National Geographic Daily News
An illustration compares minimum Arctic sea ice levels.

The drastic change between the 1979 Arctic sea ice minimum (outlined in yellow above) and the 2012 sea ice minimum (shown with blue tint) is evidence that global warming is not a hoax.

Illustration courtesy SVS/NASA

Ker Than

for National Geographic News

Published April 4, 2013

Conspiracy theories are as American as apple pie. A national poll released this week by Public Policy Polling (PPP) found that some popular conspiracy theories in the United States have persisted for years, like the belief that a UFO crashed in Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947.

Meanwhile, new theories have gained believers, such as the ideas that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 9/11 attacks and that Osama bin Laden is still alive.

Perhaps not surprisingly, many of the ideas in the new poll are based on a misunderstanding of science—or a stubborn refusal to acknowledge it.

Here's a reality check on some of the science-related conspiracy theories from the survey:

1. A total of 37 percent of American voters believe global warming is a hoax. Most (58 percent) of the people who believe this identified themselves as Republicans. Of those who don't believe global warming is a hoax, 77 percent are Democrats.

Reality Check: Numerous scientific studies have confirmed that the Earth is warming and that the rate of warming is increasing. Average temperatures have climbed 1.4°F (0.8°C) around the world since 1880. Much of the temperature increase happened in recent decades, coinciding with a spike of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases emitted into the atmosphere as a result of human activity.

The effects of global warming on the natural world are equally well documented: Arctic sea ice is now thawing at historic rates, flowers are blooming earlier, and the migration patterns of birds and other animals are changing.

2. A total of 29 percent of voters believe aliens do exist. Another 21 percent believe the U.S. government covered up a UFO crash near Roswell, New Mexico, in 1947.

According to PPP, more Americans who supported Mitt Romney for president last year (27 percent) than those who supported Barack Obama (16 percent) believe in the UFO cover-up.

Reality Check: It hasn't always been the case, but many astronomers today are open to the idea of life existing elsewhere in the universe—and even to the possibility of intelligent alien life. That's thanks in large part to the relatively recent discoveries of hundreds of so-called exoplanets—worlds beyond our solar system—and thousands of planet candidates. Most scientists think it's only a matter of time before a habitable, rocky, Earth-like twin is discovered.

Even our own solar system might contain evidence of alien life. NASA's Curiosity rover recently discovered tantalizing evidence of clays and minerals that scientists say could only have formed in water. The implication: Ancient Mars had the conditions and ingredients necessary to support life.

As for UFOs, most sightings are eventually linked to more mundane causes. For example, a recent video by actor Russell Crowe purportedly capturing a UFO outside his office was likely reflected sunlight from a plane passing near sunset.

3. Some 20 percent believe childhood vaccines are linked to autism. These voters believe that childhood vaccines against mumps and other diseases could increase the risk of developing autism.

Reality Check: A recent government study confirmed what many scientists have been saying all along: There is no connection between the number of vaccines a child receives and his or her risk of developing autism.

The study, published last month in The Journal of Pediatrics, also found that even though kids are getting more vaccines these days, those vaccines contain fewer substances that provoke an immune response.

4. The poll revealed that 14 percent believe that Bigfoot is real. Another 14 percent said they were not sure, while 72 percent said they do not believe Bigfoot is real.

Reality Check: Despite several attempts to prove Bigfoot exists, no one has presented evidence that has withstood scientific scrutiny. Indeed, many such "proofs" have turned out to be outright hoaxes. In 2008, two men claimed to have found a seven-foot (two-meter) tall, 500-pound (230-kilogram) Bigfoot corpse in the woods of northern Georgia, but the body was later revealed to be a rubber ape costume.

Last November, another group claimed they had done DNA tests that proved the "North American Sasquatch is a hybrid species, the result of males of an unknown hominin species crossing with female Homo sapiens." The researchers touted the fact that their study was published in a scientific journal called DeNovo—but it seems the publication was created especially for that Bigfoot study.

While Bigfoot is likely just a myth, that's not to say that no new, close relatives of humans have ever been found—it's just that all of them are long extinct. For example, in 2010, scientists announced that a 40,000-year-old pinkie bone found in a Siberian cave belonged to a previously unknown species of ancient human called Denisovans.

