Global Warming -hoax -truth -your opinion?

Question

Tell me your theories

Answer 1

The consensus in the scientific community is that global warming is mainly caused by emission of greenhouse gases due to human activities since the start of the industrial revolution. There is no disagreement in the peer-reviewed scientific literature. The importance of peer-review cannot be overstated. That's what keeps science grounded and prevents "garbage-science" from confusing things. There's no such process in the popular press. As long as you stay away from libel, slander and inciting acts of terrorism, you're free to say whatever you want.

It's easy to understand how people can get confused about this when folks on Yahoo! Answers and, all over really, are hearing and repeating lies, half-truths and other statement whose only intention is to mislead and beguile.

Here's some of the bogus stuff people say when they're trying to convince you it's a hoax. The following is copied from http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/15656 :

Fact vs. Fiction on Climate Change
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


We've just had the coldest day in June -- so much for global warming!


Fiction: Just look at X: it's the coldest day/month/year on record ... or: Region X has cooled by Y°F over the past two years! There is no global warming!


Fact: Statements like the one above are deliberate attempts by climate contrarians to confuse and mislead the public. It's an attempt to disprove the reality of global warming with a cold weather anomaly. This is not only scientific bogus, comparing apples and oranges, but outright dishonesty. Weather is the state of the atmosphere at a given time and place, defined by variables such as temperature, moisture, wind, and barometric pressure. It is highly variable from day to day. By contrast, climate describes long-term weather patterns, with average temperatures and precipitation totals as well as typical occurrences of climatic extremes (such as normal dry periods or tropical storms) being used to characterize the climate for a particular region. This distinction is very important. Averages are always made up of numbers differing from the mean. Global warming is about the average going up. Over time this will make extreme colds become less likely.



Oh, what's a few degrees?


Fiction: A few degrees temperature increase won't matter much, and besides, warmer is better -- fewer cold-related deaths, longer growing seasons, lower heating bills. How many people actually notice the difference between 86 and 88.5°F?


Fact: Considering that in some regions people experience large daily temperature ranges (20-30°F), climate skeptics try to convince the public that global warming by a few degrees is nothing to worry about. This is another version of deliberately confusing weather and climate (see above). A small increase in the average temperature, however, obscures extremes and patterns of warming that are quite troubling: nighttime temperatures increase more than daily averages; there are already and will be more extreme heat but less extreme cold events; poleward latitudes warm more than other areas, etc. While the benefits of warming pointed out in the skeptics argument are certainly among the potential impacts of climate change, the potential negative impacts -- such as heat-related illnesses and deaths, increased heat stress for crops, greater energy needs for cooling etc. -- are strategically omitted. Moreover, it bears emphasis that the difference in global average temperature between the last ice age and the present day is about 9°F! This puts the IPCC's projected range of climate change-related global average temperature increases of 2.5-10.4°F in an entirely different light.



Human CO2 emissions are small compared to natural CO2 exchange.


Fiction: The 4.5% of the world's greenhouse gases that humans generate is insignificant when compared to the 95.5% generated by nature.


Fact: It is indeed true that human emissions of CO2 are a small percentage of the total carbon cycled through the different components of the Earth system: plants, soils, rocks, the oceans, and the air. But these human emissions are by no means insignificant. For the last 420,000 years, until the beginning of the industrial revolution (~1750), this cycle of carbon exchange was in a quasi-stable equilibrium, i.e., the continual release and uptake of carbon kept CO2 concentration in the Earth's atmosphere fluctuating between 180 ppm (parts per million) and 280 ppm. Since 1750, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased by 31%, to a present level of 367 ppm. This increase in the CO2 concentration of the atmosphere is mainly due to the burning of fossil fuels and large-scale deforestation and land-use change. These human activities have forced the carbon cycle out of the state of equilibrium and out of the known range of variation.



Satellite temperature records don't show any global warming.


Fiction: Satellite temperature records do not show a warming trend over the past 20 years, and ground-level data are incorrect and exaggerate the warming.


Fact: It is true that temperature records derived from satellites show either less warming than surface temperature data or even a cooling trend. Recent studies (most notably a study by the National Academy of Sciences published in 2000) found, however, that satellite data needed to be adjusted for some measurement and calibration problems. These adjustments bring surface and satellite records into better agreement, both showing a warming trend. It is important to note that many surface temperature records date back to 1860, while satellite records only date back to 1979. With such a short data record, observed trends can be strongly affected by extreme conditions -- such as the 1991 eruption of Mt. Pinatubo which decreased atmospheric temperatures for several years. In addition, satellite and surface data differ in what they record: surface thermometers measure the air temperature at the Earth's surface, while satellite data take temperatures of different slices of the atmosphere. Including records for the upper atmosphere -- where the depletion of the ozone layer has had a cooling effect -- will lower the overall temperature trends observed from satellites.



