Global Warming and Insurmountable Proof

Global After years of controversy, and a plethora of arguments, the debate over Global Warming can finally be put to rest. Friday, international scientists are set to release a report proving that since the middle of the last century, we have been responsible for the temperatures rise, causing glacial damage, sea disturbance, and, if not reconciled, cataclysmic damage. This begs the question of whether scientific, insurmountable proof will be enough to make a believer out of the skeptics.

For decades, the controversy surrounding climate change has been a topic of heated discussion. There never seemed to be enough evidence or enough words to prove an existence of environmental harm. As believers watched in horror as parts of their world denigrated and changed, doubters drove through the outrage with rhetoric and red herrings. What distractions will they bring with them now? Staring at the proof that global warming is and has been occurring for years, and that we, the occupants are responsible, may not be an easy pill to swallow for some.

For five years, this group of Nobel Prize-winning scientists has been given the task to find this insurmountable proof, and this, the fifth assessment, has the highest amount of evidence claiming our responsibility. It brings about a sadness to know an entire world is now, literally, shaky ground, and those that could have been fixing it or aiding it, have instead been ignoring it.  A few of the myths used to try and disprove global warming have been dismissed by science, so this new production may not do as much good as some would hope. With outstanding data, many have refuted the facts and turned a snubbed nose to reason and logic. “Global warming requires insurmountable proof,” they say. “Calling me an irresponsible human is disgusting,” they say. One would think that the two leading and most reputable global trend analyses- NASA GISS and CRU- would be enough to convince even the most stubborn juror, but astonishingly it is not.

Climatology has turned into a daily discussion in many circles, and in every circle, there tends to be at least on skeptic. Some arguments include weather stations being inaccurate, earth prediction is unreliable, historical data is questionable, and so on. There is a fear in some people that no matter what evidence is shown, fault will be found, and the climate will continue its path toward more destruction. At what point do we, as humans, stop and take a moment to look at the reality of where we stand? There are so many easy ways to help out – just in case it is real. We can recycle, drive less, use compact fluorescent light bulbs, keep unused lights off, and plant trees. So many things that can help our earth do not take up as much time as you would think. Even if you do not believe- even if this Friday’s report full of insurmountable proof does not sway you, what does it hurt to be proactive? This is just my take.

Written by: Amy Magness Whatley



Ways to Help

5 Responses to "Global Warming and Insurmountable Proof"

  1. Thea Wilbert   March 14, 2019 at 3:28 pm

    Whats Taking place i am new to this, I stumbled upon this I have discovered It positively helpful and it has helped me out loads. I am hoping to contribute & help different users like its helped me. Great job.

  2. nemo paradise   September 27, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    How nice to know that the “debate…can finally be put to rest.” Apparently, wishing can “make it so.” I’ll bet some pesky people will keep “debating,” however, especially as real time observations continue to diverge from infallible and rigorously scientific computer model projections. Some people just don’t seem to want to accept the fact that science, at the end of the day, is a matter of opinion, where facts are elected by a majority. By the way, that bear is really a seal.

    • Bill Rabara   October 30, 2013 at 10:09 pm


      You are dead wrong. Science, in its essence, is a mode of inquiry. Science is about being skeptical about all claims — especially ones that lack empirical support. Science rejects explanations based upon anecdotal evidence or superstition. Science is about truth being contingent upon current evidence. Science elects no facts. Ignorance of or fear of (many times for religious reasons) science results in uncalled for smear campaigns.

  3. Rich Brown (@HRleaderRich)   September 27, 2013 at 5:55 am

    Nice photo, by the way. Polar Bear populations are way up in the past decade.

  4. Mashal (@mashal1144)   September 26, 2013 at 11:49 pm

    very useful and informative article — I did enjoyed it . keep writing … thanks


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.