5. Some 9 percent believe the government adds fluoride to drinking water for "sinister" purposes.

Reality Check: The latest evidence that fluoridated water has dental health benefits comes from a 2013 study published in the Journal of Dental Research. The study found that fluoride in drinking water prevents tooth decay in adults regardless of age, whether or not they drank fluoridated water as children.

Other recent evidence of the dental benefits of fluoride came from an unlikely source: A survey of more than 23,000 skeletons from medieval archaeological sites in Britain showed that people who lived near the coast—and presumably consumed a lot of fluoride-rich fish—had fewer cavities.

6. A total of 7 percent of voters believe the moon landing was faked. Another 9 percent said they weren't sure whether the Apollo moon landing really happened.

Reality Check: Believers of this particular conspiracy theory have painstakingly dissected video and photos from the Apollo 11 moon landing looking for evidence that it was faked. For example, some have pointed out that the American flag Neil Armstrong planted on the moon appears to be flapping "in a breeze" in videos and photographs.

But, as spaceflight historian Roger Launius of the Smithsonian's National Air and Space Museum in Washington D.C., explained on the 40th anniversary of the first moon landing, "The video you see where the flag's moving is because the astronaut just placed it there, and the inertia from when they let go kept it moving."

171 comments
Christopher Todd
Christopher Todd

Love that crap. "Ufo Russel crowe caught more likely to be reflecting sunlight" U serious?  UFO Means its Unidentified flying object. Till you know for a fact? Your "reflecting sunlight" Is just a pointless assumption. You were not there. Here are some GOVERNMENT declassified files and other files for you from the nsa below.  Here is a line for you from ufo_ic_blind_spot "The inability for humans to objectively process this data indicates a SERIOUS WEAKNESS in the INTELLIGENCE of the community." Russel Crowe isn't stupid lol.. But its possible he made a mistake. NO ONE REALLY KNOWS..

Nasa is using a color system now. That allows us to find world like ours much faster. Now Imagine a species living long enough to master space travel.. With close to human breeding rates. Now Imagine them having a FAR more advanced planet id system with a LEGION of numbers to scout such worlds. So yeah.. More likely your blowing smoke out your butts. Because NO ONE KNOWS. Government sure is taking them seriously. Look at the gov files..

Look at Nasa Sts ufo video's? That were once claimed to be "Ice particles" Then look at all the Live Video's caught of the same type of strange things. Someone added some of them in this video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmAgo7q1-cY

Nsa warned to take ufo's SERIOUSLY.
http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/gov_super_secret_agency.pdf
read..
http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/ufo_ic_blind_spot.pdf
16 nations investigate ufo case TOGETHER.
http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/us_gov_iran_case.pdf
hmm?
http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ufo/now_you_see.pdf

Jeanni Bajenski
Jeanni Bajenski

i'm a regular every day resident of planet earth.  and a resident who can read and make deductions.

of all i've read, i sincerely believe fluoride DOES reduce IQ's by 20% - and makes the indiv docile.  has no one read about the auschwitz experiment??  i buy filtered/ozonated water to avoid being medicated against my will.

i believe the moon landings were a hoax.  all pictures of the moon, claiming spotting the Apollo left-behinds, are blurred - simple white boxes that THEY CLAIM are this n that.  Stanley Kubrick claims he directed them here on earth and lived a hermits life in fear of his life!!  i believe him!!

i don't give a s*** about big foot!!!

as for UFO's - yes i believe they're circling our planet.  but WHY haven't they made themselves known??  maybe those in area 51 have contact with them...if so....the secrecy must mean something...and i fear it's a "dire" something.

i could care less if some planet or another may have possibly shown life in the past.  BFD....the planet is dead...NEXT!!!

vaccines:  yes, considering autism has risen 200% since the increase of vaccines....you betcha i believe vaccines are the cause.  holy christmas, 21 vac's by the time you're 2!!  i'm glad i grew up when i did....(born 1951).

i also believe the percentages quoted as to who "believes" are manufactured.  only 9% believe fluoride is added to water for sinister purposes....BS!!  they left out the 8 in front of the 9.  and this applies to all the other percentages.