The observed warming is all due to solar variation, not human activities.


Fiction: An increase in solar irradiance is the main cause of the Earth's current warming trend. Therefore, reducing fossil fuel emissions would not impact the Earth's temperature.



Fact: Current scientific understanding leaves little doubt that the sun's radiant output impacts the Earth's climate on both decadal and centennial time scales. However, it is only one of many components affecting terrestrial climate. According to the findings of the Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change, the warming effect due to increases of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is estimated to be more than 8 times greater than the effect of solar irradiance.



What about the 19,000 scientists who claim we should not worry about global warming?


Fiction: There is no scientific consensus on climate change. Just look at the 19,000 scientists who signed on to the Global Warming Petition Project.


Fact: In the spring of 1998, mailboxes of US scientists flooded with packet from the "Global Warming Petition Project," including a reprint of a Wall Street Journal op-ed "Science has spoken: Global Warming Is a Myth," a copy of a faux scientific article claiming that "increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide have no deleterious effects upon global climate," a short letter signed by past-president National Academy of Sciences, Frederick Seitz, and a short petition calling for the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol on the grounds that a reduction in carbon dioxide "would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind."


The sponsor, little-known Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, tried to beguile unsuspecting scientists into believing that this packet had originated from the National Academy of the Sciences, both by referencing Seitz's past involvement with the NAS and with an article formatted to look as if it was a published article in the Academy's Proceedings, which it was not. The NAS quickly distanced itself from the petition project, issuing a statement saying, "the petition does not reflect the conclusions of expert reports of the Academy."


The petition project was a deliberate attempt to mislead scientists and to rally them in an attempt to undermine support for the Kyoto Protocol. The petition was not based on a review of the science of global climate change, nor were its signers experts in the field of climate science. In fact, the only criterion for signing the petition was a bachelor's degree in science. The petition resurfaced in early 2001 in an renewed attempt to undermine international climate treaty negotiations.

Answer 2

I don't know the answer. What is very obvious though is that a lot, probably the majority, of "information" on the subject being sold to us is based an false premise, the subject has been taken over by politicians who see it as a way of making some money, and the "Greens" (and I don't mean that in a disrespectful way) have turned it into a new religion, and it's well known that it is almost impossible to alter the mind set of a "believer". I have read a lot about the subject, including ALL the IPPC reports, and have come to the conclusion that the views of the scientists "on the ground" are being ignored because they do not fit with the already established line.

Answer 3

I think the earth has cycles of warming and freezing naturally since the beginning of time

However this time when we have a cycle there are billions of people on earth who will be affected by it.

So if we're causing what would be normal to be worse than normal we need to take precautions....because we can't leave and go someplace else.

Answer 4

The globe has been getting warmer for the last 18,000 years. There are fluctuations, however. In the middle ages there was a small "ice age" in which glaciers claimed a lot of farm land, but they receded again.
It is hard to draw reliable conclusions about the current climate trends, since we do not know enough about what causes these changes.

Answer 5

It's does not matter what think, what does matter 97% scients studey this Issuse say real. Those say it's 90% scients, more convers plotice studey this say 80% if do nothing theart human race if we take small steps this other Eveirment problem save human race and more this think as well.

Answer 6

i think it is truth. I'm not a democrat tho. i just think that it has to be, there is no way that all the cars all over the earth polluting the atmosphere 24/7 can't have a negative impact!
plus everything else as well. i think its real, and its a problem. and besides even if it isn't real, who are we going to hurt by re-planting the rain forest and making more fuel efficient cars?

Answer 7

What do you mean hoax or truth? Scientist have proven we are reining the ozone layer causing the earth to heat.

Answer 8

I believe there may be a shifting of weather patterns, but in OKLA. we have had the worse winter in many years.

Answer 9

Something is going on, weather fueled by power(ppl wanting to controll others), greed( ppl trying to make a buck off fear) or a true phenomenon. Either way this planet will be here long after humans die out. And be able to mend its self.

Answer 10

The globe is warming in one of its warming cycles—that it is caused by man is a way for the media to keep us scared and make money.

Answer 11

i wont believe something just because some moronic liberal democrat says it in a tv commercial. Anyways, ever heard of the earths heat and cold cycles?