I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again–any time someone mentions any skepticism related to global warming, he’s perceived as a political conservative with an agenda (Global Warming Nonsense). That’s unfortunate because we should all be skeptical of global warming.
Before everyone jumps to conclusions about what I mean, let me define a few common terms as they related to the global warming debate.
Global Warming Skeptic
A global warming skeptic is someone who challenges the validity of all information related to global warming, with the goal of having accurate information upon which to gauge his opinions.
Global Warming Supporter
A global warming supporter or advocate is someone who believes that global warming is occurring (not someone who wants it to happen as the name might suggest) and that man is at least partially responsible. As such, he will often will use any evidence to make the case that global warming is occurring.
Any every extreme weather event is “proof” of global warming (heat waves, tornadoes, and even blizzards). The result is often conflicting information, such as studies that prove global warming was the cause of a more intense Atlantic hurricane season in 2005 and the reason for a below-average hurricane season in 2006.
Global Warming Denier
A global warming denier is the opposite, and this person will always take a stance that any and all types of weather are result of natural factors. Man is too insignificant to influence the atmosphere.
Any scientific evidence that supports global warming is fraudulent in some way, perhaps being done by a scientist with an agenda. Any colder-than-weather average weather is proof that global warming is not occurring.
Global Warming Skeptic–and Proud of It
The question of global warming and how we might react to it is one of the most pressing question mankind will fact in the next couple of generations; therefore, we need accurate information in order to make the best decision. That can only happen through healthy skepticism.