change being man-made. In particular, energy policy and energy prices should be considered, as well as other regulations, including building regulations and transport.

Since such measures are often presented in public as the irrefutable implications of climate change being a consequence of man-made emissions, then the veracity of climate science is denied. This attitude is promoted by over-exaggeration [on the part of people who agree with climate science] that can be observed again and again, for example in the argument that virtually every extreme weather event these days is a direct consequence of climate change, which is certainly inaccurate.

We also had a comment from Hagen, who believes it is already too late to stop climate change. Is he right? What have the global agreements on climate change achieved?

The science implies that climate change can be controlled to a limited extent because the release of greenhouse gases determines their concentration in the atmosphere. By appropriately reducing global emissions, climate change can be slowed down and then stopped altogether. This would take several decades and require very substantial reductions. For example, a complete end to emissions across Europe would be effective but insufficient for this purpose.

Recent UN Climate Change Conferences have led to a general acceptance of such measures without any real obligations. But without obligations, the process cannot be stopped by individual countries if others refuse to participate. The last climate conference (COP23 in Bonn) seems to have clarified how the progress in emission reductions is measured, balanced and compared. These are significant technical advances.

Why do some people think climate change is a hoax? What would it take to convince them? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

IMAGE CREDITS: CC / Flickr – United Nations Photo


233 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

    • Ivan Burrows

      Scientist have no idea how the climate works so every ‘answer’ they give can only be theory and/or conjecture.

    • Ivan Burrows

      If anyone claims they know for a fact that it is man made climate change then yes, they are part of the hoax.

    • George Guydosh

      You people have any idea what’s it like to get PhD in sciences? No, you visual proud people, you don’t. Over 95% of scientist involved think it’s man made or at least the CO2 emissions are reinforcing this phenomena.

    • Uli Czeranka

      When the believe is based on studies then it is a proof. Climate change isnt god. When there is an agreement that it is to a high degree manmade than it is manmade. You can’t just negate something by saying its just a theory.

    • Karolina

      Debating Europe, why don’t you prove it is not “a hoax” and put the evidence on here? What is the point of the debate, otherwise?

    • Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn

      It’s proven that The temperature and co2 have a coalation. And that we are The Only one cousing The co2 to rice so rappidly. So yes it’s proven. If we dig not Was to exist it should normaly become colder not as now warmer du to less heating from The sun.

  1. Matej Zaggy Zagorc

    It’s not that it’s a hoax, it’s the claim that it is only out fault and that we can/must stop it, both claims are complete bullshit.

    Climate change has been going on since the planet was formed. I believe they even found traces of a forest in Antarctica.
    As for humans, yes we contribute to it with with extra CO2 from our industries and speeding it up, but even if we quit that, we won’t stop it.
    IF we decided to stop it, THEN we have really messed with the natural order and nature will bitch slap us so hard we won’t get up.

  2. Ivan Burrows

    Most people don’t think its a hoax, they think the idea of it being man made is a hoax due to the lack of actual evidence.

    • Manos Foukarakis

      What ever works for anyone… No its not human made… So we Can keep do what we do…. Simple

    • Derek Snow

      We have a lot of evidence. Look at the sky in China, you can barely see blue. The sky is covered in smoke there which is not good at for Earth for the people who live there. Have you seen our oceans? They are already 15% filled with plastic. By 2075, there will be more plastic than fish in the oceans. Is that enough proof for you?

  3. Charles Vee

    Why is the EU letting America go on with the spraying of our skies? What kind of referendum was made to let them poison and mess up our westher, our skies and us?! STOP CHEMTRAILS!

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Charles Vee
      Have you any proof regarding your assertion, please?
      Does the EU do likewise too?

  4. Oli Lau

    Nobody is claiming that the climate isn’ changing. It has always changed. The real issue is the cause of the current changes if it is abnormal and if it is anthropomorphic.

    Why do you always caricature points of view of the others?

  5. Arthur Gustin

    “Why are some people retarded ?” is a more relevant question and resolving it might actually improve life on Earth…

    Alleging their position because they have the right to express their opinion is pointless. You’re basically legitimasing the existence to a antagonist position which result to a debate, whereas it’s a unanimous scientific conclusion or even a daily life observable phenomenon.

    Sometimes, authoritarian stands in politics, medias, etc should be in application even in democratic liberal countries because that’s a lot more efficient to take action to reach goals !

    • Tarquin Farquhar

      @Arthur Gustin
      A bit of an aggressive post methinks.

      Humans are not yet immortal and thus it is impossible to confirm the assertions propounded by the theory of ‘global warming’.

      However – the concept of ‘Pascal’s Wager’ could be used to support the theory of ‘global warming’.

