what is global warming ?

Question

is it really serious matter ?
what could be ramifications of global warming in future ?

Answer 1

Global warming is the increase in ave global temperature that we'ver been experiencing since the start of the industrial revolution and even more so in the last 40 years. Yes it is serious. It is easily unprecedented over the last 10000 years that civilization has flourished, and quite likely unprecedented over the last 3.5 million years. See my answer in http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoLY3iIKVH1NqpMODweQI3EgBgx.?qid=20070129154318AAqnVa4&show=7#profile-info-bXnWO8mzaa for what could happen (worst case).

So if I interpret this correctly, sailcatt would have you believe that because Fox collected a few scientists to present the minority opinon that this is reason to ignore the fact that the entire world scientic community has reached consensus in the other direction. What he fails to mention is that the reason why this broadcast was so one-sided was that FOX had previously presented a one-hour special on globall warming hosted by Rick Folbaum that was equally one-sided:

"FOX News is attempting to rise above politics on the global warming debate. ... FOX News will continue to report all sides of the global warming issue (and all issues, for that matter), and let you come to your own conclusions about it. We hope you watch and enjoy our special, 'Global Warming: The Debate Continues.' " -- http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,195877,00.html

Just to set the record straight:

From a book published by Harvard University Press: "In 2001 a panel representing virtually all the world's governments and climate scientists announced that they had reached a consensus: the world was warming at a rate without precedent during at least the last ten millennia, and that warming was caused by the buildup of greenhouse gases from human activity." (http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog/WEADIS.html ). So, for the most part, scientists have been in agreement about this for the last 6 years.

Continuing research by mainstream science supports those conclusions. According to the US EPA, the US Climate Change Science Program CCSP) released a report in May 2006, "which addresses some of the long-standing difficulties in understanding changes in atmospheric temperatures and the basic causes of these changes." (http://epa.gov/climatechange/science/recenttc.html#ref ). When I look at the CCSP report, it says, "Our best scientific understanding is that:
• Increases in well-mixed greenhouse gases (which are primarily due to fossil fuel burning) result in largescale warming of the Earth’s surface and troposphere, and cooling of the stratosphere." (http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap1-1/finalreport/sap1-1-final-chap5.pdf ). I encourage everyone to have a look at the full summary of the report for themselves and decide for yourself. It's easy reading.

NASA says, "the general consensus among scientists is that global warming is real and its overall effects are detrimental" (http://eospso.gsfc.nasa.gov/ftp_docs/Global_Warming.pdf , page 6 )

In fact, it is so detremental that the Attorney General of California has filed suit against the 6 auto manufacturers and 5 utilities here in CA. (http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/cms06/06-082_0a.pdf?PHPSESSID=bcafe4e63eecea93153f25e6fe5bc9ba , http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=709&year=2004&month=7&PHPSESSID=5fa0700eb86a845983a94e26ab86a46e ) for ignoring the IPCC statements, stating in the lawsuit, "Defendants knew or should have known, and know or should know, that their emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases contribute to global warming and to the resulting injuries and threatened injuries to California, its citizens and residents, environment, and economy."

There really is little controversy in the scientific community on this issue. There's a small handful of vocal people, many of whom have strong ties to the oil industry (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Global_warming_skeptics ) who are keeping the debate alive. When people mention this or that group of scientists that represent the dissenting minority position, I would be curious what percentage that group constitutes. Consensus is not the same and unanimity; as long as two people are left on the planet, they will disagree about something.

Now that the oil companies here in the US have begun to abandon their position and Pres Bush followed suit a few days ago in his State of the Union Address, I am hopeful that the US will ratify the Kyoto Protocol and join in the efforts worldwide to slow the progression of global warming.

Answer 2

Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation into the future.

Global average near-surface atmospheric temperature rose 0.6 ± 0.2 °Celsius (1.1 ± 0.4 °Fahrenheit) in the 20th century. The prevailing scientific opinion on climate change is that "most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities."[1] The main cause of the human-induced component of warming is the increased atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as carbon dioxide (CO2), which leads to warming of the surface and lower atmosphere by increasing the greenhouse effect. Greenhouse gases are released by activities such as the burning of fossil fuels, land clearing, and agriculture.

Models referenced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predict that global temperatures may increase by 1.4 to 5.8 °C (2.5 to 10.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100. The uncertainty in this range results from both the difficulty of predicting the volume of future greenhouse gas emissions and uncertainty about climate sensitivity.

An increase in global temperatures can in turn cause other changes, including a rising sea level and changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation. These changes may increase the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, such as floods, droughts, heat waves, hurricanes, and tornados. Other consequences include higher or lower agricultural yields, glacier retreat, reduced summer streamflows, species extinctions and increases in the ranges of disease vectors. Warming is expected to affect the number and magnitude of these events; however, it is difficult to connect particular events to global warming. Although most studies focus on the period up to 2100, warming (and sea level rise) is expected to continue past then, since CO2 has a long average atmospheric lifetime.

