Haven't we really been having "Global Warming" since the last Ice Age?

Question

If you think about it before people were crying about global warming they were crying about global cooling which is it Chicken Little? We have been cleaning up this country since the 70's which is good, don't you think the rest of the world like China, South America, Mexico and the rest of the cheep labor countrys need to clean up thier act? Why is it always up to the USA to foot the bill? Al Gore needs to stop wasting jet fuel flying all over the country promoting his bad movie and then we need to stop burning wood which is a big Polluter.

Answer 1

we are on the edge of the last Ice age,and in the late 1970's they said we were reverting back to an ice age,now they are basing one of the factors of the so called global warming on the CO2 levels in the atmosphere,but they seem to have excluded the causes that really contributed to this,Mt pinatubo in the phillipines,other volcanous activity in the last 10 years,and Saddam Hussein setting the fires to all those oil wells,which would have a tremendous impact on the atmosphere,besides man,(yes and I know theres no snow in NY) but its happened before,so has large Ice masses there,I think its an alarmist agenda,man has burned wood and coal for thousands of years,so yes this can effect the earth,but so does breathing,no other country will apply for this hypocrasy of an idea,China surely will tell us all to go to hell if we tried to impose such foolishness upon them,and it truly amazes me that Al Gore didnt use sailing vessels and bicycles to get around if he truly beleived in the product he is trying to sell,theres another agenda here my friend and though I beleive in ecologist views,this is all just a farce

Answer 2

Yes, we have been having global warming since the last Ice Age, and global warming may actually save use from the next Ice Age.

Most people do not realize that the oceans have risen 100 meters in the last 15,000 years, and that the rate of rise will increase with Global Warming.

That doesn't mean, however, that Global Warming isn't real. If all the fossil fuel in the Earth is burned in the next few hundred years, it will raise greenhouse gases to levels not seen for the past few hundred million years. The last time greenhouse gasses were so high, Kansas was a shallow sea filled with giant swimming reptiles and Antarctica was a rain forest. Having such a vast change occur over a couple hundred years will be an ecological (and economic) disaster.

As far as "footing the bill":
1) It's stupid to burn all the fossil fuel in the world. Alternate technologies are possible and will be needed sooner or later. With the proper political will, we can meet this technical challenge and save our civilization.
2) Meeting the technical challenge could be a benefit rather than a detrement. It could be good for the economy.
3) The longer this overhaul of our infrastructure is put off, the more expensive and unpleasant it will be.

The personal attack on Al Gore is uncalled for. What is needed is a complete change of our energy industries. Attacking Al Gore for not personally reducing his carbon load is beside the point.

There was never any serious discussion of catastrophic global cooling, except in the context of Nuclear Winter. This is also a real effect, but no one ever argued it would occur without a major nuclear war or a major volcanic eruption.

P.S. Comments to the above: there are lots of data, and they are unequivocal to anyone willing to learn what they mean. The CO2 levels in the atmosphere are certainly increasing due to the burning of fossil fuels. There is no doubt that an increase in global CO2 levels will lead to an net global warming. If you don't agree, you're just wrong. It's not a matter of opinion.

Answer 3

You are correct about the earth's natural warming and cooling cycles. If we were in a cooling cycle now and global temperatures were dropping and the polar caps were growing, many people would be moving toward the equator eventually.
Maybe we'd be asking ourselves, "do we just have to freeze and die or is there something we can do about it?" Maybe then it would be considered an environmental survival tactic to make as much greenhouse gas as possible, take catalytic converters out of cars, and so on.
Since we are in a warming cycle, natural or man-made, the end result will still be the melting of polar ice caps. It has been estimated that the resultant rise in sea level would obliterate all coastal areas to about 50 miles inland. If you lived within that area, and millions do, would you be the least interested in trying to protect your property, family and lives by doing whatever you could, or would you be content to stay put and drown? New Orleans has given us a small taste of what that would be like.
The dumbest thing is to stick your head in the sand.
Maybe there are those who are over reacting, but we at least have to listen to what is being said. If we can avoid hastening our own demise, that might be a good thing.
By the way, the US consumes 1/4 of the world's energy output and generates almost 40% of manmade pollution. So we are not quite in a position to point fingers at other countries, who are becomming more heavily industrialized.

Answer 4

U are right ,First the major problem was CO2 due to all the fuel we burn which they think is about 60% too much. Of course if we did that there would be a lot of people die. Because they could not get enough watter or food or cloths. A pitiful state of affairs ,much aimed at Bush. The CO2 problem was taken care of a few million years ago when Mother nature introduced the plants to the earth. The plants take in CO2 and keep the C and give us back the O2 . So there never was a problem with CO2. and all the Green house gases is only 1.1 % of our atmosphere . Now they are after methane as the problem . Methane is a gas that is lighter than air ,so it goes very high in the atmosphere how could it be proved.

Answer 5

Actually Jamie, I wasn't aware anyone was worried global cooling. Some of us have been worried about warming since the 1960's. The problem now is that the average RATE of warming has gone into exponential growth since 1900. Now it is just going straight up. HOWEVER-just because industrial emmissions are correlated with the rate of warming doesn't mean there is a "cause and effect" and that humans are necessarily the major cause. Geologically this has happened before. Sure we should conserve-because we have to cut our on dependence on fossil
carbon to minimize the shock when we can't afford it any more.
On the net search "abrupt climatic change" and the US N.A.S. Note that the DOD has been funding this study for15 years to prepare for military alternatives when it happens. Michael

Answer 6

umm no... Global Warming is a much more than a warmer climate. I hate it when i hear these stupid arguments like I hear from the people i work with that say. "Well I don't believe in global warming because it's much colder around here now than when I was a kid back in the 60's"
Global warming is about the greenhouse effect. It is quite simply the deteroration of the atmosphere and the excess amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that lets harmful radiation in, and does not let it out.
I understand your point about the rest of the world, but the united states puts more co2 into the atmosphere than all those countrys combined. It is the simple fact of the amount of automobiles in this country and our extensive manufacturing industry.

Answer 7

the problem here is that too many people are using very little data to support and push their own agendas. our world is a physical one that has always been in a state of flux. the thing is that there are so many people here now that we can no longer ignore what we are doing. i'm not saying global warming is strictly our faults, but that there is more to what's going on than what anyone, especially politicians, might say.

Answer 8

I totally agree about Al Gore, but thrid world countries cannot afford to clean up their act. Its cheaper to live in a dirty environment

Answer 9

You are so right. Only, the increased usage of autos, factories, etc., have made a little increase in the "warming." I hope I'm around when the same people start "boo-hooing" the global cooling. I also agree that the U.S. should not be the World's problem solvers.

Answer 10

Congratulations, you've watched enough Fox News. Your brainwashing process is completed.