is global warming, a future reality? do we have to take it very seriously?

Answer 1

This issue has become very politicized. To your questions, I would say no and yes. No one knows for sure what will happen with the climate, even next year! Much less in the next 100 years!

I believe that humanity has and is affecting the environment. To what extent, and can it really cause a cataclysm like in the movie The Day after Tomorrow? Probably not. I think it is better to take a pragmatic approach, and learn as much as you can about what is being spread as fact. I came across the site listed below a while back, hope you find it informative.

I prefer conservationist to environmentalist. We're not going to free the cows, and if humanity disappeared the earth would not all of a sudden become the garden of eden.

Answer 2

Yes.Global warming must be taken very seriously into account.An improved procedure,take into account that,like in the refrigerators,more than:10-18more thermal energy may be obtained than the electrical energy utilized.So,the thermal energy became 3-6 cheaper,in the same time the global warming being avoided.The combustible consumption will decrease with 50%.,utilizing 10% of electricity production.In the same time the same installation will assure the desired temperature,in our rooms and in the summer time.

Answer 3

England and the 25 members of the European Union are working on ways to correct global warming. Meanwhile the US and China who are the worst polluters act as though it doesn't exist. It's time to get our heads out of the dinosaur age. For example, in Spain in 2007 all housing units will be built incorporating solar engergy. There is much we can do to improve our impact on the ecology of our planet, but first we have to admit there is a problem.

Answer 4

There is evidence that the globe is warming but the important questions are why and is it a permement change.

Some people claim it is man-caused but the science behind those claims is very shaky. There is good evidence that the globe is much cooler now than most historical times so perhaps all that's happening is the globe is returning to its normal temperature. We really only know that the climate has changed for many illions of years and that we do not have the knowledge to say how much it will change or why it is changing.

Answer 5

I don't worry about global warming because I will be dead before it happens. I leave my tv radio computer and all of my lights on 24 hours a day.

Answer 6

Well, the vast majority of scientific research says that it is a real threat.

If we take it seriously, we have a lot to gain and nothing to loose(except some money as initial investment). We get to reduce energy consumption, rely less on fossil fuels(which will run out soon), we breath better air(which improves our health and reduces health care costs) and actually in the long run spend less money.

Answer 7

What could be worse than global warming? Global Cooling, that's what. Warmth is energy you can use to stay cool. But cold is just cold is just cold. Are we expert enough to avoid the same fate as the Sourcerers Apprentice, or will the brooms just keep on coming if we mess with it?
Earth is a dynamic planet, ever changing, as if itself alive. This is not Venus. The fossil record shows that over a period of a billion years, the Earths' climate was predominantly warmer, occasionally interrupted by glacial periods. During the warmer climes the salinity of oceans decreased due to ice cap melting. Fantastic as this may seem, that turns out to be very good for marine life as is witnessed in the fossil record. Such were the periods of species diversification due to an opportunity for life forms to divert their energies previously tied up in salinity stresses. It is also noted that individual sizes increase. As oceans are diluted with more water, its use as a solvent of oxygen increases. Metabolisms can pick up the pace a little. With all this marine life living, dying and being buried, so goes carbon mostly in the form of Ca CO3 from the active environment as Carbon Dioxide to burial as Carbonate in the sea bed.
On the matter of weather, it is too easy to equate greater overall energy to more violent weather. Intense contrast between polar and equatorial temperature diminishing, so too should the reactive contact between latitudes become more moderate, air and ocean current borders become blurred.
Though it may be a surprise to discover that global warming might be caused by one of its resident species, global warming is none the less expected and inevitable with respect to the climate patterns of pre-human history.
So what is our problem? As a species, we have evolved only during the recent glacial and present interglacial periods. Can we adapt quickly to the environment new to us? Ocean levels certainly will rise if they are not already doing so, and not only living space will be lost, but vast agricultural areas will also be lost. We may have to learn how and what to grow, where and when to grow it, all over again. Imagine finding the suitable crop for the former temperate regions that will grow in warmer overall temperature conditions but in unchanged seasonally available sunlight. Such plant life may only exist at present, in the 'fringes' of genomes. The challenges go on and on.
Independent to the current awareness of the global warming predicament, geologists and climatologists have presented many models in which a warming trend is required to trigger polar glaciation. As winters at the poles become milder, abundant precipitation in the form of snow will be made possible. Should the winter precipitation exceed the summer melting, accumulation begins, the effects of albedo in summer increase, and an ice age advances. How do we positively determine the direction for earth climate?
Personally I think that the human species is not yet sophisticated enough to predict outcomes for our mistakes let alone outcomes for premeditated efforts to correct them.
Or even to determine beyond all criticism, that the cause for the observed climate change, is not due to any other mechanism. If we really had the time, we could try our hand at influencing climatic change on another planet, study and learn from it without dangerous consequences. If the time is just not available, should we focus all of our efforts on an endeavor to which we have absolutely no experience, and only a vague notion as to the result, or, is there something more we can contribute to better our own prospects that we are proved to be capable at? Although reducing the amount of waste by more efficiently utilizing our resources, and controlling the nature of the by-products themselves is a noble ambition, our prospect for success lies with an accompanied robust effort aimed at adaptation, in case the warming trend proves to be inevitable. With a balanced multi-pronged approach, crazy as it might seem today, global warming could turn out to be beneficial and enjoyable.

Answer 8

Definitely

Answer 9

Of course not. It's just a scam for politicians to raise taxes and give more cash to their friends. Also, a bunch of no-name scientists get to be on television.

Answer 10

No, we don't need to take it very seriously as every such natural phenomena will have a natural solution too!