Proving Global Warming?

Question

I am very much interested the scientific process to prove global warming.

Has anyone created an experiment to totally prove global warming?

My wife and i totally disagree on this topic, i would like to know what the good folks of yahoo have to say and how they can back it up.

Answer 1

What exactly are you trying to prove? That the earth is getting warmer? That is simply a matter of observation, no proof required: of the fifteen warmest years on record, all fifteen have occurred since 1990. (Here's a link)
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

Are you trying to prove that the current warm spell is not the result of natural cycles? Well, the Sun isn't getting hotter, and that too is a matter of simple observation (here's a link)
http://ieg.or.kr:8080/abstractII/G0102523037.PDF
And the cycles in Earth's orbit that cause ice ages are easily computed, and they should be cooling the planet right now, not warming it (here's a link)
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/207/4434/943
So natural causes can be eliminated.

By looking at tiny bubbles of air trapped in arctic and antarctic ice, we can reconstruct the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere going back thousands of years, and those gases (primarily CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide) have all jumped sharply since the industrial revolution. (Here's a link, and you'll want to scroll down to page 15)
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
Is there really any doubt that human industrial activity is the cause of these spikes?

Or perhaps there is a doubt that CO2 and other greenhouse gases actually cause planets to get warmer? How else do we explain why Venus is hotter than Mercury, even though Venus is twice as far from the Sun? (Hint: Venus has an atmosphere composed mostly of CO2; Mercury has no atmosphere). Or why the surface of Titan, Saturn's largest moon, is 100 degrees warmer than the surface of Rhea, Saturn's second-largest moon? (Hint: Titan has an atmosphere of methane, Rhea has no atmosphere). Or why the bottom of Death Valley is always warmer than the top of Mount Whitney only 70 miles away? (Hint: the bottom of Death Valley has a lot more atmosphere than the top of Mount Whitney).

What, exactly, is in doubt?

Answer 2

First of all, I salute you and thank you for serving for the people and the country. And no, I didn't say that for the 10 points. lol
Yes, there is global warming. It isn't caused by man. It is part of the cycle of Earth. In the past the Earth has cooled and then warmed back up. We weren't here to start the warming, just animals, plants and worst of all, the evil, polluting and menecing volcanoes. Oh yeah, I forgot, cosmic dust as well. Do we accelerate it. Probably to a small degree. If a person would study certain data they would find that the flucuation in particulate matter coinsides with eruptions of volcanoes. But the scientists that have an agenda in crying the sky is falling fail to mention that. Instead, they have the audacity to say that we have caused global warming. That is an insult to my inteligence. By the way, over the last five years there has been a global cooling of .035 degrees c. OOOOOHHHHH look out, here comes the Ice Age. Tell your wife to study real science, but tell her nicely. Don't pi ss her off. Be tacitful and nice. Sometimes I am not at this place, because the far left doesn't understand it unless you smack 'em in the head with it. Anyway, I digree. Sorry. Will we lose the ice caps? Probably not. The Gulf Stream will slow down a lot before that happens and we will go into another ice age. When? Science doesn't even know. Projected years in theory? Anywhere from 80 to 150 years. Maybe as much as 200 years. We could go into a mini ice age like that of the Middle Age, or Medieval Age. Around 600 to 800 AD Greenland was actaully green and wasn't covered in snow and ice. Talk about global warming. I have given you just a part of much. There is a lot of scientific data to be had. All done by people that don't get grants to promote an agenda and give Honest facts that are unbiased.

Answer 3

You cannot create an experiment to prove global warning, but you can make observations and associate them with measurements made on earth.

You can observe examples of planets that have experienced global warming (Venus).

You can demonstrate and measure the greenhouse effect (greenhouses).

However the earth is very complicated, so it is hard to get quantitative estimates. This is done by computer modeling, but it is difficult to get all of the factors included in any model.

The only meaningful results come from a large number of studies, measurement and models that are refined over a period of time.

Even then, there is no 100% certainty. That doesn't mean it can be ignored. If you were standing on a railroad track with a train coming at you, and you knew that there was a 50% chance the train's brakes would work, what would you do? Would you say "no one has proved that the brakes are bad, so I won't worry about it"?

The evidence has been building for years now, much of the contradictory early measurements have been resolved, and the probability of real disastrous effects from warming due to human activity is now well over 50%.

Answer 4

Global warming has always been around and always will continue, regardless of the presence of humans and our activity. However, human activities are adding to the faster warming of our environment. Some scientific processes that can be used to measure global warming include the relative increase in temperature over a period of time compared to another period of time, the rate of ozone change due to chemicals (ozone protects us from the sun and can also trap hot air in our atmosphere, and the total amount of work done by our machines (which correlates to the heat we put into the environment).

Answer 5

Go with the data from Shinatama.

There never was any valid disagreement on the causes of Global Warming any more than there was ever disagreement that cigarette smoking caused Lung Cancer. There were paid "hacks" in the scientific community that attempted to present false evidence, both in the case of Tobacco and now with human induced Global Warming (read Exxon and Mobile oil companies).

The uneducated people denying Global Warming are "flat-Earth'ers " and should be given as much credence as people who think the Sun revolves around the Earth.

The amount of Carbon Dioxide that has been added to the environment in the last 150 years is a third higher than it has ever been in the last 650,000 years. The measurements are recorded from ice samples from Antarctica. In 50 years, CO2 levels are projected to be +55% higher than they have ever been ever. This is if we do nothing and continue to do the eat-drink-and-be-merry policy we are doing now.

