How much information do we have on global warming?

Question

Day after tommorow comes out and hollywood gets the twitch...
Ignorance leads them to believe they have this problem and the world's issues all figured out in a nice pie chart with some cashews on the side table....money and tax breaks can save the world....
too much money going either way...keep eating your media with gravy on it.

Answer 1

Very superficial info. The production of CO2 in the upper atmosphere is ignored. Jet fuel burning thousands of tons of fuel per hour. Each ton burned produces 3.66 tons of CO2. There is a gradient of CO2 to be absorbed and utilized on the surface of the earth. Growing plants take it up instantly. The ocean absorbs it just as fast. Especially cold water. Since 85% of the earth is covered by water, this would be the main absorption(clearing) route. No studies have addressed these items. As the weather circulates over the earth, all gases drop down to earth. Hot air rises, cold air settles down. Equator to the poles. I think there are conclusions occurring that are not justified. CO2 trapped in ice, and rocks is fraught with errors in the measurements of them.

Answer 2

Um Yeah,
Making cars harder to afford will really create more jobs...
*scratches head*

I have another scenario for the DAT people:

I call it The Pheonix Civilization --

It is vanity to think that the temperature of the Earth is something that humans have more than VERY minor control over. Glacier activity says, "Yes, we are warming." Particularly since we aren't living under the glaciers!

Two things that happen at the same time are not necessarily cause and effect. A small minority of scientists were fretting over global cooling just three decades ago, and a similar proportion are concerned about global warming now.

Here's the biggie: Anything, like the Koyoto Treaty, geared to protect developing countries but enforce restrictions on developed countries will move jobs to developing countries -- lots of jobs.

Add on a hike in the minimum wage, increased taxes, and increased social programs, and the US will crash fast and hard.

At that point, any economy that relies on the US will follow suit.

Life as we know it comes to a screaching halt. The 1930's will be looked on fondly as a time of plenty. City dwellers, who can't even think about subsistance farming, go splat PDQ. When food prices peak, the poorest start dying of starvation. The richest can't even keep up with the beggers who stream into their private homes hoping for work and food. The farmers can't get the fertilizers and replacement equipment that they need to feed the nations. Finally, the electrical companies can no longer pay to produce electricity because no one pays their bill, and the towns go dark.

Ultimately, the American Dream dies, and civiliztion starts building a new alpha state that will care for the other nations, give the strength of it's people to help maintain peace, and be the engine of the new republic, the new hope, the new dream. And then we zip past the technology we have now into a better, greater society that must again be pulled down into the ashes for daring to soar too close to the sun.

Oh, and is Rob Correll the guy who's running around with a photo showing a "hole" in the polar ice that is ACTUALLY just dense, clear ice that appears black because of it's visual depth? Because if he his, he's a liar or a fool. TIME did print a retraction on that caption, but some jerk is still running around with his spurrious proof of global warming.

It took a minute, but guess what?! Bobbie Correll IS INDEED the jerk running around claiming that the polar icecaps are melting! Look at his picture carefully kiddies. You definately SEE a hole, but like I said, that is CLEAR ICE! He's playing you for a fool.

Answer 3

Unless I've missed something, the whole so-called "debate" on GW resolves to 4 non-issues:

1. Denial - GW is not happening.
2. OK, GW is happening, but we're not responisble for it.
3. OK, it's happening, we did it, but it's too late to do anything about it.
4. OK, it's happening, we did it, but it's no big deal and nothing to be concerned about, because
a) warm is better
b) it's not enough to be concerned about

Why are they non-issues? Because they are just plain false and, in the words of Dr Robert Correll, "The science is unassailable."

He says, "The planet is out of balance. ... We now have really unchallenged science ... the preponderance of evidence across the board among all the disciplines that the warming we're seeing today is substantially coming from human effect." And he saying we have a real, serious problem and that, even though much of what we've done is irreversible over the span of the next hundreds of years, that's no reason to not start putting on the brakes.