Remaining scientific uncertainties include the exact degree of climate change expected in the future, and especially how changes will vary from region to region across the globe. A hotly contested political and public debate has yet to be resolved, regarding whether anything should be done, and what could be cost-effectively done to reduce or reverse future warming, or to deal with the expected consequences. Most national governments have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol aimed at combatting global warming.

Answer 3

There's a possibility that this is happening, but a very small one.

In the 70's, there was actually a scare. This one was called "Global Cooling", and everybody bought into the 'hype' (if you will) that the earth was actually freezing. It turns out that our earth's temperature was staying EXACTLY the same. Weird eh?

So now they want us to jump on this band-wagon and buy into the hype of the earth becoming 'hotter' than it was before - when in reality, it's probably still remaining the same. So really, there's no reason to worry. It's just the past lie, but re-created in today's world.

Answer 4

The build up of green house gasses in the atmoshpere that create the green house effect in the Earth's atmoshpere increasing global temperature. Yes it is a serious matter. There are very large holes in the ozone layer at the north and south poles. The polar ice caps melt b/c of global warming. It is said to be possibly linked to catostrophic events that will happen in the future if nothing is done.

Answer 5

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

Answer 6

Global warming is the same as global cooling, because measured by temperature.
Temperature is everywhere in the Universe, and it is the most evident fact of existence.

Answer 7

Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation into the future.

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 8

With the population explosion we have currently, world wide, there is now the greatest need for water the world has ever known. This includes water not only needed for humans but for all of the animals grown for human consumption, also plant and crop life as well to grow all of the produce to eat. This is why the Polar ice caps are melting, so we will all have enough water to drink!

Answer 9

Global Warming Catastrophe Debunked By Scientists On Fox Special
By Rev. Louis P. Sheldon
Chairman, Traditional Values Coalition

May 23, 2006 - Fox News reporter David Asman hosted an important investigative report on Sunday evening entitled, “Global Warming: The Debate Continues.” This latest report was a counterpoint to a Fox feature that aired last November on the same topic. Asman’s report featured numerous scientists and Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) who chairs the U.S. Senate Committee On Environment and Public Works.

All of those interviewed for this show were skeptical of the claims made by former Vice President Al Gore and radical environmental activists on the causes, extent and potential damage that global warming might cause to the future of our planet.

Much of the hysteria generated by Gore and his cronies in Hollywood about global warming causing melting icecaps or the flooding of coastal cities, is unsupported by scientific data, according to meteorologists and climatologists who were interviewed for Asman’s special. In fact, many of the same environmentalists in the 1970s who were screaming about pollution bringing about a new ice age, are now claiming just the opposite with their dire warnings about global warming. They were wrong then; they are wrong now.

Those scientific experts who were interviewed by Asman pointed out that the computer models used by Al Gore and other environmental activists to predict future world flooding, etc., are notoriously unreliable. These models fail to take into account the extraordinarily complex nature of the environment. Two of the scientists interviewed by Asman said that activity on the sun may be a major factor that is overlooked by the Chicken Little environmentalists.

Radicals like Al Gore typically look at the worst-case scenarios—and those are based on flawed computer models—that fail to take into account future scientific breakthroughs. Gore and his cronies also ignore the current efforts being made by the Bush Administration to encourage such technology as energy plants that convert coal into gas—or technology that converts grains into low emission fuels.

Senator James Inhofe has called the claim that global warming is a man-made problem, as “the world’s greatest hoax.” I am convinced he is correct—and many reputable scientists agree with him.

Former surgeon and best-selling author Michael Crichton wrote “State of Fear” in 2004 to expose the radical environmental movement and its wildly inaccurate claims about future ecological disasters being caused by global warming. Crichton researched the environmental issue for three years before he began writing this book—and wrote a devastating critique of environmentalism in his author’s message in “State of Fear.” Crichton observed: “Nobody knows how much warming will occur in the next century. The computer models vary by 400%, de facto proof that nobody knows. … We can’t ‘assess’ the future, nor can we ‘predict’ it. These are euphemisms. We can only guess. An informed guess is just a guess.”

So, the next time Al Gore gives a speech about man-made global warming, melting ice caps, and flooded coastal cities, keep in mind that he’s just guessing—and basing his wild opinions on the worst case scenarios developed by unreliable computer models. (And, remember that this is Hollywood’s pick for the presidential run in 2008.)

Al Gore has a history of making statements that are unsupported by the facts. Entire web sites have been developed to chronicle Gore’s misstatements, including one published by National Review magazine several years ago. This is hardly a man who could be trusted with our national defense or environment if he became president.