      Why gamble with denying ‘global warming’ when the ramifications of doing so are cataclysmic.

      Indeed, there are so many environmental and energy benefits associated with countering perceived ‘global warming’ threats that to do otherwise is illogical.

    • Alex

      ur right, at this point anyone who denies climate change isnt really worth speaking too, especially if they say man has nothing to do with it

  6. Lynne Warner

    I don’t believe anyone thinks climate change is a hoax. We all have eyes and memories. However many of us believe that the hyperbole of it being solely brought about by humans is incorrect and has been inflated in order to charge more taxes on everything! On top of that, what do we have to show for all the money that has been poured into committees that endlessly debate the problem, make laws to remove products from the shelves that they say are harming the planet. Energy saving electrical goods, that don’t work, I.e. light bulbs, (horrendously expensive and pop after a couple of months and require 2 to do the job of 1 old kind), stove plates that can’t cook a steak because of thermostats, vacuum cleaners that don’t suck, more and more items in never ending plastic, no way yet of recycling all plastics. No answers to where all this rubbish goes when people discover that they are inefficient and throw them away. No viable reason for removing glyphosate ! Where is the money going. Why aren’t we seeing governments pumping money into innovation that helps clean the seas, new and better filters for manufacturers so Europe can do it’s own manufacturing instead of sending it to high polluting China, South Korea, India etc? Nothing is being seen to be done by the doom casters and tax collectors!

    • Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn

      It is in The politic accely underestimated. If they would tanke in The evidence and what Will happening they should put as mutch ord more money in to it than they dig On war in The ww1 and 2.

  7. Marian

    There is one nimber we need to know – the climate sensitivity. The “vlimate science” today wallows in scaremonhering while the sensitivity estimates are about as unprecise as 40 yesrs ago. Now, why do we have this strange neglect!

  8. George Guydosh

    Because our education system is so poor/focused that people just don’t have the basic scientific knowledge. Possibly many don’t even have the basic scientific culture, the notion of causality, the notion of a model as description of natural processes, mathematics can be used to describe and foresee phenomena etc.

  9. Nuno Oliveira

    We are 7 billion. You will always find lots of people believing in almost everything.

  10. Dante Kenpachi

    It’s not that they deny climate change, our planet’s climate changes all the time, otherwise we wouldn’t had long periods of ice age. They deny the so called human influence on climate change ;) The theory that the sun’s position in the milkey way effect’s it’s behavior and energy output resulting in long periods of hot temp. then a period of normal, then a period of cold. (neverending cicle) like seasons of our milkeyway

  11. Neno Prigorec

    Why term “global warming” changed to “climate change”?? What is next change? Probably global warming->climate change->global cooling …. SUN drives climate, not carbon dioxide. Watch sun cycles.

  12. Marko Martinović

    There was allways climate change since there was climate. We had 4 ice ages etc. Question is how much are humans influencing our climate and why so many scientific predictions where dead wrong. There is also political aspect to it, and politics now is forcing itself on science, not just this one

  13. Constantinescu Florin

    That time when Gore take a Nobel Prize for a book in which he describe how polar ice will totally melt until the end of 2011….

  14. Constantinescu Florin

    Some scientist proved that are some climate changes on Mars and Venus too… I hope nobody could claims that that changes are man-made too, right!?…

    • Manos Foukarakis

      Its like you say that between 100.000 B. C and the industrial evolution we had no climate Change at all…. So clever bro… Gz

  15. Constantinescu Florin

    Nobody denied the existence of climate change! Everyone would like to see some trusted evidence that that changes are man-made! Because the governments hurried to impose some taxes based on climate changes! They are making good money from that story!

    • Amphib Ian

      All of science accepts that most climate change is man made. What is your alternative theory and where is the evidence for it?

    • Constantinescu Florin

      I think the one who wants to impose his man-made theory should presents some evidences….

  16. Ronny Wouters

    You forgot the word “not” between “is” and “a”. You can kiss your carbontaxes good bye and (try to) find another way to finance a non democratic world government. O wait, newsflash, Europe is finding out and is no longer going to pay when nature’s temperature fluctuates(like it did aaaall over history)

    • Constantinescu Florin

      It is not a hoax! A hoax is the ideea that climate changes are man-made, so the governments can impose extra taxes! The level of pollution has been greatly reduced since the 1980s due to measures to reduce carbon dioxide and freon emissions. Have climatic conditions improved?

  17. John Amyas Dixon

    Sitting here in the UK on a cold winter’s night, with more forecast, following a washout, often cold summer, following what was in some places a record cold winter in the USA, and having also been told that this year is once more the hottest since records began, I can’t think why ‘some people think climate change is a hoax’.

    • Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn

      The problem is that due to climate Exchange Europé Will get colder climate due to The vaniching golf streem

    • John Amyas Dixon

      Scientists haven’t got a clue what’s happening with the Gulf Stream. it’s part of a system whose workings are too complex, there are too many variables, for them to be sure one way or another about the effects of what’s happening.

  18. Karolina

    The climate has been changing since Earth has existed. I have posted this on here before. Iceland was settled because it was warmer at the time. And ancient Greece used to have a tropical climate. We know that already. What annoys people is the insistence that 1. all of this change is because of human activity; 2. that it has to be reversed; 3. that normal people have to pay for it when it is mostly big companies that pollute the atmosphere.

    There are many coastal places threatened by flooding, but isn’t that something normal that the water erodes the soil and advances on cities? Why have such heavy buildings been built on land reclaimed from the sea?

    A very recent example was the deadly flooding in Athens about a week ago. Athens has seen illegal building outside of town plan and in the paths of creeks and brooks, deforestation etc since antiquity and everybody in Greece knows this. This is what has been causing the flooding since always. But the BBC reported it as a sign of climate change… There is proper brainwashing that is going on with regards to this issue.

    • Karolina

      It’s another commercial trap to get more money out of us, sell new technologies, generate jobs etc. There are people who are welcoming increased temperatures: Greenland, Iceland etc. Why are their views being left out of the discourse?

  19. John Costigane

    Climate change/global warming is basically a left-wing narrative. How does this affect objective scientific perspectives? I say out it drowns out the latter, to science’s severe detriment.

    FDR said “there is nothing to fear, but fear itself” That holds even today. We must look to the future, unafraid. Problems ahead can be adapted-to, using ever-improving technology.

    Ordinary people are feeling the brunt of this. A European Republic would stand against all such tyranny, as in the USA.

  20. Daniel Jolivet

    Il est certain qu’attribuer un phénomène météorologique quelconque au réchauffement climatique est hasardeux. par contre l’ensemble des phénomènes météos peut avoir un sens.

  21. Boris Zugolaro

    Climate exchange exists. The problem is to evalute how much it is a consequence of mankind’s activities. And here it is where the matter turns from scientific to political. What democratic leader might tell their voters they should change dramatically their lifestyle in order to stop the warning? None.

  22. Máté János

    Climate change is a fact but the activities of mankind to control it is definetely is more and more a booming business than a non-profit solution :-( …

  23. George

    Because the temperature increase is not going to stop at actual levels.

  24. Wendy Harris

    Climate change isn’t a hoax it’s just nothing new in Earth’s ancient history.

  25. Oliver Zompro

    Climate always has changed and will always be changing. But the human influence on it is questionable. CO2 is nonsense, but we should talk about the catastrophic deforestation.

    • Hans von Storch

      Indeed an often repeated argument – “climate has always changed, it is changing now and thus the present change is nothing special”. But it is special – the issue is the speed of change. In my introductory comment – see at the top – I mentioned the “detection and attribution” concept, which is taking into account his speed issue. The present change, across the past several decades, is faster than what you would expect from natural (and internal dynamics) causes.
      The assertion “CO2 is nonsense” is linguistically nonsense, i.e., makes no sense. Please try to write comprehensible sentences so that others can understand what you mean. Ranting may help your present frustrations but not communication.

  26. Ivan Burrows

    They don’t think its an hoax, they think man made climate change is a hoax and the claim that the planets ever changing climate can be manipulated is a hoax.

    • Jack

      Spot on! No amount of money will change these ongoing processes! The money will simply line the pockets of the charlatans promoting this hoax!

    • Jayne

      Not all, but yes, some.

  27. Sherrie Heckendorn

    Anyone with a brain can read and research and thus knows that human activity has sped up the natural progression of climate change

    • Bill Home

      I love you Sherrie you are actually reading the facts instead of trying to deny them. Our culture nowadays has a tendency to deny everything they see because it is really hard to accept our own faults. If people go into research with an open, unbiased mind and really evaluate the facts, we can accept climate change.

    • Jayne

      Well put, the only thing is that not all people know how to use their brain.

  28. ewropano

    Because research needs money, hence is not always independant.

  29. Jack

    Cause it is a hoax to scam money, period! The climate has been changing for billions of years and man has nothing to do with it! Don’t even try to argue that in man’s nanospeck of existence in geologic time that it will affect processes which were already going long before man and will continue after man is gone! No amount of bloody money will change these processes! Any idiot clamoring to reduce CO2 is out of his bloody mind! Yeah, let’s reduce our ability to grow food idiots! Next, these criminals and junk scientists will tell you that a new tax will change the size of the sun and these wankers will believe it!

  30. Oli Lau

    No nobody is denying that the climate is changing. It has always changed. What people question is that this time it would be man made.