The high CO2 range used to be ~270 ppm of CO2. It is now about 350 ppm. It is projected to go towards 600 ppm.

Understand also that in the last ice age (when CO2 was around 150 ppm) the location of where Chicago is now, was under one mile of ice!

We are treading entirely new ground with what we are doing with the environment.

Know also that if either the Greenland or Antarctic ice shelves melt, about 20% of Florida will be under water. This includes all of Miami-Dade county and the Tampa-St. Pete areas. Don't forget other coastal areas, such as New Orleans and New York city. Tens of millions of people will be displaced in this country alone.

Answer 6

The Global Warming Hoax
By Alan Caruba
CNS Analysis from the National Anxiety Center
16 January, 2000

The debate about "global warming" continues and it would appear that more people are beginning to doubt the endless lies they read and hear.

An opinion editorial by Philip Stott, a professor of biogeography, was published recently by Bridge News. He wrote, "Imagine a coast-to-coast headline, from The Boston Globe to the Los Angeles Times: Climate stops changing? What a story. Nobody would believe it for a minute." Why? Because we know that the weather changes hour to hour, day to day. "If the bizarre idea of a stable climate is so intrinsically newsworthy, why are we currently obsessed by the opposite, the idea of global warming?"

Good question. "Climate is always changing, and on every spatial and temporal scale. Climate is governed by millions of factors," said Prof. Stott. In brief, weather is chaos. The notion that human activity is the controlling factor is inherently bogus. To believe that, you would have to believe that the sun, the oceans, the clouds, volcanic activity, and countless other factors do not play a major role in the weather.

I recommend you visit www.greeningearthsociety.org, an Internet site that provides some of the best information available. In the January 4, 2000 "Virtual Climate Alert" on the site, it takes note of the worst propagandist for the global warming hoax, a so-called science reporter for The New York Times, William K. Stevens.

"In the December 19, 1999, edition of The New York Times, science writer Bill Stevens reported that 1999 was the 'second warmest year on record' for the United States and other global land masses and that the rate of increase has been especially dramatic since the 1970's. While these facts in themselves are correct, Mr. Stevens ignores the larger set of observations that are necessary in order to put these facts into proper perspective.

For instance, the warming rate during the most recent three decades is the same as the warming rate observed during the 30 years from 1916 to 1945-a period before there was any large buildup of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration. The fact that the rate of current warming has been observed in recent history indicates that it is not at all unusual and that it is, therefore, likely to have occurred many times in the past." (Emphasis added)

Or to put it another way, Stevens has taken a set of facts and twisted their interpretation to suggest that the earth is undergoing an unusual amount of warming. The Virtual Climate Alert points out that "In fact, of the 13 years in the Twentieth Century that the average temperature in the United States was greater than 1 degree Fahrenheit above normal, over half occurred more than 40 years ago (before 1960)."

To return to Prof. Stott's observation that "the bizarre idea of a stable climate" continues to be regarded as "newsworthy", I can only tell you what I have repeatedly pointed out in a commentary on this website. In "The Great Global Weather Scam", I note that the Greens were publishing whole books in the 1970's claiming an Ice Age was coming! This means that The New York Times and other news organization's articles about global warming not only are inaccurate, they are not really news. News is about something that is actually happening. They are writing about something that is not happening, i.e., the claim that the earth's temperature and the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is a dramatic change from the past and a portent of terrible things to come.

Again, I implore you to ask yourself why! Why are major news organizations telling us that global warming is a terrible threat to the earth and all life on it? Why has the United Nations been leading the global warming campaign? Why do all the major environmental organizations continue to say that global warming is happening? Why should we trust these reports any more than the drumbeat of fear that surrounded Y2K when we now know that nothing happened regarding the major computer systems around the world?

The answer is we cannot, we must not, continue to allow this Big Lie to be perpetrated. You can and must write letters to your local newspaper every time it shows up. You must protest this lie when you hear it from candidates for the presidency, other politicians, or anyone else. The issues behind the global warming hoax are not about the climate.

They are an assault on the success of capitalism in the Western nations that utilize energy to provide homes and other structures with warmth in the winter and a cool atmosphere in the summer. Nation's where the widespread use of automobiles allows the population greater mobility. Nation's whose supermarkets are filled with fresh meat and fish, vegetables and fruits, grown around the world and brought fresh to their shelves. It is an assault on everything we consume to live longer, healthier lives.

The objective of the global warming hoax is to create conditions that would reduce the earth's population by restricting the use of energy to protect health, to reduce the amount of food that can be grown to feed the population. It is an attack on the countless other ways modern life extends and protects our lives.

This is part of a pattern of activity over the past twenty years to ban pesticides vital to control the insect and rodent populations that spread disease. It is the reason that freon, the chemical that is essential to air conditioning and refrigeration was banned. It is the reason that plastic products are under attack. It is an attack on the human race! Greens regard humans as a cancer on the earth that must be eliminated to "protect" the earth.

Alan Caruba is the founder of the National Anxiety Center.

Answer 7

You're wrong and she's right.

Of course "global warming" exists, and it existed before being assigned that stupid liberal name, which is based upon the liberal religion of globalism. It's natural and it's what melted the ice ages.

Don't listen to that liberal lunatic porker Al Gore, who also claimed to have invented the Internet. I think that he needs to undergo psychiatric treatment that includes Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.

Answer 8

Global warming is an imediate threat and always will be for centuries to come due to humans actions.