did you care about the global warming?

Question

what will you do to prevent this ? what do you think about this ?

Answer 1

I care and I can do nothing to prevent it. But I'm doing everything I can to reduce my own emissions and convince people to take it seriously.

I think it's a fact of life. The consensus in the scientific community is that it's mainly caused by emission of greenhouse gases due to human activities since the start ot 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.

Take, for example, Health-Nut_Ditto-Head's reply above. He copied an article from "The American Daily, Analysis with Political and Social Commentary" ( http://www.americandaily.com/article/13701 ) and presents it as his own work, without quotation marks or credit (BTW, this is called plagiarism). The American Daily is very conservative political commentary and opinion.

The article begins with the statement, "The official thermometers at the U.S. National Climate Data Center show a slight global cooling trend over the last seven years, from 1998 to 2005. " This statement is totally unsubstantiated and flies in the face of every average global temperature graph I've seen for the last seven years!! The article also presents the viewpoint of Robert (Bob) Carter and Fred Singer as if this should be sufficient to offset the consensus of the entire worldwide scientific community. So I did five minutes of research on these guys and here's what I found:

Robert Carter writes articles for Tech Central Station, which received 63% of its income in 2003 from ExxonMobil. Tech Central Station (TCS) is the former name of TCS Daily. TCS was primarily funded by sponsors that currently or previously have included AT&T, The Coca-Cola Company, ExxonMobil, General Motors Corporation, McDonalds, Merck, Microsoft, Nasdaq, and PhRMA. TCSDaily was published by DCI Group, a lobbying and PR firm based in Washington, DC.

"Fred Singer ... is an atmospheric physicist. He is best known as President and founder (in 1990) of the Science & Environmental Policy Project, which disputes the prevailing scientific opinion on climate change. That is not all that he is skeptical about. "Singer is also skeptical about the connection between CFCs and ozone depletion, between ultraviolet radiation and skin cancer[2] [3] [4][5][6] and between second hand smoke and lung cancer[7][8][9]. " -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Singer I guess having a PhD after your name in no way precludes your being a total nutcase. Oops, maybe he isn't so nutty after all. In reply to accusations of conflict of interest, "In a February 2001 letter to the Washington Post, Singer denied receiving funding from the oil industry, except for consulting work some 20 years prior. While funds were not directed to Singer in his name, publicly available documents show that Singer's non-profit corporation SEPP received multiple grants from ExxonMobil, including in 1998 and 2000.[9]"

Just in case you aren't clear, consensus is not the same thing as unanimity. I can think of no better strategy for making sure that we never address global warming than that of waiting for every single scientist on the planet to agree, while meanwhile, CO2 continues to build up, the sea level continues to rise along with the average global temperature.

Puh-lease, Health-Nut_Ditto-Head. Give us a break and go find something of real significance to talk about!

Answer 2

The official thermometers at the U.S. National Climate Data Center show a slight global cooling trend over the last seven years, from 1998 to 2005.

Actually, global warming is likely to continue—but the interruption of the recent strong warming trend sharply undercuts the argument that our global warming is an urgent, man-made emergency. The seven-year decline makes our warming look much more like the moderate, erratic warming to be expected when the planet naturally shifts from a Little Ice Age (1300–1850 AD) to a centuries-long warm phase like the Medieval Warming (950–1300 AD) or the Roman Warming (200 BC– 600 AD).

The stutter in the temperature rise should rein in some of the more apoplectic cries of panic over man-made greenhouse emissions. The strong 28-year upward trend of 1970–1998 has apparently ended.

Fred Singer, a well-known skeptic on man-made warming, points out that the latest cooling trend is dictated primarily by a very warm El Nino year in 1998. “When you start your graph with 1998,” he says, “you will necessarily get a cooling trend.”

Bob Carter, a paleoclimatologist from Australia, notes that the earth also had strong global warming between 1918 and 1940. Then there was a long cooling period from 1940 to 1965. He points out that the current warming started 50 years before cars and industries began spewing consequential amounts of CO2. Then the planet cooled for 35 years just after the CO2 levels really began to surge. In fact, says Carter, there doesn’t seem to be much correlation between temperatures and man-made CO2.

For context, Carter offers a quick review of earth’s last 6 million years. The planet began that period with 3 million years in which the climate was several degrees warmer than today. Then came 3 million years in which the planet was basically cooling, accompanied by an increase in the magnitude and regularity of the earth’s 1500-year Dansgaard-Oeschger climate cycles.

Speaking of the 1500-year climate cycles, grab an Internet peek at the earth’s official temperatures since 1850. They describe a long, gentle S-curve, with the below-mean temperatures of the Little Ice Age gradually giving way to the above-the-mean temperatures we should expect during a Modern Warming.

Carter points out that since the early 1990s, the First World’s media have featured “an increasing stream of alarmist letters and articles on hypothetical, human-caused climate change. Each such alarmist article is larded with words such as ‘if’, ‘might,’ ‘could,’ ‘probably,’ ‘perhaps,’ ‘expected,’ ‘projected’ or ‘modeled’—and many . . . are akin to nonsense.”

Carter also warns that global cooling—not likely for some centuries yet—is likely to be far harsher for humans than the Modern Warming. He says, “our modern societies have developed during the last 10,000 years of benignly warm, interglacial climate. But for more than 90 percent of the last 2 million years, the climate has been colder, and generally much colder, than today. The reality of the climate record is that a sudden natural cooling is more to be feared, and will do infinitely more social and economic damage, than the late 20th century phase of gentle warming.”

Since the earth is always warming or cooling, let’s applaud the Modern Warming, and hope that the next ice age is a long time coming.

Answer 3

Watch the Al Gore movie on global warming. Its called An Inconvenient truth. It was great!

Answer 4

Hi leo, i really care about global warming and i am trying to prevent it. this is done by me turning off my appliances and disconnecting them from the circuit when not in use. this would reduce the rate of enrgy used save me money and also reduce co2 emmition into the atmosphere. cool question.

Answer 5

Millions of tons of crap DAILY into the atmosphere is nothing to sneeze at. Pun intended.

We are screwing ourselves over for a buck.
Shooting ourselves in the herd.
Stepping on our own ducks.
Cutting off our nose to spite our finch.
Kicking ourselves in the aardvark.

We're ruining it for everybody and everything, and people who can't accept it are three fries short of a Happy Meal.
Have a nice day.

Answer 6

Much overblown, and in any event not capable of being dealt with without spending far too much money. The UN has proposed a program to deal with it; the 50-year cost of that program is $557,000,000,000,000 -- forty times the entire gross national product of the United States, and several times the total value of every asset in the entire world.

Answer 7

If you care about the future and your survival you care about the changes that are happening to our planet. Try and live a self sufficient life and pollute as little as possible

Answer 8

thier is no cure