Global Warming

2007-11-02 13:54:06 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

I'm from Ontario, Canada. I work at an organic farm as a farm hand. We raise organic beef, chickens, and pigs.

Where you from? What do you farm? Do you like to buy organic farm produce more than produce at grousry stores?

2007-11-02 13:38:10 · 4 answers · asked by Stony 4

Hello, everybody. I'm a brazilian guy and I'm still learning how to speak (to write, in this case) English. So, please, don't care if you find an error here. My question is: the United States, for being one of the most powerful country in the world, is also one of the most poluing one. In Kyoto Protocol, the U.S.' government didn't signed it because it would affect the country's bussiness. In my opinion, the life in Earth is much more important than money. What do you think about this situation? What do you think that must be done to change all this? Give me your opinions.

2007-11-02 13:21:27 · 19 answers · asked by Dan 2

and do something about it and now there is still hold outs on taking responsibility for global warming? Do they really think you can continue to pump pollutants into the air/water and it won't have any effect on the atmosphere? I'd like them to prove that, it's only common sense.

2007-11-02 10:30:47 · 11 answers · asked by Ktcyan 5

The first state of denial was that it's not happening. Most all "skeptics" have dropped that, because of data.

The guy who takes pictures of surface stations has a bad problem. He can't show any difference in the data between undeniably well located stations, and arguably bad ones. The data shows exactly the opposite, that the differently situated stations say the same thing. He's like a tourist, going around giving a boring slide show.

In the satellite data, ACRIM versus PMOD is an unimportant discussion, unless your analysis picks two arbitrary points on a continuous curve and draws a straight line through them, ignoring the rest of the data. In science, that's just not acceptable.

The next stage was that it isn't mostly caused by us. The problem with that, is that the contribution from man made greenhouse gases is now so strong, you can't explain the data any other way. Respectable skeptics like Lindzen and Christy have moved on.

2007-11-02 09:22:01 · 12 answers · asked by Bob 7

Well i know they did find a couple of errors in An Inconvenient Truth but so what? They only want to spread the news about what could happen to our planet if we don't do something.

And plus Al Gore is an EX politican so i don't want people saying its a political scam.

2007-11-02 08:37:16 · 14 answers · asked by ♥ Pompey and The Red Devils! 5

loooook
thinkkkkk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0b2k98YLSnk

2007-11-02 08:07:03 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

What's going to happen? I've read that the UK could get colder as the Earth gets warmer, true? Can someone explain why?

Also, this summer's flooding in the UK- direct consequence of global warming, or just shoddy government building extensively on floodplains?

Lastly, how much of the UK will be underwater due to global warming? Will it happen, or is it just science-fiction??

2007-11-02 07:07:46 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

Normally, I believe it is 1:1. How much has it changed with the increased greenhouse gases?

http://eosweb.larc.nasa.gov/EDDOCS/images/Erb/components2.gif

2007-11-02 06:36:46 · 9 answers · asked by Larry 4

If your answer is no, please do not provide explanations that are 'derivatives' of selfishness (eg. greed, avarice)

2007-11-02 05:40:51 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

2007-11-02 05:11:04 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous

Other methods of reconstructing past CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere show more variation in the CO2 levels than the ice cores. For example, plants have minute pores in the epidermis of the leaf or stem through which gases and water vapor pass. The density of the pores varies with the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. This has been tested in controlled environments in which the CO2 is held at a constant level and the pores developed at a density adequate enough to take in the required amount. If CO2 is increased, fewer pores are required. If CO2 is decreased more pores develop.
The stoma pores can be seen in fossilized leaves and CO2 concentrations can be determined from past climates by their density and carbon dating of the fossils. A study was done that reveals CO2 varies much more in the plant record than in the ice cores. It showed CO2 levels during the Holocene maximum to be as high as 328ppm.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=129389

2007-11-02 04:38:09 · 5 answers · asked by Larry 4

I Seen a commercial the other day that had these celebrities telling us we need to stop global warming. It really got me mad because these people are probably some of the biggest energy users and consumers on planet earth. How does it make you feel?

2007-11-02 04:32:57 · 18 answers · asked by Bob Dylawn 3

Every day we hear about Global Warming and its possible effects upon the environment.

The earth’s atmosphere is warming up. Thus the icebergs are melting giving a rise in the seas total height etc etc

All this is because of man’s greed for resources such as fuel.