Concerned Citizen
Concerned Citizen

REALITY CHECK National Geographic....there are literally thousands of witnesses to strange spacecraft daily and numerous alien abductees have come forward to share their story.  I guess your version of science is to call everyone a crazy liar to prove your pre-determined agenda.   Need proof....check out Dr Karla Turner, Phil Schneider, Jim Sparks just to start, not to mention declassified police, military and radar reports.  Oh and btw, Allen Hynek of Project Bluebook who made up those lame excuses such as swamp gas etc to explain UFOs has since gone on record saying that UFOs are the real deal.  Need more proof.....check out the Citizens Hearing on Disclosure and AnonymousFO.com.  

Anyone reading this article or similar ones needs to understand that there is a mis/disinformation campaign by the 'powers that be' to hide the truth from you.  Also realize that this extends well beyond our elected officials to a shadow government that is calling the shots behind the scenes.    But don't believe me, do the research for yourself and prove it to yourself.....I got my start by wiping the slate clean of any preconceived notions.  

This article has made me loose all respect for National Geographic as a scientific organization.   

*BTW, equally as enraging..... fluoride has been proven to reduce IQ, cause numerous health problems, and makes people more passive/docile.  It may help teeth, but at the expense of your brain and your body as a whole.  Please see through the lies we are being force fed by controlled media and help expose those behind these lies.    

-Concerned citizen


Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

Funny stuff these conspiracy "theories"  The only one I suspect is true is that aliens exist.  But there is no evidence for them, and certainly no real evidence they have visited us.  Most of that evidence relies on the assumption that humans in the past could not have possibly accomplished the things they did before technology without help of some kind.  That is insulting to our ancestors and just plain wrong.

Leslie Crofford
Leslie Crofford

Remember Climategate?  Sure we have man made global warming.  Its called Weather Modification.  If you live in a drought stricken area & have a forecast for rain, check the skies the day before & you'll notice something.  I've been taking pictures for 6 months now & when be showing them to the local news channel & maybe they can ask the military whoever, what those man made trails, clouds are being put up there for.  I don't need YT for what I've been seeing.

Fluoride:  Look up how a Dupont plant contaminated the countryside in New Jersey.  The farmers tried to sue the govt, but got barely nothing because of National Security.  You see, Fluoride was being used for Atomic Bombs.  Its used to kill roaches, termites...If we were able to obtain raw milk, we would have a healthier group of people.  instead fluoride gets advertised like tobacco was in the 50's ads.......Most dentists recommend Camel Cigarettes.  Today most dentists recommend Fluoride treatments.

As for the govt allowing ingredients for sinister purposes, why does it allow aspartame, a cancer causing agent in foods?

Maybe National Geographic should write a story about what I put above?



Brad Reinhardt
Brad Reinhardt

Can I just say I love all the arguments on here that are using non scientific articles, such as YouTube, and websites to prove a point. Number one rule when proving a point use some damn scientific literature. That has been peer-reviewed and discussed by a scientific community. I don't give a crap what John Doe typed on his wiki page while he was sitting at McDonalds enjoying his latte. Real scientist use SCIENTIFIC evidence!!!

John C.
John C.

According to PPP, more Americans who supported Mitt Romney for president last year (27 percent) than those who supported Barack Obama (16 percent) believe in the UFO cover-up.

----------------

And among Obama supporters:

Study: Many Blacks Cite AIDS Conspiracy

Prevention Efforts Hurt, Activists Say

By Darryl Fears

Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, January 25, 2005; Page A02

 More than 20 years after the AIDS epidemic arrived in the United States, a significant proportion of African Americans embrace the theory that government scientists created the disease to control or wipe out their communities, according to a study released today by Rand Corp. and Oregon State University.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A33695-2005Jan24.html

More than half of Democrats, according to a neutral survey, said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0411/More_than_half_of_Democrats_believed_Bush_knew.html

Debra Hall
Debra Hall

How many Americans believe in evolution ? In the rest of the world it's taught in most schools , yet for some reason a number of American schools refuse to do this . There is even an Anti-Evolution movement for heavens sake .  Please wake up !

