Global warming controversy | Wikipedia audio article

This is an audio version of the Wikipedia Article:


00:03:03 1 History
00:03:11 1.1 Public opinion
00:11:54 1.2 Related controversies
00:13:53 2 Scientific consensus
00:14:29 2.1 Scientific consensus
00:20:33 2.2 Authority of the IPCC
00:25:50 2.3 Greenhouse gases
00:31:16 2.4 Solar variation
00:33:55 2.5 Aerosols forcing
00:34:54 2.6 Analysis of temperature records
00:35:03 2.6.1 Instrumental record of surface temperature
00:38:05 2.6.2 Tropospheric temperature
00:39:05 2.6.3 Antarctica cooling
00:42:10 2.7 Climate sensitivity
00:44:28 2.8 Infrared iris hypothesis
00:45:21 2.9 Temperature projections
00:48:50 2.10 Forecasts confidence
00:50:00 2.11 Arctic sea ice decline
00:50:42 2.12 Data archiving and sharing
00:54:36 3 Political questions
00:59:46 3.1 Kyoto Protocol
01:02:43 3.2 Funding
01:09:02 3.3 Debate over most effective response to warming
01:16:35 3.4 Political pressure on scientists
01:23:57 3.5 Litigation
01:25:22 3.5.1 Kelsey Cascade, Rose Juliana et. al. vs. United States
01:26:31 4 See also



Listening is a more natural way of learning, when compared to reading. Written language only began at around 3200 BC, but spoken language has existed long ago.

Learning by listening is a great way to:
- increases imagination and understanding
- improves your listening skills
- improves your own spoken accent
- learn while on the move
- reduce eye strain

Now learn the vast amount of general knowledge available on Wikipedia through audio (audio article). You could even learn subconsciously by playing the audio while you are sleeping! If you are planning to listen a lot, you could try using a bone conduction headphone, or a standard speaker instead of an earphone.

Listen on Google Assistant through Extra Audio:
Other Wikipedia audio articles at:
Upload your own Wikipedia articles through:
Speaking Rate: 0.9874162518438285
Voice name: en-AU-Wavenet-A


"I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think."
- Socrates


SUMMARY
=======
The global warming controversy concerns the public debate over whether global warming is occurring, how much has occurred in modern times, what has caused it, what its effects will be, whether any action should be taken to curb it, and if so what that action should be. In the scientific literature, there is a strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view, though a few organizations with members in extractive industries hold non-committal positions.The controversy is, by now, political rather than scientific: there is a scientific consensus that climate change is happening and is caused by human activity. Disputes over the key scientific facts of global warming are more prevalent in the media than in the scientific literature, where such issues are treated as resolved, and such disputes are more prevalent in the United States than globally.Political and popular debate concerning the existence and cause of climate change includes the reasons for the increase seen in the instrumental temperature record, whether the warming trend exceeds normal climatic variations, and whether human activities have contributed significantly to it. Scientists have resolved these questions decisively in favour of the view that the current warming trend exists and is ongoing, that human activity is the cause, and that it is without precedent in at least 2000 years. Public disputes that also reflect scientific debate include estimates of how responsive the climate system might be to any given level of greenhouse gases (climate sensitivity), how global climate change will play out at local and regional scales, and what the consequences of global warming will be.
Global warming remains an issue of widespread political debate, often split along party political lines, especially in the United States. Many of the issues that are settled within the scientific community, such as human responsibility for global warming, remain the subject of politically or economically motivated attempts to downplay, dismiss or deny them—an ideological phenomenon categorised by academics and scientists as climate change denial. The sources of funding for those involved with climate science—both supporting and opposing mainstream scientific positions—have been questioned by both sides. There are debates about the best policy responses to the science, their cost-effectiveness and their urgency. Climate scientists, especially in the United States, have reported official and oil-industry pressure to censor or suppress their work and hide scientific data, with direc ...