I could only find one argument that some people still debate as a "no evidence" theory. The argument by some is, if the Earth is indeed warming, it would benefit us rather than cause us problems or harm. This argument asserts that the period between 5000BC and 3000BC was when the Earth was at its "climatic optimum" and this is when humans first started to build up civilized societies. Plants and animals have usually thrived during the planet's warmer periods, as opposed to the ice ages which have caused survival problems for many species. New land would be available and agriculture would benefit. Although this argument doesn't really deny the existence of global warming, it does come under the banner of "no evidence" because of its suggestion of benefit rather than problem.
Scientists accept that there is overwhelming evidence that the world is warming.
There are evidences to support it. Scientists have proven its theory.
There is no evidence that global warming is affecting meerkats yet. However the warming is gradually affecting the food chains and habitats of many animals. If this happens, the animals have to migrate, adapt or die.
Global Warming.
There is no evidence that shows jaguars are being affected by climate change.
True global warming does not decrease temperatures. So, either the model for global warming's effects is hokus-pokus, or global warming as presently claimed, does not exist. Some global warming followers will have you believe that global warming makes the weather "act crazy". If true, then it is not really global warming, is it.
Global warming in itself isn't pollution - global warming is the gradual warming of the earth. However, global warming was caused by carbon dioxide pollution in the atmosphere, but global warming in itself isn't a pollution. yes it is a pollution
global warming?
No, not at all. There is no evidence that the global warming is affecting brown bears.
There is no evidence that global warming is a myth. There has certainly been a lot of misinformation on the subject, often from vested interests, but the clear consensus of climate scientists is that global warming is real and that human activities are substantially the cause of global warming since the Industrial Revolution.
There is no evidence that "global warming" is causing birds to migrate differently.
No, that would probably be evidence for global cooling.
On May 19, 1997, in a speech at Stanford University, Browne declared that evidence suggested that global warming could be real. He argued that evidence that burning of fossil fuels was contributing to global warming
Extremely conservative groups tend to be more critical of the evidence of global warming. This has more to do ideology than idiocy, even though over 97% of scientists acknowledge the existence of of global warming.
There is absolutely no evidence that global warming causes shark attacks.
Of course, global warming is a factual environmental issue. Evidence are the floods around the globe, frequent earthquake experiences, more tsunamis incident occurred and etc -- resulting people to die.
The work of 15 climate scientists is helping to educate the public about the overwhelming scientific evidence for human-caused global warming.
At the poles we see that the icecaps seen to be melting.
There is no evidence that global warming is affecting meerkats yet. However the warming is gradually affecting the food chains and habitats of many animals. If this happens, the animals have to migrate, adapt or die.