Kristopher Fjeldos
Kristopher Fjeldos

As a scientist I cannot reduce the emotions about human activity on Earth that causes destruction. But I need to suggest a hypothesis, The World has been coming out of an Ice Age and the reason we are coming out of an Ice Age is because of the location of the Jet Streams. I cannot deduce the possibility that when the Jet Streams pull air in to one Polar Region and not the other, which could be probable for Polar Ice Melting or Polar Ice Growing. Since the Earth is seeing different Ice Growth I can permit with full apathy that we are seeing a flux of Jet Stream Positioning and not just Human pollution.

Ricky Allred
Ricky Allred

My Turn!  In the summer on 1991, Mt. Pinatubo erupted in the Philippines.  At the time, the hot button issue for the agenda driven alarmist type scientist wasn't global warming at all.  Global warming wasn't even mentioned or brought into serious conversations.  No, back then the trigger to end the world and kill us all was "Ozone Depletion" at the poles.  That's right, we were all going to be dead by 2000 because of the holes in the ozone layer.  These stupid a**, agenda driven, self-appointed saviors of humanity, used pseudo-science, with the identical charts and graphs used today for global warming, and absolutely swore the lack of ozone would kill us all if fluorocarbons were not eliminated immediately....  And so it was done, and we’re not dead, and haven’t been burned alive by cosmic gamma rays.  Thank God for the all the scientist in their infinite wisdom.  (Scientist that don’t believe in God, I might add)

So here we are, all the fluorocarbons from the A/C in our cars and houses, to the propellant used in hair spray…, all replaced with a less ozone depleting agent.  Sounds like these scientist saved the planet, doesn’t it.  This spawned an entirely new industry.  This new industry flourished, as did the scientist, making quite a few millionaire almost overnight.  Then suddenly, as quickly as ozone depletion began, it was gone, never to be heard from again.  I wonder what took its place, don’t you?

What they didn’t tell anyone until much later, and that we only know now because of a few disgruntled and bitter poor scientist that didn’t get to cash in on the ozone free for all, is that when Mt. Pinatubo erupted that summer, it immediately, as in a couple of days, spewed 400,000 times more ozone depleting and greenhouse gases, such as methane and carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere than man had spewed in his entire existence.  Funny how that works out, isn’t?   Manmade global warming is the same old game, with the same old players, with the exception that these loons now have a former Vice President of the United States on their collective payroll making documentaries, and making millions on the backs of these crazy a** climate change zealots.  Of course, that’s only when he isn’t selling out America to Aljazeera.

Don’t get me wrong, I do love a capitalist and anyone who is successful in this rancid political and business environment, but not at the expense of reality, not at the expense of truth, and damn sure not at the expense of the American tax payer.  So shame on you for even including your version of climate change in what was an otherwise decent article.

Myrtle Fulala
Myrtle Fulala

It's funny how they keep quoting stats of US voters. The rest of the world thinks Americans are mad, and the ones that aren't mad are stupid. Makes all this kind of hard to take seriously.

Jay Jay Deng
Jay Jay Deng

The first photo showing the Arctic ice decreasing came from NASA but Nat Geo conveniently left out the other picture of the Antarctic which shows its been INCREASING in land mass.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/arctic-antarctic-ice.html

Of course, in the above article there is an explanation for this "anomaly" but climate scientists always have some excuse. I love it when we have an above average summer heat wave, the media immediately proclaims "global warming!" but when we have colder than average winters no one says ANYTHING. Oh sure, I've heard people explain away how global warming can contribute to ambiguous weather (hence the colder than average winters) but again, EXCUSES.

So what is it? Does global warming actually mean WARMING? Or does it mean up and down weather? I love how these scientists always try to have it both ways. Either the globe is warming or its not. You can't have colder than average winters and at the same time, proclaim global warming is real. You can't have below average hurricane seasons and say global warming is real. You can't have the Antarctic increasing in size and say global warming is real. You can't have a period of massive natural warming which occurred thousands of years ago with no help from CO2 and say that global warming is real.

Whats my point? WE DON'T KNOW ALL THE FACTS YET. No side does. I don't care which side you are on. I am sorry to break it to you, but just like a lot of scientific principles, global warming is still a THEORY. Yes, just like the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution (although those 2 things have much better and clearer science behind it). Even a hardcore climate scientist will (although begrudgingly) admit that it is just a theory. Just because you believe it to be true doesn't make it so. People use to think the earth was flat and had to wipe egg off their faces.

