Global Warming

Discussions around here often focus on this year or that. Or claims are made that, since we can't always predict the weather, we can't predict climate change.

But, in science, it is frequently true that short term data is not predictable, but long term is.

A classic example is radioactivity. Take a piece of lead-210. Look at individual atoms with an electron microscope. It is utterly impossible to predict whether or not any atom will decay in the next hour (although many of them will).

And nothing in science is more certain than that, in 22.3 years, half of the atoms will have decayed.

Global warming data is very much like that. Individual years are not predictable, but the long term average is. This graph is educational:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif

2007-11-29 04:41:11 · 8 answers · asked by Bob 7

If you doubt the man-made (anthropogenic) global warming theory, which statement is true?

1) There is significant dispute in the scientific community about what is causing the current warming. In other words, the claim that the vast majority of scientists agree with the consensus that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming is false.

2) You personally understand climate science better than climate scientists or know something that climate scientists don't know.

3) Climate scientists are in agreement, but only because anthropogenic global warming is a scam.

2007-11-29 03:44:03 · 15 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

I have to write a report on "Global warming is it just propaganda" for my college professor. I have read and read data on this issue, but would like to hear what regular people have to say about this issue.

2007-11-29 01:41:02 · 10 answers · asked by Amanda T 3

In the presence of record high CO2 levels, what is the mechanism that has prevented record warming?
How can we trust these predictions?
http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSL0318315620070106
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6228765.stm
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070104-warmest-year.html

2007-11-29 01:32:55 · 16 answers · asked by Larry 4

any articles about globla warming that i can use to describe how is going to affect the future? or the bad things about it?

2007-11-29 01:22:06 · 14 answers · asked by rauju20032002 1

I just found out about this newly released game "Sim City Societies" where you can choose how to build your city concerning greenhouse gases as well. I thought the idea was interesting and fun.

See more here (look at the snippet of the game): http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/14/be-an-eco-sinner-or-saint-in-the-new-simcity/

What do you think? Can this help raise awareness?

2007-11-29 01:10:11 · 2 answers · asked by Ingela 3

changing of environoment became more fast as compared as 10 years ago
maybe we can not control anything in the future

2007-11-28 21:59:46 · 7 answers · asked by sangoku sangoku 2

human must wake up soon els he lose everything
keeping environoment is responsiblity of everyone

2007-11-28 21:53:09 · 10 answers · asked by sangoku sangoku 2

I'm serious. Does anyone want to change their beliefs? Not most. Why waste our time? I hate to say this, but I think we have no choice but to let the big boys handle it. I just hope they do the right thing. Whatever that might be.

2007-11-28 20:11:46 · 30 answers · asked by Pink Panther 4

2007-11-28 19:14:28 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

Does see no evil hear no evil and speak no evil seem to be getting hotter with all the global warming skeptics?

2007-11-28 19:12:45 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-28 19:08:03 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

With surface temperatures on Earth Warming will a White Christmas only be a memory or dream?

2007-11-28 18:56:51 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

The recent global warming skeptics/doubters/deniers questions have all been of a political nature (at best). They say scientists are in it for the money, it's all a big hoax, bla blah blah.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Au1NxK1iXyH0ihHAAtLUSREFxgt.;_ylv=3?qid=20071128161151AADqenC
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AhEU1V5kbO8EKvdtJwE_ZXMFxgt.;_ylv=3?qid=20071128162218AAQpgN4
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=At6755hjfpJiQWF70zPn.80Fxgt.;_ylv=3?qid=20071128165059AAQ5UI7
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=An6N6Nouu1CmfGJWdR0CGaQFxgt.;_ylv=3?qid=20071128193510AA6cBqX

I can't even remember the last time an AGW skeptic made a scientific argument to try and prove that the AGW theory is flawed.

Is this because AGW skeptics on Y!A don't comprehend the basic science, because there is little scientific evidence to support their opinions, or some other reason?

2007-11-28 17:30:40 · 27 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

Ever notice how these powerful "models" the scientist use to predict global warming are never right at the time of their predictions? Take for instance the 2007 hurricane season. Once again (they said the same thing in 2006), the experts predicted a more active hurricane season than normal. And for the second straight season, they were wrong. All in all, this is good news as less loss of life and property. But, for global warming enthusiast, this news is bad. Their "models" have predicted more storms and more powerful storms. And yet,for 2 years running, their models have been WRONG. Now, they will go back and "tweak" the models and tell us the improved models actually predict less storms due to global warming. At that time, they will deny ever saying they predicted more storms (unless there are more storms, in which they will go back to their original statement). Sort of like Hillary's position on the war.

http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/general/view.bg?articleid=104733

2007-11-28 16:20:13 · 9 answers · asked by CrazyConservative 5

I was flipping through channels and saw a bit about Krackatoa (?) and that it released so much SO2 in the atmospere it caused Europe and Eastern America to have unusually cold weather for a year or two. (1816-year there was no summer). Yellowstone is larger (I think) and is due/overdue to erupt. I would like to know any other or better detailed information and also, would an explosion that large counteract the effects of GW?

2007-11-28 16:14:53 · 7 answers · asked by strpenta 7

If we do nothing to limit our use of greenhouse gas emissions.