So who is this guy? He's not someone from hollywood getting "the twitch" and ignorance hasn't lead him to believe there is a problem. He was the Assistant Director for Geosciences at the National Science Foundation (NSF) from 1987-1999 and the Chair for the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment study completed in 2004, where he coordinated an international team of over 300 scientists, experts and Arctic region natives.

These scientists are not getting rich. And I'm sorry, you couldn't pay me enough to spend years on the Arctic ice cap. When will you wake up? For these scientists, it's not about the friggin money. They could make much more on the oil company payroll trying to convince idiots that there's no problem.

There is a difference between consensus and unanimity. Are you suggesting that we wait until every scientist on the planet agrees ? Even the one's with strong ties to oil money?

So here's the video clips that I got the quotes from: http://60minutes.yahoo.com/segment/26/global_warming Have a look; you can also vote or just check out the result on a GW poll.

---------------------
To Niniva (below):

You've got to be joking, right? You say, "A small minority of scientists were fretting over global cooling just three decades ago, and a similar proportion are concerned about global warming now."

Where have you been?? It's the other way around. Since when is virtually the the entire, worldwide scientific community a "small minority"? FYI, there was an analysis of 10 years of peer-reviewed scientific journal papers indexed by "climate change". They found 928 total papers supporting the consensus view and ZERO papers disputing it. Exactly how does that translate to a minority position in your mind?? Please reply, because I really would like to understand how your mind works.

Answer 4

It is pretty conclusive that humans are the primary cause of global warming. There is a report that will be publicized on Friday, detailing the effects and consequences of global warming. This report is composed by over 2,000 scientists and climatologists. Gonna be pretty hard to keep ignoring the problem or marginalizing the problem now!!!

Answer 5

usual amounts of CO2 is something like 200 ppm. right now we are at 400 ppm. seems like that is TWICE THE AMOUNT!!! AAACHH!!! um, ok well how about this. CO2 still only consists of a mere 4 one hundreths of a percent. 0.04 percent.

if you look at historical data collected from rock samples and their estimated CO2 levels and such, the amount of CO2 we have in the air in conducive to old measurements (going up) and we *should* be heading into an ice age pretty soon. all the data says we should be. hell, you're probably too young to remember, BUT back in the 70's, they were all on the news about being worried about global COOOOOLING and having a panic of an ice age coming soon.

Answer 6

Global warming solutions:-

We have the technology and ingenuity to reduce the threat of global warming today. Solutions are already available that will stimulate the global economy by creating jobs, saving consumers money, and protecting our national security. By investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency, and increasing the efficiency of the cars we drive, we can take essential steps toward reducing our dependence on oil and other fossil fuels that cause global warming.

Using energy more efficiently and moving to renewable energy (wind, solar, geothermal, and bioenergy) would significantly reduce our emissions of heat-trapping gases. The United States currently produces 70 percent of its electricity from fossil fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil, but only two percent from renewable sources. Since the burning of fossil fuels releases large amounts of carbon dioxide—the leading cause of global warming—but renewable energy does not, increasing the share of our electricity generated from renewable resources is one of the most effective ways to reduce global warming emissions.

Cars and trucks are another significant source (25 percent) of U.S. carbon dioxide emissions. A serious effort to address global warming must therefore reduce emissions from cars and trucks. Many technologies already exist that can do this, while also creating new jobsacross the globe,. automotive sector and other industries. In addition, consumers across the world would save billions of dollars on gasoline, and we would reduce our dependence on oil.

By putting energy efficiency, renewable energy, and vehicle technology solutions in place at the federal level, we can reduce our contribution to global warming while creating a stronger, healthier, and more secure nations.

Answer 7

Not enough. We have good science that the CO2 level is increasing. We have fairly good science that the earth's temperature is increasing. We have no good science that shows that the two are related -- it's all computer simulations.

Answer 8

one thing is that, Japan is going to submerge because of the melting glaciers at the poles.
many new islands are found under what used to be huge chunks of glaciers in antartica

Answer 9

not enough info to stop it.