Environment - December 2007

Do you think its all a con? or is the planets climate getting warmer afterall?Australia recently signed the Kyoto treaty in Bali,the European Union is also convinced and wants tougher limits put on green house emissions put in place before 2020,are they all wrong?and how about the U.N. GEO-4 report?

2007-12-12 23:37:39 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

2007-12-12 19:33:21 · 7 answers · asked by GEO 6 in Global Warming

Its so damned cold how can they call this global warming???

2007-12-12 18:22:39 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

Since America The biggest Emitter of Carbon Emissions i.e. Polluter", does not believe in "Global Warming" as evidenced by blocking agreements in Bali., much like their position on slavery, land mines, cluster bombs and Kyoto, as they use arguments like, "there is Climate change on Mar"s, Uh! we don't live on Mars! and "this is a cyclical change, how do they know., where they here during the ice age? much like the arguments and B.S. for the wars they started to steal oil. Since Americans love their Guns and Humvees, and killing each other, as evidenced by the shooting rampages in Shopping Malls, churches and High Schools I say we encourage them.,
Not, to change sign up for agreements on Climate Change, but to support their bids to carry guns like "Cowboys", so they can shoot and killl each other whenever they like, and when they are all gone, they will have done their part in saving the planet. America Style. A good Idea?

2007-12-12 16:30:03 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

2007-12-12 15:54:33 · 4 answers · asked by Lost. at. Sea. 7 in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

i am very scared becaus of the polar ice cap when it all melts!

2007-12-12 15:46:03 · 5 answers · asked by cupcake princess :) 2 in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

It seems Americans are the leaders in global warming denial, http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/187.php?nid=&id=&pnt=187&lb=hmpg1
How many people will have to die before you understand that man made global warming is real? Do they all have to be Americans, or will people being killed in Bangladesh be enough to convince the holdouts?

2007-12-12 15:05:28 · 13 answers · asked by Author Unknown 6 in Global Warming

2007-12-12 14:40:52 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Conservation

How about leveling 55 square feet of rain forest for a single meal or dumping 2,500 gallons of water down the drain?

If you're eating chicken, fish, turkey, pork, or beef, that's what you're doing—wasting resources and destroying our environment.

Mmmmm PETA People Eating Tasty Animals.

I'm going to have a steak and only eat half of it.

2007-12-12 14:29:34 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Green Living

cause more pollution in the environment?

I am having a fight with someone over the use of the iphone, and one of their points was that the factories in which the iphones are made causes more pollution in the environment. I don't exactly know more than what...but does it actually cause an excessive amount of pollution?

2007-12-12 14:19:21 · 3 answers · asked by ♫♥♥♫♫♫♥♥ 3 in Other - Environment

http://nzclimatescience.net/images/PDFs/mclean-disband_the_ipcc.pdf

2007-12-12 14:10:01 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

Please explain what happened to end the Ice Age ? Green
house gases from industrialization and SUV's certainly didn't
cause it to end. Obviously, man had nothing to do with that, so why suddenly is man the cause of global warming ? I think it is
all a huge scam by scientists to continue receiving grant money, thereby justifying their existance. Your thoughts ?

2007-12-12 13:59:35 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

Under the Federal Clean Air Act, private businesses and governmental agencies that succeed in keeping their emissions below the permissible limits dictated by the Environmental Protection Agency can earn pollution credits. Holders of these credits can sell them to other organizations that have trouble keeping their emissions within the limits, or can retire them permanently, thus reducing the potential of further pollution.
State agencies in New York have amassed millions of dollars in pollution credits. Recently the state has sought to lure businesses to New York by offering the credits for free. That is, if a company agrees to set up a plant or office in New York then the state will give them some of the pollution credits that it (the state) has earned. This new approach for attracting business into the State of New York is highly controversial. Widespread protests forced the state of Maine to back away from a similar approach. Do you vote in favor of NY law or against it, and why

2007-12-12 13:36:51 · 1 answers · asked by Curious Star 2 in Other - Environment

Burning one less candle will cut Hanukkah C02 emissions by 15gm. each.

Getting divorced results in 38 more million rooms around the globe to heat, light and cool according to a Michigan State University study.

Rearing cattle produces more greenhouse gases than driving cars according to the UN Nov. 2006 report.

Don’t forget about the study from the University of Alberta where getting rid of all the old beer fridges often found in North American and Australian homes could have a significant impact on household greenhouse gas emissions.

In another even fresher such academic report, a report in the Medical Journal of Australia cites a professor arguing that every couple with more than two children should be charged a $5,000-plus "baby levy" at birth and an annual carbon tax of up to $800 a child.

2007-12-12 13:33:53 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

and what can we do to prevent global warming?

I just want to see the options we have here. Thanks

2007-12-12 13:28:32 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

2007-12-12 13:22:21 · 7 answers · asked by burundukgan 1 in Global Warming

"Scientists" were clamoring for governmental action on global cooling 30 years ago. I'm just saying...