Answer 10

A careful look at global warming, as a topic, shows that there is a great deal of disagreement about the facts and substance of climate change. Those who blame man for climate change often disagree about what facts lead them to that conclusion. Those who hold man totally innocent of it often ignore established facts. Experience and research leads us to believe that warming is, in fact, occurring; however, there is little to no objective evidence that man is the cause, nor that the effects will be catastrophic. The idea of earth “wearing out” is an apt analogy. This entire world has been continually decaying since the fall.

Global warming “facts” are notoriously hard to come by. One of the few facts universally agreed upon is that the current average temperature of Earth is indeed rising at this time. According to most estimates, this increase in temperature amounts to about 0.4-0.8 °C (0.72-1.44 °F) over the last 100 years. Data regarding times before that is not only highly theoretical but very difficult to obtain with any accuracy. The very methods used to obtain historical temperature records are controversial, even among the most ardent supporters of the theory of human-caused climate change. The facts leading one to believe that humans are not responsible for the current change in temperature are as follows:

• Global temperature changes from past millennia, according to available data, were often severe and rapid, long before man supposedly had any impact at all. That is, the current climate change is not as unusual as some alarmists would like to believe.

• Recent recorded history mentions times of noticeable global warming and cooling, long before man had any ability to produce industrial emissions.

• Water vapor, not CO2, is the most influential greenhouse gas. It is difficult to determine what effect, if any, mankind has on worldwide water vapor levels.

• Given the small percentage of human-produced CO2, as compared to other greenhouse gases, human impact on global temperature may be as little as 1%.

• Global temperatures are known to be influenced by other, non-human-controlled factors, such as sunspot activity, orbital movement, volcanic activity, solar system effects, and so forth. CO2 emission is not the only plausible explanation for global warming.

• Ice Age temperature studies, although rough, frequently show temperatures changing before CO2 levels, not after. This calls into question the relationship between warming and carbon dioxide; in some cases, the data could easily be interpreted to indicate that warming caused an increase in carbon dioxide, rather than the reverse!

• Computer simulations used to “predict” or “demonstrate” global warming require the assumption of human causation, and even then are not typically repeatable or reliable. Current computer weather simulations are neither predictive nor repeatable.

• Most of the global temperature increase of the last 100 years occurred before most of the man-made CO2 was produced.

• In the 1970s, global temperatures had actually been dropping since 1945, and a “global cooling” concern became prominent, despite what is now dismissed as a lack of scientific support.

• The “consensus” claimed by most global warming theorists is not scientific proof; rather, it is a statement of majority opinion. Scientific majorities have been wrongly influenced by politics and other factors in the past. Such agreement is not to be taken lightly, but it is not the same thing as hard proof.

• This “consensus,” as with many other scientific theories, can be partially explained by growing hostility to those with differing viewpoints, making it less likely that a person without preconceived notions would take on the subject for research. The financial and political ramifications of the global warming debate are too serious to be ignored, though they should not be central to any discussion.

• The data being used to support anthropogenic (man-caused) global warming is typically based on small data sets, single samples, or measurements taken in completely different regions. This creates an uncertainty in the results that rarely gets the attention that alarmist conclusions do.

While the above list is not exhaustive, it does include several of the major points that raise doubts about mankind’s actual effect on global temperatures. While no one can deny that warming is occurring, “overwhelming evidence” of any objective type does not exist to support the idea that global warming is significantly influenced by human actions. There is plenty of vague, short-sighted, and misunderstood data that can be seen as proving “anthropogenic” global-warming theory. All too often, data used to blame humans for global warming is far less reliable than data used for other areas of study. It is a valid point of contention that the data used in these studies is frequently flawed, easily misinterpreted, and subject to preconception.

In regards to issues such as this, skepticism is not the same as disbelief. There are fragments of evidence to support both sides, and logical reasons to choose one interpretation over another. The question of anthropogenic global warming should not divide Christian believers from each other (Luke 11:17). Environmental issues are important, but they are not the most important questions facing mankind. Christians ought to treat our world with respect and good stewardship, but we should not allow politically driven hysteria to dominate our view of the environment. Our relationship with God is not dependent on our belief in human-caused global warming.

For further research on global warming, we recommend the following articles:
http://www.icr.org/article/3233/
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/ http://www.clearlight.com/~mhieb/WVFossils/ice_ages.html
http://www.xtronics.com/reference/globalwarming.htm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/5/14/161152.shtml
http://www.whrc.org/carbon/images/GlobalCarbonCycleLG.gif
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/fig3-1.htm

Read more: http://www.gotquestions.org/global-warming.html#ixzz3IgkPqYcx