    And why do you write climate change and not global warming anymore?

    • Jayne

      We write climate change and not global warming because not all parts of the globe are warming. Yes the average temperature is going up, but some parts of the world are actually getting colder.

    • Antoine Che

      Since education has become brainwashing, you might be right…

  31. Franz Moisi

    They just want to. They deny that there is no problem and hope that it disappears by itself. So they can continue to waste energy and fossil fuels. (by the way, there is still the issue of air pollution that actually causes people to die earlier)

    I think it all started with the
    US-oil-industry. In the US there is a big tradition of manipulating the public opinion with huge campaigns financed by political groups and or companies.

    Guess what you can’t run away. When the temperature rises more than 2°C and therefore the rainforest burn down, the ice shields disappear (which causes less sunlight reflection) and the methane hydrate and permafrost thaw, the temperature will rise additionally 2 to 7°C. That causes whole agriculture systems to fail, water will be more scarce, cities like New York City or Shanghai and countries like the Netherlands and Bangladesh will just drown in the sea and billions of people will have to migrate somewhere else. (Not even starting with the mass extinction of specieas and other ecological effects) So either we manage to do something now or the “costs” will be 1000 higher in 100 years.

    • Michael O'Hanlon Kavanagh

      Then explain the rapid changes that have occurred since the industrial revolution.

    • Ivan Burrows

      Michael O’Hanlon Kavanagh Easy, there hasn’t been any. Or do you think the ice age was caused by the industrial revolution as well ?

  32. Luc Sabbe

    It is even totally unimportant whether the climate change is manmade or not. The mean temperatures are rising, and clearly at a pace never seen before. Even if it would not be due to mankind, we have to react against it, because we know that disasters will follow if we let it rise! Don’t waste your time in discussions who is to blame, we need action, urgently!

  33. Vytautas Vėžys

    Cause you changed it to “Climate Change” from “Global warming” after 50 years of telling people that whis world will be inhabitable till year 2000?

    • Bill Home

      haha agreed

  34. Liz Lyz

    It is about taxes! :) You are polluting ( you change the climate) , so you have to pay taxes.

  35. Sabin Popescu

    because it first began as “global warming generated by the industry”, then it transformed into “climate change generated by the industry” and now it’s “climate change”

    The climate has been changing for the past 4-5 billions of years and back then there has been no industry, nor pollution, not even humans.

    So yes, Al Gore’s theory of global warming (nowadays called climate change) is a hoax based on data collected in the past 100-150 years and ignoring the data before that and other factors that influence Earth’s climate (for example that tiny little thing called Sun).
    The sole purpose of this theory is taxing everything that moves

    • JA

      Although it is correct that climate has been changing for billions of years, and the temperature has been rising and falling, the global temperature is rising at an exponentially greater rate than it ever has before, and there is plenty of evidence showing that this is because of greenhouse gasses becoming trapped in the atmosphere by the ozone.

  36. Christophe Walter

    According to the last Woolley Mammoth global warming is cyclical therefore any and all propaganda that states global warming is man-made is in fact a cruel hoax.

  37. Franck Legon

    Because they know about climate cycles and the huge amount of studies available in many scientific areas from astrophysics to geology, ice and sediments analyses, erosion, paleoclimatology, archeology, a.s.o., that prooved them to be right for sure since Melankovitch first did in the XIX century.

  38. Octavian Damian

    We don’t know exactly how our planet works, is bigger than we can experiment and reproduce in the lab. Climate change is real, no doubt, but human activity footprint negatively contributing on it, is arguable. If it is enough to admit human activity is negatively impacting the percentage may not be so important as our actions to reduce it.

  39. Aris Tselios

    Because they believe that Green Energy is expensive and a lot of people who works in factories afraid of losing their jobs.

    • Stefan V. Stancioiu

      There would be jobs trying to implement new technologies so… i don’t think those people are scared.

  40. Ana Spínola

    Why? Because they are ignorant and arrogant. And lazy too, reading and listening to scientists and researchers requires too much effort for them.

  41. Zé Miranda

    Because we actually understand science, computer models, we know how to read articles and we understand that the empirical data and the theory just isn’t sound enough to believe that greenhouse effect has any impact on global temperature changes over time, let alone CO2: the weakest greenhouse gas. The way they usually predict warming is as follows: CO2 generates a small amount of extra radiation which by theoretical feedback effects generates a LOT of additional warming. It is extremely uncommon that feedback effects are stronger than the main effect and to be believable such feedback effects would need to be extremely well understood and empirically documented, which they aren’t. On top of that climate scientists don’t seem to know math very well. The typical analysis for global temperature and the formulas behind feedback effects are often just incorrect in the articles. That is why so many physicists are against global warming. Who knows physics understands that a lot of the claims put forth by climate “scientists” are simply extremely hard to believe without a LOT of experimental evidence, which simply isn’t there since climatologists prefer spending their money playing with useless computer models.