But of course, with idiots like Chris Crawford (whom I am certain will be dying to respond to this comment) drowning out reason and debate, its pointless to even discuss this topic especially when people are so close minded. The truth is, I don't know all the facts - no one does. To ostracize so called "skeptics" for offering an opposing view is wrong; that's just bad science. Good science on the other hand, has always been a result of open debate. I dare any of you to try and prove that statement wrong.

Liam O'brien
Liam O'brien

I think you need to take your tin foil hat off and step away from the computer.

Dianna Schmidt
Dianna Schmidt

@Concerned Citizen  

If you see an object in the sky that you cannot identify, does this not make it an UFO?  So it is possible thousands of UFO's are seen daily.  THAT does not mean they are alien spacecraft.

Inglorious Betches
Inglorious Betches

@Concerned Citizen here here. We've been on a 16 year cooling trend reported in various publications including Forbes, May 2012. Not only is sodium fluoride banned in most European countries, it is proven to have serious effects on the Pineal Gland. We are NOT supposed to drink it according to science.Oh, gosh, but how would industry be able to dispose of this by-product of aluminum, fertilizer and Uranium processing?  As far as vaccines go: several European countries have verified links to Autism via vaccinations and have banned several of them. We are not educated in this country at all. Look! I think I see Kim Kardashian!!

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@Leslie Crofford Chemtrails is what you speak of right?  Those are contrails created when airplanes travel through our atmosphere.  They are very easy to explain and very common.  There is certainly some jet exhaust in them, but they are nearly all good old H2O.  The govt. is not using the passenger jets of private companies to spray chemicals.  This is a great example of a conspiracy theory with no basis in fact.

Martin Smith
Martin Smith

@Leslie Crofford
The man made trails? As in the contrails behind the planes?

Ok, when an object (it doesn't need to be a plane) flies through the air it compresses the air infront of it. Water condenses from the compressed air and forms clouds which stick around after the plane has moved forward, forming a trail. They aren't spraying anything, it's just water vapour.

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@Brad Reinhardt Haha!  I never ever click links on these kinds of forums.  There have been a few times just for kicks I've clicked the link, looked at it, then googled the subject.  Even without trying it is easy to come up with decently unbiased sources which allow a relatively balanced view on the issue, never mind genuine scientific literature.

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@John C. Yeah I've known a few people who are left-leaning like me and then you find out they believe in the 9/11 conspiracy theory.  It's funny, but then you start finding out they believe that aliens have been creating the crop circles and other hogwash.  A couple have even been fellow-scientists, go figure.  The type of brain that accepts conspiracy theories does not have a political bias, and can even be of a scientific bent, strangely enough.

David Lango
David Lango

@John C. I wouldn't doubt that "Bush was complicit". If I were to decide on a suspect for ultimate responsibility I'd follow the money. I'd like to accuse the House of Rothschild. It took a lot of work to pull off the biggest false flag event we've ever seen.

It's estimated that it took ten tons of nano-thermite to demo all three buildings.

John Boyd
John Boyd

@Debra Hall It's the "believe" thing. Most everyday science can be demonstrated to true, whereas evolution works on a slower time scale an can not be shown to be true. Of course, anyone with an eye for nature can see that evolution really does occur, coupled with archaeological evidence, and that's the crux of the matter. One has to believe in the interpretation of that evidence, and belief is the province of religion. Besides, for some reason  some people think being created from mud--not monkeys--is much more sexy.

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@Kristopher Fjeldos I cannot understand your post.  Apathy?  I think maybe English is not your first language, which is understandable.  But please don't expect people to be able to understand what you write.

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@Ricky Allred Why do people believe the world's scientists are in cahoots and propagating a series of hoaxes in order to be enriched by funding for their research and not believe that the billions and billions of dollars on the line for fossil fuel companies is not the larger factor?  This is strange.  It is not scientists that have our congressmen on their payrolls but industry.  Scientists are trying their best.  Science gets funded, but that in itself is not proof of corruption.  That's just the way it's paid for.  