2007-11-28 15:15:17 · 19 answers · asked by Eliza West 2

When Al Gore's documentary came out and all of the supposed facts were thrown at us, along with the testimony of a seemingly vast majority of scientists, I was sold on Global Warming. But lately i've been hearing a lot of doubting of it and "brushing it off."

I really don't know what to believe. Of course we can never be certain, but is there an above 50% chance that the global warming purporters are right? Sometimes when I hear people go against the theory of global warming, they sound uneducated and random. They'll say things like "ohh it's a farce, ohh it's fear-propaganda."

What do you guys think? I mean, isn't there overwhelming proof about the ice caps melting?

2007-11-28 15:05:24 · 9 answers · asked by Armand N 1

Does global warming cause denial of reality and a loss of brain cells that make some people stupid?

2007-11-28 15:04:43 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

I personally think it is a politcal issue. The people who are strong supporters of global warming tend to fall to the left. sure some conservatives say it is real but the vast majority are liberal. If it was science wouldn't both sides believe it. I mean many of the scientist say it is real are funded by liberal groups.

2007-11-28 14:35:10 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-28 13:37:50 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

Let's see, billions of dollars have been pumped into a previously obscure science. Thirty years ago, there were a couple of hundred climatoligist, now everyone is an "expert". Seems to me, if I am a scientist, I am going to promote AGW in order to advance my career. Where does a lot of the money come from? Let's see. The other beneficiary, governments, and UN. The UN abviously has an agenda to promote AGW. They stand to lead the "world Governing" taxation body. Sure would be nice to be able to fund people who will in turn allow me to take over vast sums of money. Other beneficiaries, governments. Name one government which does not attempt to extort more money from its citizens? Every government has a benefit from promoting AGW in order to enrich their coffers.

The entire system is being promoted by those most in position to benefit. Must be nice.

2007-11-28 11:50:59 · 5 answers · asked by CrazyConservative 5

http://www.newsmax.com/us/un_climate_change/2007/11/27/52561.html

The real reason behind AGW is to promote an anti-capitalist agenda. Our friends the UN want to seize our hard earned money and redistribute it to other nations. Why dont they get their money the way other criminals do, steal it!

2007-11-28 11:22:18 · 5 answers · asked by CrazyConservative 5

That is what the alarmist do all the time just wanted to know why it is ok for them to say somthing short term is global warming.

2007-11-28 11:11:51 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

if we should care, how much and why?

2007-11-28 09:56:34 · 14 answers · asked by aeg0522 1

the council didnt pick up our rubbish as it had a glass jar in it , that we didnt put in it!! we (recycling) I think it was a neighbour!they also said it was smelly! no way as we always recycle, but now I am going to put all the recycling stuff into the Black Bin and f... the council. what do we have to do to be good people , we are good people as we do own 2 houses!

2007-11-28 08:44:10 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

I asked this question last night. but all though I agree with has been written, I dont actual mean physical heating!

As within a microwave oven, microwave radiation causes molicules to vibrate and heat up. Gobal warming has seamingly increased in the last 30 years, around the same time we have been sending more satilates into space for mobile communications, radio dishes and mobile phone masts, and Wi fi. Pigeons flying in the path of radio dishes can be instantly cooked, so with all these's signals and radio waves, there must have an effect, in heating up the atmosphere.

I mean that If radio waves can cause molicules to vibrate and heat up.

Mobile phone masts have been opposed on health questions

A micro wave oven doesn't produce that much heat to cook. With so much radio wave and other radiation criss crossing the globe, then is'nt there a chance then, we are microwaving ourselves

2007-11-28 08:42:49 · 11 answers · asked by MARK J 2

I think it has to do with increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere due to human activity. Its odd because the leaves are stuck on the trees a lot longer, and fall came a lot later. And the leaves are all turning brown before dropping off when they usually drop off in colors. And there is dead leaves still stuck to the trees that won't just fall off.

I know its only one odd season, but is increased CO2 levels to blame, or is it just a weird season because it hasn't happened before.

Do you think this pattern will continue in seasons to come?
Or do you think its a one season deal and next year it will be "normal"

Its just something we discussed in my Environmental Science class. And i also noticed it.

2007-11-28 07:28:32 · 11 answers · asked by ♥ Pompey and The Red Devils! 5

Huckabee calls climate change "a spiritual issue."

"We ought to be moving rapidly toward energy resources that don't have a greenhouse gas effect."

Last spring, Thompson seemed to mock the issue. More recently, as a presidential candidate, he has said global warming is real.

At a town hall meeting in New Hampshire in October, Giuliani said: "Yes, global warming is happening. Yes, human beings are contributing to it. No, it is not an hysterical emergency that has to be dealt with...it should be dealt with as a long-term emergency in a sensible, mature sound way in which we allow our economy to grow."

McCain favors caps on greenhouse gas emissions, a "cap and trade" policy as a market-based way to spur industries to take action, and higher fuel standards for vehicles. He has been highly critical of the Bush Administration on global warming.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3922730&page=1

Which of these candidates do you most agree with?

2007-11-28 06:59:37 · 11 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

From wide-spread recycling to a huge "green" sector of the economy to resource sustainability, all of the policies meant to ameliorate global warming are conservative. Why would conservatives oppose them, regardless of what they believe concerning global warming?

2007-11-28 06:34:26 · 11 answers · asked by Whoosh 2