Do you think the theory of "global warming" is incorrect?

Question

I have heard research from scientists that stated that global warming is being blown way out of proportion. They have said that we are not looking at a large enough sample of time in relation to the earth. It has been said that there have been times that the earth has been much warmer than this, and times that it has been much cooler. Basically, the earth goes through waves of temperature shifts and we just tend to be in one of the warming waves right now. What do you think?

Answer 1

Very few scientists seem to question weather or not the earth is warming. Also very few scientists seem to be questioning the data that indicates that the warming trend we are in is happening unusualy fast. All scientists agree that the earth has been through warming and cooling trends in the past, the dissagreements are about how fast are we warming, how much will we warm, and what is causing the warming.

Most scientists have now agreed that we should operate on the "Precautionary Priniciple", that means that since it is very likely humans through industrialization, and the use of fossile fuels are having some effect on the rate of warming (it may be argued how much), and that much more warming will likely result in the deaths of millions of humans, that we have a responsiblity to reduce our impact, and reverse it if possible.

I belive that humans are having a negitive impact on the enviroment, we have radicaly changed a great deal of the earths habitable surface, and have extracted and added to the atmosphere incredible amounts of carbon. I belive that allthought the science at this point may not be conclusive, we must act. The situation is similar to tobacco smoking in the 1960's and 70's except they only had to wait a decade for conclusive tests, and the damage was being done to a small portion of humanity. We do not know how long we will wait for iron clad "proof", but we know that by the time we have it, we may have endangered the life of all humanity.

I am for the "precautionary principle" when gambling with the future of humanity. I

Answer 2

Global warming is at the fore front because politicians found how to use a new platform to get re-elected. The world leaders use it because they found ways to make money at it. This is a made up problem just like Global Cooling in the 1970's. Wake up people. I agree we need to be more efficient with our resources, and we should fine and jail companies who are dumping into our rivers maliciously. I want to stop the raiforest destruction, but to say that global warming is a serious man made issue and we need to destroy the American economy and bow down to the rest of the world certainly does not float my boat. Follow the money on this one and you will see that it is all for political gain and grant money for those scientists who profit off of the government if global warming stays at the front of the issues. Look deep into the Keoto (sp?) Treaty, first of all they took jets to a non-central resort location. Not very environmentally concious. THen in the parameters of the treaty they have a clause that makes it so you can buy or sell polution credits. This is all about shifting wealth and breaking down the United States. This is painfully obvious, just look at peoples agenda. The earth's mean temperature has risen .6 degrees C in the past 125 years. Greenland's icecaps have gotten colder in the past 10 years. The Scientists who do not gain anything on their posisition will tell you that the earth has a natural progression and this is what we are seeing. The UN report is made up of POLITICIANS not a good spread of scientists. THere are as many or more scientists who believe that man in NOT the reason and it is over hyped, but their voice is not heard in the LIberal Mainstream Media. This issue is 99% political, and an attempt to make the USA a socialist nation, and eventually communisim. WAKE UP AMERICA, IT IS TIME TO BE AMERICANS. FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE. STOP THE LIES

Answer 3

Well, if it could be proven absolutely, it would be the law of global warming, not theory. Whether or not its right or not, it doesn't take a genius to realize the changes in our environment. Where do we think all that smog above cities came from. Nature? That stuff ain't good for the lungs. That right there should be enough to get us doing something. How about the sun? Remember when we were kids? You could spend ALL day in the sun, with no sunscreen, and be just fine (I'm only 33; that is the 1980s I am referring to). Maybe a little pink. Try that now and you would have 3rd degree sunburn. Maybe the breakdown in ultraviolet isn't related to human activities, but what if it is? Even the smallest chance of this demands we do something.

Can we afford to assume global warming isn't our fault?
Nice avatar

Answer 4

There is no way to accurately predict the weather. Everyone knows this, so we all take the weather forecast with a grain of salt.

But there will always be Chicken Littles screaming the sky is falling, so now it's Global Warming. These "experts" are trying to tell us that they can predict the global weather patterns 30 years into the future. And the funny part is, notwithstanding my first paragraph, a lot of people are buying this tripe.

I don't care what kind of data people point to, it is impossible to accurately predict weather patterns. It's like a hoax we had here recently, where the hoax was that a tsunami was imminent because an earthquake was being predicted in Japan. Many silly people rushed to the stores and bought loads of batteries, bottled water, canned goods and butane stoves. Of course, it is impossible to predict earthquakes!

Use your common sense and don't let people fool you. Why do they want to fool you? Money. The biggest source for bullsh!t research: federal grants.

Answer 5

Scientifically speakingy the Globe goes thru cycles of heating to high temperature and cooling to low freezing temperature.
This cyclic occurance of changing Climate has been attributed to the precession of the Poles.
We are at this time entering a heating cycle. However due to particulate emissions in the atmosphere an opposite effect is occuring;Its called "Global cooling effect "due to the shadowing of the sun by these atmospheric polutants.
Co2 Gas emission at hight emperature are not what is causing global warming. The reason is that carbon dioxide is heavier than the atmospheric air.Therefore the gas rise and as soon as it cools it descends on the oceans and forest were its reabsorbed.
So Co2 never rise high enough in the atmosphere to create global warming since its so heavy.

Answer 6

if you look at charts of the arctics amount of ice over the past 100 years, It shows that the ice is melting so that mens we are getting more water in the ocean.... the explanation for this is very easy to understand, The pollution from cars and factories and other things of that nature, the Co2 inthe atmosphere creates kind of a bubble in the sky, so when the heat from the sun comes in it gets trapped and cant get out so the earth is warming up, i think global warming is a big threat to the earth and people need to try and make a difference, the ice melting might have long term effects but when it does earth as we know it will be under water

Answer 7

It's true that there have been waves of temperature shifts throughout history. The thing is we have not been around that long, we weren't there to observe the impact when it happend before...
Now we are here (and observing it) and yes, we just tend to be in one of the warming waves right now. But on top of that we are burning fossile fuels wich fasten the process. Pray for a US president that is more concerned about our future than about oil and vote for him, or her...

Answer 8

It's Based on 800,000 Years of Data Collected from Air Bubbles in Arctic Ice.

Answer 9

I don't know what to believe any more. I just hope for the sake of our children, their children and so on, that somebody gets on top of the matter. If it is true--governments should be doing something about it. At least they shouldn't be trying to keep the public confused and/or naive about it.

Answer 10

Researchers have recovered a nearly two-mile-long cylinder of ice from eastern Antarctica that contains a record of atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane--two potent and ubiquitous greenhouse gases--spanning the last two glacial periods. Analysis of this core shows that current atmospheric concentrations of CO2--380 parts per million (ppm)--are 27 percent higher than the highest levels found in the last 650,000 years.

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=00020983-B238-1384-B23883414B7F0000



and what do they say?? an ice age comes every 11,000 years approximately? how many ice ages are in 650,00 years??

Concentrations of CO of 800 parts per million (ppm) can be lethal after three hours.


First of all, the results demonstrate clearly that the relationship between climate and CO2
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/11/650000-years-of-greenhouse-gas-concentrations/

temperature trends
http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/facts_and_figures/temp_ghg_trends/temp.cfm
http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/facts_and_figures/temp_ghg_trends/index.cfm

Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.
Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1992). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year (24 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 1998) . Human activities release more than 150 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of nearly 17,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 13.2 million tonnes/year)!


watch this:
http://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Truth-Al-Gore/dp/B000ICL3KG/002-9351897-1027268

assume that he is lying on everything he says, and research the claims yourself.
you'll find his only real mistatements, are:
1) implying that Lincoln freed the slaves based on moral obligation.

2) trying to predict how long it will be before we face consequences is quite impossible. the problems could come soon, or they could come a cnetury from now. it is pretty impossible to predict.

and
3) the CO2 concentrations will probably get us before global warming will.