    • JA

      There are actually quite a few greenhouse gasses including Carbon Dioxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide, and fluorinated gasses. these gasses hold in heat and are trapped by our atmosphere(ozone), causing the average global temperature to slowly rise at a much faster rate than it ever has in the past, endangering plant and animal, as well as human life if it is not stopped soon, as the temperature is rising almost 20 times faster than it has in the past 2,000 years.

  42. t

    Ughh all you people, CLIMATE CHANGE IS REAL AND DESTROYING OUR PLANET!!!!

    • stephengreene

      thats facts

  43. Ivan Burrows

    If the ‘climate’ scientists claim 97% of scientist believe in climate change where is the list of scientists ? could it be it’s just another manipulation of the data ?

  44. J

    If weird how people know and accept that what humans do are killing out planet and our ozone layer which is anywhere from 10 to 30 milas straight up. But it’s too far fetched to believe that those same events and actions that are destroying out planet could possibly be warming the earth or melting ice caps and such. And it is true there is little evidence and mostly just theories but..in the long run is it really that hard to believe

    • JA

      CO2 does have an indirect effect on the ozone, however, while CO2 slows down the production of new ozone in the lower stratosphere and by the equator, it actually helps speed up the production of new ozone by the poles and in the upper stratosphere.
      The problem with CO2 and other greenhouse gasses are that the ozone helps protect us from and keep out harmful rays from the sun, but it also holds in heat, and with more greenhouse gasses being produced, the gasses are held in by the atmosphere, and the average global temperature will start to increase very slowly.

  45. stephengreene

    i think climate change is real and it’s destorying our earth

  46. Christophe

    I believe we accelerated the climate change but why bother this was going to happen inevitably. Why not search a way that we can survive a cataclysmic climate without a glitch and focus more on that. There is fundamental problem in our world which has to with being greedy and always wanting more that will be the demise of our kind if we go to fast. People need to be more happy and enjoy the things they have. I don’t say cut the luxery but do we need to change our car every 4 years and our smartphone every 1 year. When years ago we built things to last we now forgot and one thing is for sure I would not want to be trapped in a horrible climate with things that don’t stand the test of time. I know for a fact with advances in technology be it in times op peace or war always a great waste is made. When will enough be enough ?!.

  47. jim andersen

    DINOSAURS IN MONTANA? YOU DO KNOW THEY WOULD DIE IN COLD WEATHER, RIGHT? THE EARTH’S AXIS CHANGES BECAUSE OF THE UNIVERSE AND THE ICE CAPS MELT. YES, THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE ON THE PLANET. THE LARGEST BREEDING ARE THE LEAST TECHNOLOGICALLY CAPABLE. FIX THAT PROBLEM. THE EARTH WILL TAKE CARE OF ITSELF.

  48. Rachel George

    climate change is obviously real and we cannot argue that, there is scientific evidence of how our orbit changes around the sun; we are now getting closer to the sun but we are still in an ice age, there is not enough evidence at the moment to say if the rapid increase of the temperature of the world is our fault but climate change is defiantly real and no one should argue against that

  49. Alexis

    Dear fellow citizens,

    My view, is that we need to change our thinking approach on this subject.

    Plz don’t try to blame anyone, start with your self by saying, “the climate is worsening (for one reason or another) why contribute towards worse?” Why make it worse?

  50. Oli

    you keep asking the same questions over and over.

  51. Oli

    It s called climate change now? No more global warming?

    • Bódis

      Global warming is the overall phenomenon, which can be felt locally as climate change.

      For example, the climate change for Europe will bring weather that’s more extreme as the Gulf current and its stabilizing impact become weaker.

    • Daniel

      Right

    • Ivan

      Bódis Except there is NO data to prove the climate is changing in any meaningful or un-natural way. The climate changes whether man is on the planet or not.

    • Bódis

      Yes, the climate will change regardless because it’s cyclical and nothing on this planet or elsewhere stays the same forever. But it’s completely reasonable to assume that with all the extreme pollution of water and air that we’re causing, those changes are accelerated.

    • Ivan

      Edita Of course we affect it, everything does. An ant colony in Africa affects it & a clump of daffodils in my back garden affects it so should we get rid of ants and daffodils ? . The point is the pro climate change lobby can not point to a single piece of evidence than ‘humans’ affects it in any meaningful or damaging way that nature cannot change, as it has done millions if not billions of times before.

    • João

      They had to change the name because of stupid people like you that kept saying “it’s snowing, where is that global warming??”

