Global Warming

China is much more 'ungreen' than the USA, but yet we don't have Mr. Gore banging his fists on the table about China. The rest of the world should be outraged, but I don't hear anything about it. Why is the USA the bad guy? It is clearly China!

2007-12-15 01:31:56 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

"This is the beginning, not the end," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said in an interview with The Associated Press. "We will have to engage in more complex, long and difficult negotiations."

The document does not commit countries to specific actions against global warming. It was limited to setting an agenda and schedule for negotiators to find ways to reduce pollution and help poor countries adapt to environmental changes by speeding up the transfer of technology and financial assistance.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071215/ap_on_sc/bali_climate_conference

Theres your proof that global warming is a money making scheme, a scam, this whole BALI forum crap was just a sideshow, to distract people from the fact that this whole blobal rape that is about to come to a rearend near you is all about getting money AWAY from those who have some, and GIVING IT TO those who dont have it. Period, a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT AGENCY TO REDISTRIBUTE WEALTH.

2007-12-15 00:41:54 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

The world has its own system of heating and cooling vastly more powerful than mankind. Seems totally pointless to fight it. Why dont we work with it and look to surviving with it rather than fighting it.

2007-12-14 20:37:03 · 15 answers · asked by fred 2

Out of all the leaders at the Bali Conference on climate change and global warming, how come George Bush was the only one to refuse to set limits? Is he trying desperately to curry favour with the American people and Big Business by
refusing to restrict the use of fossil fuels?
Or is it simply that , not content with destroying so many young U.S. soldiers' lives in Iraq, he now wants to destroy the World by global warming?

2007-12-14 18:04:53 · 19 answers · asked by freebird 6

Your honest opinion, which is killing the animals off,
Global warming or Overpopulation of both human and animals.
your reasoning?

2007-12-14 17:24:22 · 16 answers · asked by gretch 2

ok, so me and my friend tend to have friendly debates about politics on IM. for the first time in a few weeks, we got INFURIATED with each other aobut global warming. he thinks its an unimortant issue thats just a scam, and of course i strongly disagree. somehow, the conversation got to how oil effects animals after a spill. he was saying "birds are jsut birds" and now that i think about it, i didnt have any good info to back myself about why global warming was important or why birds matter to the environment. Any insight on this?

2007-12-14 17:21:41 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

Who are some important or famous people that thinks that global warming is not true?

2007-12-14 14:40:26 · 11 answers · asked by ... 2

To reduce global warming, we need to reduce two things: coal and gasoline (oil). Isn't reducing coal and gas better for our economy in the long run?

For coal, the cost from producing electricity from burning coal compared to nuclear are about the same (http://www.world-nuclear.org/reference/pdf/rae-report.pdf). The difference is that coal emits mercury that poisons fish. This has reduced sales in fish, affecting the entire fishing industry.

For oil, higher gas prices set by OPEC has put enormous stress on the U.S. economy. Reducing carbon emissions will require that automakers make cars that get better gas mileage. If drivers don't need as much gas, people won't be hurting so much when gas prices go up again. The financial markets won't fluctuate as much in the future, solidifying our economy.

If carbon reductions can be better for the economy, why are people so afraid?

2007-12-14 14:15:01 · 8 answers · asked by kusheng 4

Try to place yourself, as the reader, in a more objective capacity. Yes, be assured, you are allowed to think for yourself.

Read More
http://info-on-global-warming.com/global-warming-and-climate-change

2007-12-14 12:05:46 · 9 answers · asked by M B 1

Does this seem too impossible to accomplish as far as amounts to be removed and competition? or any coments in particular I am thinking of joining. sheck out www.virginearth.com for contest and details.

2007-12-14 11:54:09 · 5 answers · asked by doll 3

do you think it's true? do you dislike it? how can you prevent it? why don't many people try to prevent it?

2007-12-14 11:14:54 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

If you have, have you seen the difference in the glaciers in the last five years?

2007-12-14 10:23:56 · 11 answers · asked by James E Lewis AKA choteau 7

Isnt it better to cover your bases and take it seriously?

2007-12-14 10:18:58 · 22 answers · asked by Condemned Apple 3

2007-12-14 09:55:04 · 14 answers · asked by Rizzl+123 2

2007-12-14 09:47:29 · 23 answers · asked by shyguy 1

Little doubt that increased CO2 is causing some global warming resulting from human activities, but are there any global modeling showing how much global warming is being caused by man? Seems like that is an important question to be addressed, given that the costs that would be demanded to control CO2 emissions. Any links showing a cost/benefits anlaysis?

2007-12-14 09:19:36 · 7 answers · asked by Stewie Griffin 2

2007-12-14 09:03:50 · 20 answers · asked by Chris J 1

Because white reflects most of the heat back to the space?