2007-12-12 13:15:13 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

I hear people claim NASA says this or NASA says that. Do they have an infalable leader? Do they have to profess to a certain opinion before they are hired? Are NASA scientists like the Stepford Wives? Do they vote? Do they have an official template? If they say the wrong thing, are they fired? Are they like academic scientists who are afraid of the private sector because the private sector demands results?

Can anyone offer some insight here?

2007-12-12 13:09:18 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Environment

2007-12-12 12:47:59 · 9 answers · asked by pullagrav 1 in Global Warming

2007-12-12 12:37:15 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Global Warming

Just last year, scientist were claiming that the ice on Antarctica was melting, and the Earth would be hundreds of feet below water.

By just waiting a year, we now know that the ice sheets on Antarctica are growing, and now there is more ice than average.

We are being told that global warming now moved north and is melting the arctic ice. We're told that the ice will be gone, the polar bears will be extinct, world will be underwater, blah, blah, blah, blah....

Now NASA has determined that global warming has very little to do with the melting ice caps. That ocean currents that are decadal in nature, rather than trends caused by global warming are the cause of the ice caps melting.

NASA also predicts that the currents are now changing and that the ice caps will return to normal without us doing anything.

Please read the article for more detailed information -

http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2007-131

2007-12-12 12:31:29 · 10 answers · asked by Dr Jello 7 in Global Warming

Here its starting to get colder in New York started snowing in the polar icecaps the ice is started to freeze over so how much does Al gore know or is this starting to backfire? Or are they going to say its another ice age.

2007-12-12 11:53:14 · 10 answers · asked by Jeremy P 2 in Global Warming

2007-12-12 11:45:37 · 6 answers · asked by jfr13 1 in Global Warming

"Just last year two top scientists surprised their colleagues by projecting that the Arctic sea ice was melting so rapidly that it could disappear entirely by the summer of 2040.

This week, after reviewing his own new data, NASA climate scientist Jay Zwally said: "At this rate, the Arctic Ocean could be nearly ice-free at the end of summer by 2012, much faster than previous predictions."

"The Arctic is often cited as the canary in the coal mine for climate warming," said Zwally, who as a teenager hauled coal. "Now as a sign of climate warming, the canary has died. It is time to start getting out of the coal mines."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/12/071212-AP-arctic-melt_2.html

Do you agree with Zwally?

2007-12-12 11:06:49 · 9 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/arctic-ice-gone-by-2040-scientists/2006/12/12/1165685679610.html


a year ago they were saying 2040 and now they roll it back 30 yrs.

i dont know what to believe anymore.

2007-12-12 10:58:14 · 10 answers · asked by inside and out 1 in Global Warming

plz give a source with your answer like a website or something.

2007-12-12 10:52:27 · 2 answers · asked by jasonz619 1 in Global Warming

Personally I would say it's fair to call Al Gore somewhat of an alarmist. For example, he mentions that sea levels could rise hundreds of feet without discussing the likelihood or time frames. While the scenario is possible, it's important to provide this context.

In general, an "alarmist" is someone who predicts unrealistic and alarming scenarios. Since all indications are that scientists' predictions are too conservative, I would not certainly not call them "alarmists".

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AiBHBPhyRNMzr41QhpHCsh7ty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071210195739AAdkrj2

I would say that a "denier" is someone who refuses to acknowledge scientific data. Especially when they specifically request data, are provided data, and continue to ignore it. A good example here:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ar3uYF61NoLWT9ZHLARiBxHty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071210112240AAaUubJ&show=7#profile-info-sSvPEf97aa

How would you define these terms? To whom do they apply?

2007-12-12 10:46:00 · 9 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming

2007-12-12 10:08:54 · 38 answers · asked by Anonymous in Conservation

Good Luck. When you actually look you kool-aid drinkers will find out that ONE study in 2005 from the Scripps Oceanographic Institute is the so-called "proof" of man-made global warming.

I can link you to scores of peer reviewed studies in 2007 that refute man-made global warming:

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=84e9e44a-802a-23ad-493a-b35d0842fed8

Let's see you come up with a single study after 2005 that supports MAN-MADE global warming.

2007-12-12 09:42:16 · 5 answers · asked by c m 2 in Global Warming

In 1988 James Hansen of NASA predicted the ensuing global warming. He created 3 different scenarios, depending on how human greenhouse gas emissions changed. Actual changes ended up being closest to his Scenario B.

"Scenario B is pretty close and certainly well within the error estimates of the real world changes. And if you factor in the 5 to 10% overestimate of the forcings in a simple way, Scenario B would be right in the middle of the observed trends. It is certainly close enough to provide confidence that the model is capable of matching the global mean temperature rise!"

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/hansens-1988-projections/

Graphically:

http://www.realclimate.org/images/Hansen88_forc.jpg

To hear skeptics talk about it, you would think Hansen said "the planet will warm" and left it at that! He used a climate model (a crude one relative to today's) and accurately predicted the ensuing warming trend.

How about giving him some credit?

2007-12-12 09:23:43 · 10 answers · asked by Dana1981 7 in Global Warming