Does anyone think that if things go on the way they are at the moment nature will get its own back with like another ice-age?

Interested to hear peoples opinions.

Thanks

2007-11-02 04:26:47 · 6 answers · asked by davie 2

So lets say you wanted to add water to the atmosphere. Pump water from the sea to DV and it would evaporate hopefully loading the atmosphere with water encouraging it to rain. The water would be distilled, so pure. And the salt left behind to wreck the land where no one wants to go. What would happen???????????? Enviroment, weather wise and all that. Please be factual and also imaginable as possible. Also any other solutions to WHERE IS ALL THE FRESHWATER GOING.

2007-11-02 04:04:04 · 4 answers · asked by Wattsup! 3

2007-11-02 04:01:32 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-02 00:46:09 · 9 answers · asked by pommygit23 1

If you DO NOT BELIEVE we humans have environmental duties & responsibilities, what reasons or reasoning can you give in defence of your stance?

2007-11-01 23:25:14 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

it doesn't feel that warm today. am i missing something?

2007-11-01 22:32:17 · 4 answers · asked by pinhed_1976 6

2007-11-01 16:43:16 · 3 answers · asked by t.k 1

On which parts of the world are sea-based ice located, and where are the land-based ice located?

How about Greenland, the Arctic ice cap and Antarctica? Which of these are land-based, which are sea-based? Will the melting of all of these, or only some, contribute to global sea level rise in the 21st century?

2007-11-01 16:40:09 · 10 answers · asked by travel 4

and everything is lumped altogether. Is the stuff really separated or is it thrown in the trash? It seems with all the stuff that is recycyled that we should see more recycled stuff.

2007-11-01 14:42:51 · 3 answers · asked by wanninonni 6

I live in Florida, and I have experienced my fair share of Tropical Depressions, Tropical Storms, and Hurricanes. Anyone with experience in weather knows that when a Tropical Depression gains enough strength, it becomes a Tropical Storm, and when a Tropical Storm gains enough strength, it becomes a Hurricane.

I have also heard from countless sources that Global Warming will cause an increase in the strength of Hurricanes in the future, but not an increase in the number of Hurricanes.

So why won't there be an increase in the strength of Tropical Storms also, and in turn cause an increase in the number of Hurricanes?

Isn't an increase in the strength of a Hurricane caused by the same factors that cause an increase in the strength of Tropical Storms?

So how can it be that the strength of Hurricanes will increase, but not the number of Hurricanes?

2007-11-01 13:43:59 · 10 answers · asked by Cold Hard Fact 6

2007-11-01 13:21:06 · 16 answers · asked by daisyfay 3

Here in Alaska, there's like an island which is slowly sinking.... like it lost 3 feet already...

and here in Anchorage, AK, it's suppose to Snow this Halloween, but what did we get? Rain!!!!

Global warming is getting wicked!!

2007-11-01 13:17:18 · 12 answers · asked by Cholorophyll 3

Now that wheat is being used for feul instead of feeding poeple is it time to scrape this bio-diesel idea?

http://finance.sympatico.msn.ca/investin...

2007-11-01 11:22:56 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

i would like it to be on global warming and/or pollution.
um like meadium dificulty.. nothing like too hard...
um... i have to be able to do an expierament.
can you help?

2007-11-01 10:39:44 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-01 09:20:36 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-01 08:59:10 · 7 answers · asked by Michael L 1

Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski reports that we have "False Low Pre-industrial CO2 in the Atmosphere". He spent 40 years studying glaciers for a reconstruction of the history of man-made pollution in the global atmosphere. He says that snow on top of the glaciers has air circulating through it for thousands of years before it compacts and freezes to the point that air is trapped in tiny bubbles. He also says that chemical changes occur under pressure and due to the salinity of the water. When the cores are drilled they form cracks and get contaminated with drilling fluid. All these factors produce a very low resolution CO2 reconstruction. Does anyone know of another method of reconstruction that yields a higher resolution data set or another method that can confirm the present data?

http://www.john-daly.com/zjiceco2.htm

I have seen other reconstructions based on Stomatal frequency of different types of plants, but I don't know how accurate they are.

http://aob.oxfordjournals.or

2007-11-01 08:01:05 · 8 answers · asked by Larry 4