2007-12-14 08:46:54 · 15 answers · asked by Carlos G 3

If we really wanted to reverse global warming, couldn't we just limit each woman to one child (world wide)? Bringing the population down would stop the demand on our resources, and decrease pollution.

2007-12-14 08:37:03 · 15 answers · asked by madbax 2

The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory predicts that the lower atmosphere and surface should warm due to greenhouse gases trapping heat, while the upper atmosphere should cool.

One way to think about this is that the amount of infrared heat energy radiated out to space by a planet is roughly equal to the amount of solar energy it receives from the sun. If the surface atmosphere warms, there must be compensating cooling elsewhere in the atmosphere in order to keep the amount of heat given off by the planet the same

http://www.wund.com/education/strato_cooling.asp

If the Sun were responsible for global warming, any increase in solar radiation would heat the entire atmosphere.

So what's actually happening?

"cooling trends are exactly as predicted by increasing greenhouse gas trends"

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2006/11/the-sky-is-falling/s=ionosphere+cooling&qt=&q=&cx=009744842749537478185%3Ahwbuiarvsbo&cl

Can skeptics explain this discrepancy?

2007-12-14 08:26:04 · 9 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

2007-12-14 08:17:50 · 18 answers · asked by babooshka_uk 2

2007-12-14 07:08:39 · 8 answers · asked by Jes 5

http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/20071210_GISTEMP.pdf

100 year trend?
claims of no 10 year trend?
claims of solar radiation cycles and current influence?
"cooling" in the 1900s?
What's the U.S. and world trend?

2007-12-14 06:56:49 · 11 answers · asked by J S 5

From the questions I asked and the good answers I've received, yes even Anthropogenic Global Warming believers, feel that even if we can slow the increasing CO2, which is what they believe is causing Global Warming, they feel our Climate will continue to get warmer.

One of the main worries is that the Oceans and Sea levels will rise do to Ice Melting from the Polar regions.

Increased droughts

And that where we grow crops will change.

(I'm only mentioning things we have control over.)

So how can we deal with these things?

(To help think Army Corp of Engineers. Aquaducts in Rome. Basicly think of wonderous things man has built in the past. I helped with this question when I asked about whether man changed water levels in the ocean.)

2007-12-14 06:29:27 · 10 answers · asked by Mikira 5

Al Gore dismisses everyone who does not agree with his "Carbon Tax, Global Warming Scam" as "Deniers".
If he is right on the subject, why the fear of debating his points with any and all detractors?
After all, he IS the All Knowing Global Warming Expert that everyone agrees with isnt he?
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=d5c3c93f-802a-23ad-4f29-fe59494b48a6&Issue_id=

2007-12-14 05:57:22 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

No matter what the USA does, it will never be enough. The greedy countries that make up these conferences are never satisfied no matter how much they end up taking from America. They always want more.

So why should the USA go to these media shows just to get beat up by politicians who get their 5 minutes of face time in front of the camera? I'm sure blaming the US gets good reviews back home for these tin horned despots.

It's always the same thing. Next time the US should stay away from these conferences and just let the bashing go on with out us.

2007-12-14 04:26:57 · 13 answers · asked by Dr Jello 7

And how do you know?
What do you base your answer on? Is it just the word of others, or your faith that global warming is real? Or do you have a formula that shows what the temperatures will be for different concentrations of co2?

How do you know your answer is any more correct than a coin toss?

2007-12-14 04:21:58 · 38 answers · asked by Dr Jello 7

Personally I'm currently blocked by 2 global warming deniers so I can't answer their questions. One is supposedly the top answerer in global warming, yet I guess can't deal with opposing views.

How can global warming deniers complain about the UN not allowing skeptics to speak at the Bali climate conference, and yet block answerers who disagree with them on Y!A?

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ApJrc1P97bomnd1_wdg9te4Fxgt.;_ylv=3?qid=20071214080626AAl0X0I

What are these deniers afraid of which motivates them to block opposing views?

2007-12-14 03:55:22 · 16 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

Some claims made in an open letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations by a group of scientists skeptical of anthropogenic global warming.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=164002

1) "The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years."

Ridiculous. In the Younger Dryas (abrupt cooling period about 10,000 years ago), the prevailing theory holds that the cooling was caused by a significant reduction or shutdown of the North Atlantic thermohaline circulation. This major natural change still only caused a cooling period one-third as fast as the current warming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Younger_Dryas#Causes_of_the_Younger_Dryas

2) "There has been no net global warming since 1998."

Flat-out lie.

http://tamino.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/t1998.jpg

Do you think they believe these claims?

2007-12-14 03:48:44 · 11 answers · asked by Dana1981 7

2007-12-14 03:45:53 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous