Can people give me their opinions about Global Warming?

Question

Let's clear some things up first:

1) Scientific records of average global temperature only started in 1880.

2) The 'little ice age' started about 550 years ago and ended in the mid nineteenth century (hence the world started to naturally warm up at the same time as temperature records were beginning to be taken) - i.e. the world was colder than normal at the beginning of the readings.

3) In 1883 Krakatoa errupted, spewing tonnes of soot into the atmosphere and blocking out the sunlight for a substantial time, such that the average global temperature dropped by up to 5 degrees centigrade. The atmosphere was only clear enough to begin increasing the average global temperature again in the mid twentieth century.

Just these three facts can clearly show how the world is warming up back to its NORMAL AVERAGE TEMPERATURE and, consequently, isn't the result of our carbon dioxide usage. In fact, the amount of carbon dioxide we release is tiny compared to what is naturally released

The only major reason why Global Warming is made an issue is political (to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels, typically found in politically delicate areas of the world). Also, scientists can easily obtain funding for Global Warming studies compared to more important studies.

The bottom line is this. The world is warming up back to its normal temperature. The atmosphere of fear that exists is totally unnecessary and any SERIOUS scientists knows this full well.

What are your opinions? Are you gullible enough to believe in the hype?

summerfest_01: Sure, but it is unstoppable. Reducing our carbon footprint will have such a negligable effect. Rather than trying to stop the planet warming back to its normal average temperature, we should be devoting our efforts to relocating people and improving the structural stability of buildings such that, when the storms do hit, we will be ready.

The Complete Idiot: It is clear from your response that you know nothing about carbon, carbon dioxide, soot, the atmosphere or, in fact, anything to do with this subject.

Joe anti popcorn: The point is that the scientists aren't wrong, the world is heating up. Perhaps it was a mistake to say 'normal' temperature. Perhaps I should have said 'mean temperature over the lifetime of the human race's existance'. Either way, the phenomena you describe are climate change, not global warming. Also, climate change occurs over a long amount of time (and is completely natural by definition), whereas these recent weather anomalies are just that: weather. Sure, some strange weather is happening, but maybe we only notice it because of the hype? Maybe the weather we are experiencing (as unpleasant as it is) is actually 'normal'? Finally, I want to point out that the scientists produce the reports, and the sociologists pass them on to the politicians. If you read science journals directly, you will see that scientists are all in agreement: the effect that humans have on global warming is negligable.

epidavros: Thank you for a good answer. You are right that 50% of the population lives on the coast, but the actual length of the coastline will not massively change (even though the land-area will - see Fractal Coastlines). This means there is pleanty of room to relocate people. Nothing can be done about Global Warming, it is natural and normal. The human race must adapt to the new world (which is ironically the old world) or die. That is the nature of evolution.

Flongkoy: You've not actually read my question, have you? This is a perfect demonstration of how the media works. People see 'Global Warming' and don't really know what it is, but don't take the time to read and find out for themselves. No, you'd rather be told by tabloid newspapers and politicians. Take it from a scientists, human behaviour has almost no effect on Global Warming, and nothing can be done to stop it. More to the point, we evolved in a changing climate, so the future changes in climate will only act to help our evolution.

Answer 1

There is no "normal" temperature for the Earth - it has always been subject to change, and it always will be. And it is certainly true that colder periods - ice ages - which are more common than our current balmy climate are disadvantageous to forming civilisations.

But what should concern you is the current speed and scale of change. Both of these are evident from the detailed records we have over the last 150 years without resorting to derived historic temperatures, to which yoou object.

Neither ecosystems nor societies are good at coping with rapid climate change. Historically it has caused cities to be abandonned and civilisations to fail. Your Krakatoa example, for instance, caused Scottish croft farms (which were marginal) to be abandonned.

The current level of change - even just projecting figure from recent years with no increase - will cuase the loss of massive amounts of coastal real estate (50% of the Earth's population lives near the coast) and massive changes to agricultural productivity.

None of these things are in doubt, and none you will note involve any question of looking at what is causing the change. And the consequences will be severe for us, so we should be planning what to do.

The final question is "is any of this avoidable", and it will only be avoidable if we can act to intervene. There is good evidence now that so called greenhouse gases are playing a large roll, and they have certainly risen a lot. Take CO2. It is easy to measure historic levels of CO2 because air gets trapped and preserved in arctic ice. Count the seasonal layers to get the age and measure the amount in a trapped bubble. We also know that the Earth is only habitable because the CO2 keeps the climate warm (without it Earth would be about -40C all the time). The increase is currently about 50% on historic levels. This is NOT AT ALL insiginificant, and again is easy to verifiably measure with no projections or guesswork, and with no special climate model.

How much we can change what is under way, however, does depend on climate models. And these do not all agree.

Answer 2

We talk about this at work alot. You have many facts, I am impressed. However, are ALL scientists wrong? We very well may be in a "natural" cycle at this time; do we know for sure? Why did bush persuade his report? Why did Al Gore go through the trouble (movie). I believe some things are just ******-up, ie, snow in Los Angelis, in Pittsburgh, we have only had a few dustings. Tornadoes in Fla? in february? 5 feet of snow in denver in a 2 week period? I'm just saying....

Answer 3

i dont think that global warming is a new thing ...

if you ask the scientists that do all the research at the polls (north & south) they will say that its been happening since time began or if you like since the earth was born..its a natural prosess..

they say carbon has a big part to play well what about the cave men they used it all the time.....

Answer 4

yeah i believe the "hype". i've seen charts of global temperature reconstructed from core samples and we're leaving the bounds of the usual pattern. your point #3 is about soot, not carbon. the carbon dioxide from the volcano was counteracted by the soot, you realize. a similar effect occurs from our smog and other contaminants. without this unnatural shade, we would have been certain about this problem earlier.

you invested in oil?

Answer 5

I believe that if the Arctic continues to melt at its current pace we're all in a heap of trouble that most people haven't even considered. That is what I think.

Answer 6

i think china, uSa, and india should start loving mother nature!!! and lead and exemplify to the world the effort against global warming

Answer 7

pollution will kill us before heat makes us drown

Answer 8

no,