2006-12-10 11:45:21 · 9 answers · asked by bashar m 1 in Environment
When I say the postive effects, I mean what is good about it; in other words I mean what are the pros of Global Warming?
2006-12-10 11:50:17 · update #1
The "medieval warm period" was a time of great prosperity in Europe during the middle ages... mostly due to increased area of farmable land
2006-12-10 17:29:05 · answer #1 · answered by Ilikepie 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think the world will cool itself. it's kinda like a bobbing clown effect. u physically tip it over, it's gonna bob around until it's straight again. [not gonna go into it, but it's got something to do with salinity of seawater]
but if you go plainly, where the earth changes dramatically and then actually gets really really warm, then we'll have a huge habitable area to live in, for example, Siberia, or maybe even Antarctica. (say goodbye to Florida though)
another positive effect would be increase in rainwater, due to more evaporation. This could then result in a wetter Africa, this was evident in the last ice age, when the earth was so cold that the water was all in the glaciers, Africa dried up. However, this might go both ways, since more evaporation may also mean less and less water in crucial fresh water bodies. Then again if what i just said is true, diseases will decrease, since swamps dry up and thus no malaria or other waterborne diseases.
If water stays, then we'll see a boom in agriculture, since crops would then have a longer growing season.
although this may sound crude and heartless, all the animals that would die has no immediate effect on us. For example, if polar bears and penguins go extinct? so what? we've got zoos. [though i personally don't agree with the previous statement, it's a fact and has truths in it]
what I'm really exited about is Siberia, I mean, that place is huge!
I mean, really, a couple hundred million years ago, earth was insanely warm. Until the asteroid hit...
2006-12-10 11:56:40 · answer #2 · answered by Burninget 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
There is always a pro and con to everything. If there were no winters, heating oil wouldn't have to be burned to keep people warm. That burning produces lots of pollution (in addition to "causing" global warming in the first place). Of course if there were no winters at all, there would be much, much, more problems out there than pollution. Try sources of food.
2006-12-10 11:50:03 · answer #3 · answered by Michael W 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That one degree rise every 100 years doesn't really have positive or negative effects.
The global warming detected on Mars may be resulting from the increase in the sun's temperature. It might help with the detection of water on that desolate planet.
2006-12-10 12:00:03 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the only positive effect I can think of is also quite negative. It is warming of the climate. as this would be good for growing crops ie longer growing seasons. It is not good for the rest of the area ie polar ice caps or tundra. warm seasons in there melt everything and this is a major problem
2006-12-10 12:51:08 · answer #5 · answered by Dan 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well there is one that I know,and that is CO2 is not a pollutant and has not increased 30%. the reason why is the plants through a process of photosynthesis remove almost all the CO2 so it has not increased. If CO2 had increased 30% there would people dead. If there is no CO2 there is no global warming.
2006-12-10 12:32:30 · answer #6 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
it will enlarge the areas of cultures .
But.... we should irrigate the drylands to make it positive
like that:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6428334944196136906&hl=en
2006-12-14 11:07:57 · answer #7 · answered by pingouin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You will be able to get a tan faster .
2006-12-13 12:43:20 · answer #8 · answered by Fool 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
none that i know of. it must be a trick question..
2006-12-10 11:48:02 · answer #9 · answered by nina_bear10 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