Q: seems as if american conservatives will have us believe it's fake, even if it's accepted in the science community, sort of like evolution.
A: Yes. The weather data collected shows a clear increase in oceanic, surface, and atmospheric temperatures. There are also things like: glaciers and ice shelves are melting at a rate faster than which they can rebuild themselves; organisms which are sensitive to temperature changes are either flourishing (worms, certain kinds of algae) or disappearing (coral) according to their biological tolerances. Other organisms which can adapt more quickly are evolving to cope with these changes - some plants are becoming more drought resistant, frogs are changing colors. Those who argue against global warming tend to use the same kinds of arguments as those who are against evolution. They insist that because scientists aren't sure as to every single factor detailing why this is happening, or exactly how bad things will get, then it must not be true. This sort of thinking is really just head-in-the-sand syndrome and invokes images of Eddie Murphy covering his ears and shouting "LA LA LA I AM NOT LISTENING TO YOU!!!" Granted, many people are just reacting to the media: They distrust the media's sensationalism and alarmism. If the media were to be honest and tell us "Yes, global warming is occuring, but its probably not as bad as you think and really, we don't even know just how bad it is or how bad its going to get" ... well, you probably wouldn't watch/read/hear it. And no audience = no advertising revenue. Still, it seems reasonable to me that unless we as a species are happy to run headlong into our own extinction, we should probably err on the side of caution and do what we can to curtail known factors - namely limiting greenhouse gas production and other types of pollution. Some recommendations while doing research: Favor articles which appear in peer-reviewed journals and University publications. Do your best to get your hands on the actual research data when you can. Question articles that appear in journals and magazines which have nothing whatsoever to do with science (ie, religious sources), ubiquitously refer to unnamed "experts," are without citations, or rely on emotional arguments rather than logical ones. Also question leftist or activist groups, as many of them exaggerate and make things out to be worse than they really are.