By the way, global warming has been known for a long long time.  It became politicized in the mid- to late-1980s.  Maybe that's what you speak of.  But when I was working on it in graduate school in the early 80s, I was learning from guys who had been studying it since the early 60s.  It is actually quite an old scientific problem.  Sadly, it's politicized beyond repair now.  And that is not because of scientists but because of those in power whose business interests and nice comfortable fortunes are threatened by talks of action to address the problem.  Of course they care nothing for future generations.  That is the concern of scientists, but it is also the concern of billions and billions of parents and regular folks in this world.  You are part of a disappearing minority, thankfully.

David Lango
David Lango

@Ricky Allred note the omission labeling in the headline picture of the Arctic. They put September 2012 on it, they sure did, when the ice is smallest after so many weeks of midnight sun.

Why not show the date from 1979? Why lead people to think its smaller because of the "global warming hoax"? The arctic sees many weeks of no sun at all. Why not label that line drawn in as March?

Do these "bad scientists" think we're all stupid? Enjoy being a media lap dog I say, and stick to the globalists who censor your material.

And it's not a decent article, that part I have to disagree with you Rick. If you're going to make an article like this, why omit the biggest lie we've ever been told? Why dance around it with a "Bush knew" question?

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@Myrtle Fulala Of course the rest of the world has no idea what Americans actually believe.  Those who are rational about things vastly outnumber the loonies, but they don't get the press and aren't featured in viral internet videos that get consumed by people around the world.  Most of the world has no idea how diverse America is, but much of the world's people still admire us and want to come here.  This is all gleaned from A LOT of travel on my part, but it is still anecdotal, so take it not as fact but as simple observations.

Richard Enser
Richard Enser

@Myrtle Fulala To take your idea further, the statistics only include the people who vote - in many places, that is less than 50%  What are the rest of the people thinking?  My bet is, if you are not intellegent enough to cast a vote, you are more likely to accept myths and refute science

John Boyd
John Boyd

@Myrtle Fulala Yes, we're quite mad, and from a Vasaikar such as yourself, we take it as a complement. 

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@Jay Jay Deng So called skeptics are vilified because they cherry-pick and end up saying dumb things like the world is growing colder and that Antarctica's LAND mass is increasing.  You must mean it's ice cover is increasing, right?  Hope so.  But that is just the point.  The "skeptics" do not trust science and at the same time are almost scientifically illiterate.  Thus they are prone to being manipulated by the political machine that has been in the business of hiring "scientists" to sow seeds of doubt in a very cogent and well established theory.  I know a lot about science, and I put global warming (or climate change, which is the term used by those who know that the regional effects of global warming can be quite diverse) right up there with evolution by natural selection.  Both are well-documented theories.  By the way, the world has been warming.  That is a simple fact that relies on measurement of temperatures.  Not such a difficult thing you know, to read a thermometer.  How people somehow get hoodwinked into believing the opposite I will never know.  Good science is open to debate, but the debate must be based on real scientific evidence, not politics.  No way I want my government supporting scientists that pay any attention to moneyed industry types and the politicians they have in their pocket trying to "debate" with them.

Charlie Kohm
Charlie Kohm

@Jay Jay Deng 

Good science is not open to debate. Scientific method is a method of inquiry based upon empirical and measureable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. 

I suggest you learn about theory, theorems and hypotheses before suggesting that "Even a hardcore climate scientist will (although begrudgingly) admit that it is just a theory."

You obviously do not understand anything about 'theory', therefore it is futile to explain to you that everything you have stated is untrue.

Charlie Kohm
Charlie Kohm

@Jay Jay Deng 

Why you wasted five paragraphs to explain that you are neither a scientist nor do you possess even the least amount of education necessary to know that a "theory" is not an idea that might be proven untrue is something I'm sure even you do not understand. 

Theories are abstract and conceptual and are always assumed to be true.  

It is unfortunate that we have as a nation failed to keep fundamentalist religious quackery from being taught in our learning institutions and from being taught as an alternative "scientific" view, which is what you think is debatable.

Good science is not open to debate. Scientific method is a method of inquiry based upon empirical and measureable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning. 

I suggest you learn about theory, theorems and hypotheses before discussing what YOU believe is scientific method. There is no debate to be had, just like there isn't any debate about whether gravity or  evolution are true. They cannot be proven to be false.

Daniel M.
Daniel M.

@Jay Jay Deng

Your first sentence proves at once you have no idea what you're talking about.