  52. Attila

    Finally Italy weak up !
    In the last hour…
    The recent election shows what really think about E.U.
    Great Britain ; Italy ; who’ s next ???
    The eurosceptisism is the REAL PROBLEM of E.U.
    Why do not debate sincerlly here about it ???

    • Zorica

      Is there a brain in your head? 😠

    • Malcolm

      Zorica I have a brain to check facts rather then news. Climate change always happened. If you are worried start by closing volcanos and the asses of cows. They are the major cause of gases.

  53. Børge

    The question itself is a hoax and most debates on climate changes are either confusing or misleading.

    The only ones hinting climate changes don’t happen are the ones suggesting they can still be avoided. Most people accept climate changes but some people think the changes are made by nature rather than humans. It is a hoax suggesting rejecting the idea of humans being resposible for climate changes is the same as rejecting climate changes all together.

    Furthermore, science is not about the percentages of debaters or scientists accepting an idea. Science is about hypothesis and proofs.

  54. Ntinos

    because politicians run out if trust.
    they have crossed the limits.
    Barroso working in big bank, and having a drink in hotels with high executives of EU….

  55. Ivan

    Because ‘man made’ climate change is “NOT” proven.

    • Claudio

      Ivan please let us know where this number comes from and why its a lie. I dare you

    • Claudio

      Ivan isn’t this the guy that believes in telepathy and psychokinesis and water memory? Great sourcing the one you have.

    • Ivan

      Claudio Gamao .

      The 97% figure comes from a peer review paper where a pro climate change individual (none scientist) peer reviewed ‘100 mixed scientific papers’ and came to the conclusion 97% of scientists believe in man made climate change.

      When his findings were checked it was found to be full of errors, assumption’s and is some cases right out misrepresenting of the papers.

      When Peiser (2005) re-ran the Oreskes (2004) results they found only 2.38% explicit endorse climate change from a sample pool of ‘3,146 respondents’ (real physicists).

      The ‘real’ science is out there, you just have to look for it and stop believing what people like Bill Nye the fake Science guy and lobbyists tell you, as the media do because they need to sensualise everything and ‘climate scientists’ do because its the only way they get funding..

      https://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/97_Consensus_Myth.pdf

    • Ivan

      Claudio A meaningless chart as they only asked ‘funded Climate & Earth’ scientists. If you only ask dog owners if they like dogs you would probably get a figure of 97%. In any science having two sets of results that are exact is very, very rear but with climate change its always 97%.

    • Claudio

      Ivan there is a little bit more than the chart. Anyhow, i believe its slightly stronger argument than the speach of a person who believes that water has memory.

    • Ivan

      There are over one million physicists in the world, still can’t find a list of the 97% that say human climate change is real. It would be a very, very long list. lol

    • Claudio

      Ivan Burrows
      There is a wikipedia link with all the references. Read it and cry (or laugh like a pro brexit idiot)

    • Claudio

      Ivan hello again, check the politics part of the link below https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Hawking
      Such a shame, he just died so you cannot present to him your perspective. Although i strongly believe he wouldn’t bother arguing.

  56. Christophe

    Hoax is a word that describes a false flag. Climate change is cyclical and therefore not man-made. What is man-made is Chemtrail weather manipulation.

    • João

      Haha you don’t believe in global warming but believe in Chemtrails. So funny :D

    • Christophe

      João look up sometime. Weather manipulation has been going on for decades.. Didn’t it start with cloud seeding? By the way, if you want to get technical about global warming, go back 10.000yrs and discuss the Ice age with your ancestors. A million years in Earth terms is a blink of the eye in the grand scheme of things and we are still coming out of the Ice age. It will return like it always has.

  57. Julia

    The resource corporations and their enablers spread disinformation. Green energy to save the planet (and many peoples lives from resource wars) means no more oil or gas sales.

  58. Anonymous

    Because before was global warming, now it is climate change… Wake up some people arent dumb… We are going to a new ice era Not globing warming..

    • Ivan

      And the facebook anti free speech algorithm kicks in. So long freedom of though, I knew you well :(

    • Rui

      What u mean

    • Ivan

      Rui There is an algorithm used by facebook to auto remove any post with links that do not agree with their socialist set of values.

    • Rui

      Ah ya… for sure..

  59. Johannes

    Because there is no scientific consensus about it. If scientist can’t agree on something, it usually means that the answer is not so clear…

  60. Mauricio

    I wonder if some of the people commenting here are taking the piss, or if they’re truly as ignorant as they sound. FYI: scientists corrected the name of the phenomenon because climate change was a more accurate description than global warming. FYI2: science doesn’t merely work in a lab, it also works on prediction models and observation of expected phenomena. If the observation fits the expected prediction, the model is verified as correct, like how we found gravitational waves.

  61. Arjan

    I think it’s both true. There certainly is climate change, won’t deny that. Still there is also a lot of fake news and people talking nonsense around it. And people talking nonsense are in both camps.

  62. Gordon

    Why do hundreds of millions of people NOT have clean drinking water and enough food to eat?

  63. Gordon

    No one changed the name from global warming to climate change, this is literally one of the dumbest things people say on this subject.

  64. JA

    I wish people would stop calling Global Warming a theory. Its obviously affecting our lives, we’ve had some of the strongest and out of place storms in the past year alone, and these past years have been some of the warmest years ever recorded in history. I wish everybody would stop acting like the evidence that has been released is not real, or is some kind of joke. It’s so frustrating when people say there ‘isn’t enough evidence’ or that ‘we all know the facts aren’t true’ because we do know they’re true, and we know that Climate Change and Global Warming aren’t a hoax. Why do people even say that Climate Change and Global Warming are a hoax? A hoax is a deception or lie that is made to be perceived as the truth, but why would people make this up? By stopping Global Warming we’re trying to push forward in the production of renewable energy, like wind, solar power, etc. Why do people act like using renewable energy is a bad thing, and that we’re trying to hurt our country? Jeez, people. We’re trying to save the planet.

  65. Warren

    0.9 Celsius per century is global warming…..give us a break!
    The entire science is based on the removal of the medieval period warming period, when temperatures were warmer than today, to justify the theory that the current warming is unprecedented. The 1990 IPPC report included a graph confirming this but removed it in subsequent reports to fit with Mann’s Hockey Stick. Mann is currently suing Tim Ball and Mark Steyn over allegations of fraud but the cases are bogged down in the courts due to Mann’s reluctance to produce his data.

    • Jayne

      Yes, the temperature were warmer than today, but they were not rising as quickly as they are today either. The reason that climate change is getting so much attention now is because it is happening at a much faster rate than during the medieval time period because we have more of an influence on the changing.

  66. Clyde

    Global warming isn’t a hoax it’s a big joke the planet has been going through climate changes since the beging of time dessert were green all land was covered by water scientist have proof of this now show us proof there is global warming and not just a degree or two

  67. Jayne

    It should not be called “Global Warming” as much as it should be called Climate Change, because our climate is changing. Some parts of the globe are getting warmer while other parts are getting colder. In Idaho, we had one of the worst years of winter while the tropics are getting even hotter and we are having more and more powerful storms that have become even more frequent than in the past. Who here can argue that fact that our polar ice caps are melting away and Arctic and Antarctic animals will loose their homes in a matter of a few years?

  68. JA

    “The walls we build around us to keep the noise out only reverberate the same ideas, notions and beliefs we enforce, leaving no room for debate. When we opt out of an argument we are choosing to ignore opposing views thereby failing to understand the other.”

    “The most fatal illusion is the settled point of view. Since life is growth and motion, a fixed point of view kills anybody who has one.”
    “… But these skeptics are only selectively skeptical. They think themselves enlightened for resisting all this new proof and remaining steadfast in mistrusting anything that someone else says. But it is a false enlightenment to accept only those ideas that align with one’s worldview and reject those that don’t.”

  69. Ivan

    Because there is no evidence, only models and theories which turn out to be wrong.

    • Spyros

      Isn’t it lovely when someone uneducated thinks he knows more than the whole scientific community.

    • Ivan

      Spyros Kouvoussis (<--- Troll) Ok comrade, instead of the usual idiotic insults how about you provide some evidence ?

    • Uli

      Ivan Burrows did you actually read the article? It actually argues that climate change is real but could be possibly be overriden by the effect of the sun activity. So for what reason did u you attach this article?

    • Daniele

      Please, provide me with an explanation of why those theories and models are wrong

    • Ivan

      Uli Czeranka I did and it agrees with my first post, there is NO evidence.

    • Daniele

      I am sorry, but to prove that a model is wrong, you need to show numbers and statistical confidence. What you did means nothing.

    • Ivan

      Daniele Sicoli .

      You are mixing theory with evidence.

      Definition of Scientific Method:

      ‘a method of research in which a problem is identified, relevant data are gathered, a hypothesis is formulated from these data, and the hypothesis is empirically tested and repeated & consistent results are achieved which is then classed as scientific evidence.

      Definition of Scientific model:

      ‘A theory that is a representation of an idea’

      *No model as provided reliable, consistent or repeated data so is not evidence.

      There is a ‘theory’ the world is flat, it doesn’t mean its true.

    • João

      What do you guys expect from an extreme-right wing guy?

    • Ivan

      João Mascarenhas ‘extreme-right wing’ ? Based on what exactly ?

