If global warming will lead to another Ice Age, then in the end global warming is global cooling. Correct?

Answer 1

Global Warming Doesn't lead to another Ice Age. It leads to the ICE melting causing mass floods and Tsunmami, effectively flooding and ruining the world... Get your facts straight.

Answer 2

If global warming causes the Ice cap at the Artic to melt, the Earth will probably shift on its axis. When that happens a new ice cap will form in the area that will then be North. When that happens, it will cause a new ice age until the planet balances out. In about 10 to 50 thousand years after balancing itself the ice caps will recede just like the glaciers did thousands of years ago. So no, global warming isn't really global cooling. The process will take too long to be called cooling.

Answer 3

Speaking of the next ICE AGE. When I was a senior in high school in 1970-71 the 1st Earth Day was celebrated.

On that day the world's leading scientists agreed that within the next 100 year the world would experience a 2nd ICE AGE. And I heard they repeat that same prediction every Earth Day throughout college and graduate school. Hey, it was in San Diego, CA...

Now 36 years later the worlds leading scientists are in agreement that global warming will bring end end to civilization and mankind...humankind...humans...pick the correct PC term.

When will these leading scientist make a decision?

Answer 4

Not really, cuz first it warms up. The hot air is trapped on Earth, which warms the Earth. That melts the ice caps, that flood the oceans, that makes them mostly freshwater, that messes up the climate. Basicly, it starts arm. And that's if it even does end in another Ice Age. But at the rate we're destroying the planet, you never know...

Answer 5

Not necessarily.
It's just another blip in the history of the Earth's climate.

But it's short term effects may be felt by many.

We are in fact, close to the end of the non-glaciation period in the cycle.

There is a TV course on the Earth's climate from Carleton University. It shows on TV if you can receive it.

It is a hum-dinger!

.

Answer 6

"What we ought to continuously be attaining is the equilibrium between the two" this could be very confusing to do, seeing as aerosols purely have an atmospheric existence of at maximum some many years, on an identical time as CO2 has an atmospheric existence of as much as numerous hundred years, with some (very few) molecules lasting as much as numerous thousand. "if the size is tipped on the warming facet, we must be ending like Venus ( a planet with deadly greenhouse result and closer to the sunlight )" ought to we please end comparing the climate of Venus to Earth's climate? You already suggested one distinction between the two planets (Venus being closer to the sunlight), shall we seem at some greater: Earth: a million AU Magnetic field a million satellite tv for pc Orbital era 365.256366 days Sidereal rotation era 0.997258 d regularly occurring orbital velocity 29.783 km/s Axial tilt 23.439281° Inclination Reference (0) 7.25° to sunlight’s equator floor rigidity one hundred and one.3 kPa (MSL) Water clouds seventy 8.08% Nitrogen (N2) 20.ninety 5% Oxygen (O2) 0.ninety 3% Argon 0.038% Carbon dioxide hint water vapor (varies with climate) Venus: .7 AU No magnetic field No satellite tv for pc Orbital era 224.70069 day Sidereal rotation era ?243.0185 day Synodic era 583.ninety two days regularly occurring orbital velocity 35.02 km/s Axial tilt 177.36° Inclination 3.39471° 3.86° to sunlight’s equator floor rigidity 9.3 MPa Sulphur clouds ~ninety six.5% Carbon dioxide ~3.5% Nitrogen .0.5% Sulfur dioxide .007% Argon .002% Water vapor .0017% Carbon monoxide .0012% Helium .0007% Neon hint Carbonyl sulfide hint Hydrogen chloride hint Hydrogen fluoride And Venus' environment is around ninety situations greater huge than ours. there is not any actual way we ought to finally finally end up like Venus (or Mars). "and diverse of my professors say in the intervening time , international warming is greater like a political concept than a actual scientifically shown one." Theories can't be shown, and anthropogenic international warming is a concept, yet your professors are splendid in asserting that AGW is many times political at the instant. Too many holes interior the belief and too many uncertainties with climate oftentimes. bigger CO2 ought to reason some warming, how lots isn't often happening.

Answer 7

Which do you prefer?

Answer 8

Please stop confusing the liberals.

:-)