You say: 'climate scientists always have some excuse.' - Yes, only they call them facts and the results/conclusions of vigorous scientific study.

Your third sentence is just laughable, reductionist nonsense, which gives away your childish mind and immature non-argument. 

You are clearly not a scientist. In fact i seriously doubt you have a comprehension beyond 2nd grade science classes. Are you religious by any chance?

You say we don't know all the facts, and by 'we', i assume you mean 'you', because an overwhelming number of scientists do have facts, data, analysis, research studies and a host of other scientific information that, once dissected, peer-reviewed and stacked on top of the pile of other scientists' work, can be called 'evidence' or 'facts'. Please don't talk as if you are a peer of climate, or any other scientist, and imply that collectively, the scientific community is at odds. You are not a scientist. You are not an expert. Your opinion in this debate is utterly worthless. You are a charlatan. Persona non-grata, and i for one am sick and tired of plebeian republican propagandists like you attempting to cynically highjack the climate science debate. You have nothing to contribute and your arguments and opinions are ill-conceived, non-sensical and just plain wrong. 

watch this before making another comment, and read the list of contributors credited at the end:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqxENMKaeCU&wide=1


Read this:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/series/the-ultimate-climate-change-faq


And this: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/the-world-is-hottest-it-has-been-since-the-end-of-the-ice-age--and-the-temperatures-still-rising-8525089.html?origin=internalSearch

Johnny Lutters
Johnny Lutters

@Jay Jay Deng

The land mass is not growing in the antarctic but the ice shelves are growing but at a much slower rate than the polar ice caps are melting. What if you are wrong and global warming is taking place, its gonna take a long time to reverse it and it will grow exponentially because all the mechanism of heating feed off of each other, 

But lets say you're right, would it still hurt curbing air pollution? you've seen what has happened to our lakes rivers oceans and now undeniably our air, and that's the best case scenario if we just breath in really polluted air...

Alec Higgins
Alec Higgins

What you are saying is not only extremely ignorant but borderline delusional. Are you aware that flouride is found naturally in your drinking water, food, and even air? Not to mention the levels of put into water is about 1.2 ppm; thats 1.2 parts per million, an extremely low amount. As for vaccines, the vaccination program in America has been extremely successful. Polio, small pox, measles, just a few of the deadly diseases that have been entirely eliminated through vaccination. 

Michael Flores
Michael Flores

@David Lango @John C. Logic dictates there's no way to hide that much thermite in the buildings. About a pint of thermite barely damages an xbox. the 9/11 commission shows the money trail leads to Afghanistan. Please look up 9/11 conspiracy theories debunked, and Zeitgeist part 3 debunked &spread the debunkings.

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@John Boyd @Debra Hall Evolution is fact, it is the theory of natural selection that Darwin came up with to explain that fact.  So many people tend to confuse this distinction.  That said, I think most Americans "believe" in evolution.

David Lango
David Lango

@John Boyd @Debra Hall The missing links should be far more plentiful. If the change was gradual, the amount of fossil evidence of the "in between" should far outnumber the real deals created by God. Probability and statistics so debunks evolution. Now go find your missing links!

Carey B
Carey B

@Charlie Kohm@Jay Jay Deng 

Your definition of the word 'Theory' fails to live up to the rigors of science.  Newtons 'laws' under today's rigors of science would still be theories.

"When used in non-scientific context, the word “theory” implies that something is unproven or speculative. As used in science, however, a theory is an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena.

Any scientific theory must be based on a careful and rational examination of the facts. In the scientific method, there is a clear distinction between facts, which can be observed and/or measured, and theories, which are scientists’ explanations and interpretations of the facts. Scientists can have various interpretations of the outcomes of experiments and observations, but the facts, which are the cornerstone of the scientific method, do not change."

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

David Lango
David Lango

@Charlie Kohm @Jay Jay Deng You need to come up with more missing links, if evolution is to hold water.

A gradual change means far more "in between" evidence than the few missing links that makes such big news.

I'm not a scientist, but common sense says there should be far more half monkey-half man than what we've heard about.

Do the math. We have monkey bones and man bones. How many in between bones? Seriously? What a joke.

Again, you evolutionists really need to get to finding the plethora of missing links illustrating this gradual change!

