I'm looking for an article on global warming. can anyone help me out?

Question

clean waters. contaminated water cycle.

Answer 1

See links at end.

CO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.

Look at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest.
(see links below)

How's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.

There has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.

Yes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up.

Just to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.

HI CO2:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm
HOCKEY STICK:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm
General climate stuff:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm

Answer 2

The asker seeks an article on global warming and QFL responds with a screed based on BBC news items.

1. BBC is not a peer-reviewed journal. Like most media, its success depends on volumes of readers, not scientific volumes.

2. I wrote a good article for Science and it was rejected as not of general interest. It showed that large amounts of CO2 were not accounted for in the IPCC biased approach to such calculations, and as such, challenged preconceived notions of uptake and removal. There were no peer reviews. Indeed, they asked ME for the "peers" I would like to have review the paper. I expected there to be a panel of peers who would NOT know me, so the review would be unbiased. So much for "peer-reviewed" papers.

3. I wouldn't trust the BBC to survey London for hookers. If they needed to find them for an article, they would; if it wouldn't suit them, they would not.

4. The levels of CO2 and methane teach away from causation. The hockey stick must have been prepared by a hockey puck. Temperatures from 1947-1974 fell, enough that the first Earth Day was a warning about Man's damage to the environment that was leading inexorably to .... an ICE AGE. NASA satellite data shows that from 1979-2003, the average earth temperature changed not at all. We do not consider a trend to have been established by a 3- year history.

...how teach away? If the CO2 levels are so dramatically higher than ever, how do you account for the fact that the warmest times in earth history are as much as 10 degrees warmer than they are now? A magical delay? Soot is blocking the sun? The high priests of GlobalWarmingism have no shame, and when the data does not support their preconceptions, they will suddenly adduce a new effect, just enough and just in time to explain why the world is not actually ending this weekend...but surely by the next...

5. Global warming is a natural effect that accounts for the average global temperature's being 59F instead of -2F. Its cause is water vapor.

6. Highest in 650,000 years? Sounds like BBC hype. Even the most well recognized GlobalWarmist shows high levels of CO2 every 100,000 years or so. BUT, as evidence of cause and effect, even the correlations of warm temperatures and elevated CO2 are suspect: Higher temperatures will release CO2 from dissolved sources (like the seas) because gases are less soluble in water as temperature goes up. Just see how long your soda/pop lasts on a warm summer day!

This is still not an "article", but it's a necessary response. The GlobalWarmists need to be challenged, and their willing idiot minions rebuked whenever they appear.

Answer 3

Try google or the National Geographic Web site. I found quite a bit of info on global warming on these sites for my speeches and papers. Also, try looking at university sites or organizations.

Answer 4

www.junkscience.com

Become a nonconformist and look at the science instead of the hype.

Answer 5

http://physicists.net/history/climate/index.html

http://www.robill.com/GlobalWarmingDVDFrameset.htm