    • Daniele

      Ivan Burrows yah, great, but to disprove it you need data and statistical analyses to prove that the model is less valid than another model. So, formulate your model and test it. I am still expecting your numbers.

    • Ivan

      Daniele Sicoli You are incorrect, it is the responsibility of those proposing the ‘climate change theory’ to prove its real.

    • Daniele

      Ivan Burrows I am sorry, but in science you can’t prove something true. You can just put under stress the theories. Up to now, no one was able to put under stress the Newton’s dynamics as far as we are on Earth, we are large enough and at sufficiently low velocities. Sometimes it is also a matter of reasonability. However, If you could, since science is democratic, the scientific community would listen to you (however you need to speak the right language, that is mathematics, to participate to a democratic debate, otherwise you are just delirious). If you want, look at the peers on climate change and try to put them under stress.

    • Ivan

      Daniele Sicoli Unlike climate change theory Newton’s, Einstein’s and every other scientists can be repeated with the same outcome. Which is why ‘evidence’ is required and there is none for man made climate change.

      Some people believe that the theory the Earth only being 10,000 years hold is true, does the fact it is some ones theory make it real ?

    • Daniele

      Ivan Burrows You said “Unlike climate change theory Newton’s, Einstein’s and every other scientists can be repeated with the same outcome”. This is false, in fact classical models have statistical confidence. Empirical evidence is actually to be interpreted in the statistical sense. (Then there is quantum mechanics, that is not classical, and it is an extreme situation confirming the need for statistical evidence, or, to be more consistent with what I said, not putting this need under stress.)

    • Ivan

      Daniele Sicoli And yet you are prepared to believe without question one side of the argument in the absence of any evidence ?

      Just remember there were people who believed long before it was fashionable.

    • Daniel

      Daniele Sicoli to prove its right u have to show evidence =D its called validation

    • Daniele

      Daniel Pluskota Ok but let’s stay in the context of statistical analysis, you have to test the hypothesis that your model is not significant, right? Then, depending on the significance you choose, you can or cannot reject the hypothesis of inconsistency of the model. With a higher significance (lower confidence) you might not reject a model you rejected with a lower one. In principle, there might always be a model which is right with a lower significance.

    • David

      Ivan Burrows based on you disagreeing with them

  70. Jorge

    Cause they’re american and we all know the most of them are totally stupid.

    • Ivan

      If you think the richest & most powerful Nation on Earth is full of stupid people what does that make people in the EU ?

    • Spyros

      Ivan Burrows the British believed they were genetically superior than the Africans during their colonial era.

    • Jorge

      Ivan Burrows You’re talking about the people who elected Donald Trump, right?

  71. Daniel

    Climate always change …. Man made climate change sound stupid as you pay for studies like that: … The United Nations Climate Change Secretariat released its first ever annual report this week, in which it held up its “Gender Action Plan” as a key to increasing the participation of women in responding to global warming. and Greenland Ice Core Data…..

  72. João

    This page has the dumbest followers. Racists, homophobic, anti-science, etc.

  73. Γεώργιος

    Climate change is a continuing situation in earth since the beginning.exploitation of it by business interests is a matter of our times

    • Anonymous

      Yes, duce. But climate should not change so fucking fast

  74. Sándor

    Becasuse nobody is even remotely borhered by the highest co2 emissions in the world – those of china

  75. Simon

    Absence of evidence?? Ohh your not from Europe, where people twice or trice my age remember winters with a metER of snow etc.

    A better question would be, if we should not rather adapt to the changing climate? The very idea that humans can control nature is ridicilous – ever seen how air temp drops 10C or more in hours? And then think about all the gas we burn during winter for heating, which obviously just warms our asses!;-)

    Good luck to all to change climate!:D

  76. MoonIsAHologram

    This is a lie made by the capitalist pigs at NASA! Just like the moon landing on a green screen. It’s not possible cos the moon is a hologram. Furthermore the atmosphere does not exist because the earth is flat.

  77. morgan lowe

    I dislike global warming greatly

  78. Hoax

    Dinosaurs caused the ice age, so obviously humans are causing global warming… isn’t spring, summer,fall, and winter climate change.. so I guess it does exist.. lol

  79. Teddy Sinclair

    The climate is continuously fluctuating, surely this ‘climate change’ is just a nother natural temperature fluctuation.

    • Dr. Nero McGee

      As a professor of climatology at the university of Stoll, Loughborough, I state that, although the climate is fluctuating, data shows that this sudden increase of temperature is anomalous and unexpected.

required
required Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

By continuing to use this website, you consent to the use of cookies on your device as described in our Privacy Policy unless you have disabled them. You can change your cookie settings at any time but parts of our site will not function correctly without them.