David Lango
David Lango

@Daniel Marriott @Jay Jay Deng The globalists own, control, and censor the media.

Two more studies – one by the Leibniz Institute of Marine Science and the Max Planck Institute of Meteorology in Germany and another by the University of Wisconsin – predict a slowing, or even a reversal of warming, for at least the next 10 to 20 years.
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2009/03/92557/#g4QzvqG1kPUQYZ9G.99 

Honest scientists participate in peer review, and then get all their hard work pushed aside in favor of the few that go off on a tangent and spew agenda.

John C.
John C.

@Daniel Marriott @Jay Jay Deng

You are clearly not a scientist. In fact i seriously doubt you have a comprehension beyond 2nd grade science classes. Are you religious by any chance?

---------------

That's funny, Barack Obama is not a scientist, and is religious as well. However, your thin-skinned vitriol is exactly the type of spew that any fundamentalist emits when his religious beliefs are questioned. AGW adherents are as dogmatic in their pseudo-religion as any other religious type.   

Kristopher Fjeldos
Kristopher Fjeldos

@Daniel Marriott @Jay Jay Deng As a scientist myself I hypothesis that the Earth is coming out of an Ice Age and that we will see Global Warming even without pollution. We will someday have Global Cooling. And this all depends on where the Jet Streams are located. If you are a true scientist, you as a professional would not disregard the possibility of the changing of Jet Stream positions as the reason for Global Weather Changes? Before deducing someones argument understand that we really do not know, we can guess and that is a better guess when done with all available information not just one participle of an idea.

Martin Smith
Martin Smith

@David Lango

I'll answer your points in a lovely organised list.

"The missing links should be far more plentiful."

No. Fossilisation requires very specific conditions to occur. The right minerals need to be present, the animal needs to die in the right place, it needs to not be disturbed for thousands of years etc etc. We find as many fossils as we'd expect to considering the circumstances.

"If the change was gradual, the amount of fossil evidence of the "in between" should far outnumber the real deals created by God."

No. As I explained above, fossilisation is very unlikely to happen properly, but it does occasionally. That's the most important part. It has happened. I'm yet to see a fossil of this God you say created everything.

Jonathan Krailller
Jonathan Krailller

Saying Darwin "came up" with this stuff shows that you know very little of Darwin or Evolution.  "On the Origin of Species" by Charles Darwin is a record of his observations of species most notable his observations in the Galapagos Islands of how species changed in order to best live in their enviornment.  Modern Evolution takes almost nothing from Darwin and is mostly based in Genetic testing, which you probably no nothing about either.

David Lango
David Lango

@Charlie Kohm @Jay Jay Deng I can't believe Darwin came up with this crap and didn't explain why evolution seems to have just "stopped". Where are all the in betweens now? Shouldn't they still be here with us?

Michael Flaherty
Michael Flaherty

@David Lango @Daniel M. @Jay Jay Deng No reversal David, but there is emerging evidence of a slowdown.  This is not evidence that global warming is a hoax, but it is evidence that we have probably been underestimating the ocean's capability of absorbing heat at deeper levels than we thought.  This is bad news, because it means that (A) the effects are being postponed, probably resulting in our "leaders" taking their attention away from the problem and (B) the fact that the deeper oceans might be warming is something we have little idea how to study right now, and so we don't know how that might turn out.  It could be catastrophic, for reasons too complex to go into in this forum. 

How to Feed Our Growing Planet

  • Feed the World

    Feed the World

    National Geographic explores how we can feed the growing population without overwhelming the planet in our food series.

See blogs, stories, photos, and news »

The Innovators Project

  • Brave Sage of Timbuktu

    Brave Sage of Timbuktu

    Abdel Kader Haidara had made it his life's work to document Mali's illustrious past. When the jihadists came, he led the rescue operation to save 350,000 manuscripts.

See more innovators »

Phenomena

See more posts »

Latest News Video

See more videos »

See Us on Google Glass

Shop Our Space Collection

  • Be the First to Own <i>Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey</i>

    Be the First to Own Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey

    The updated companion book to Carl Sagan's Cosmos, featuring a new forward by Neil deGrasse Tyson is now available. Proceeds support our mission programs, which protect species, habitats, and cultures.

Shop Now »