Global Warming?

Question

a)what are the advantages and disadvantages of doing something now to slow global warming?
b)what are the advantages and disadvantages of waiting until more data available?
c)is there any way to know for sure whether there is a link between CO2 and global warming?

Answer 1

Please don't buy into the hype. Take a look at the frozen land mass called Greenland. Ever wonder how it got such an incongruous name? Well, back in the days of the Norsemen it was not frozen at all but a lush green land. Hello! There were no SUV's or evil corporations back then. There have been ice ages and warm ages many, many times before the first man ever existed.

Here are some of the ways you are being fooled by the agenda driven "scientists": Find out exactly what kind of scientists are agreeing with this nonsense. You will see that there are all kinds of biologists, botanists, zoologists etc. none of which knows any more than you do about the climate. The opinions of such scientists are useless. If you remove all the clutter you will find that the true climate experts are far from agreeing that there even is a true global warming occurring. There is nothing even approaching a concensus that it is being caused by man.

Yet you are being spun that: A) Global warming is a fact.(it isn't)
B) It is being caused by CO2. (only a theory). C) If only the developed countries hurt their own economies and destroy capitalism everything will be all right. (funny, back in the 1970's capitalism was causing a new Ice Age.)

Don't let them fool you, kiddies. They are lying to you. Their lies do not stand up to scrutany, therefore they want to cut off all debate.

Answer 2

This is a difficult question because it both presumes that we know what is causing global warming how to stop it. Which is in fact a false assumption. In general the question to act or not to act depends on the consequences. In this case since we don't know what is causing global warming, or if there is anything we can do about it or not. The consequences of taking misdirected action is to make things worse than they would be otherwise.

In this particular case the consequences of taking ineffective action are not cost free. CO2 emission controls put a drag on the economy forcing more people into a lower standard of living and shorter life span. (cost is lives lost).

Then there is the real possiblity that we are on the verge of another ice age. (See Newsweek article April 28, 1975). If the action is effective but misdirected it could push us into an ice age that might last 100,000 years. The consequences of most of the world covered with a thick layer of ice would be far more devastating than the increase of the sea level by a few feet.

Answer 3

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a report on February 2, 2007 that found "Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations." The gas in question is carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. So it is very likely that increased temperatures are a result from increased human-produced greenhouse gas. The phrase "very likely" translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame. So while we can't know "for sure", we are relatively certain.

"Hotter temperatures and rises in sea level 'would continue for centuries' no matter how much humans control their pollution, although the likely amount of temperature and sea level rise varies greatly depending on the fossil intensity of human activity during the next century."

Limiting our production of greenhouse gases can lessen the impact. Additionally, studies are being done on carbon sequestration, which could significantly reduce C02 concentrations in the atmosphere.

John McCain and Joe Lieberman wrote a commentary that appeared in the February 13th edition of the Boston Globe. They claim "Working in a bi-partisan fashion, Congress will enact a law that curbs global warming even as it strengthens the economy."

Answer 4

a) one advantage to reducing our oil consumption is we will cut some of the funding for terrorists and regimes that hate us. We would also send big oil companies a message. Using electric vehicles would also be cleaner for the environment which is a good thing whether or not you believe in global warming
b) waiting until more data is available would circumvent some of the very positive changes that could be implemented right now
c) unknown

Answer 5

The question is really one of time. It is happening and it cannot be stopped. That is because people do not in fact realize the root cause is population. You ask if we should do anything now or wait and all that. Whatever we do, however successful or strict your proposals are, the number of people will continue to increase and undo any good work you may achieve. Example;

Say you make ever car 50% more efficient/less polluting. That is great until the number of cars doubles and you are right back where you started.

Answer 6

a.) your great, great, great, and so on grand children won't have to pay the price for your actions. once it starts, it won't stop.
b.) it could come extremely quick. it probably won't be here tomorrow, but soon, I give it 50-100 years and global warming will be here.
c.) not for sure, but if you look at the planet Venus, you see most of the atmosphere is CO2 and that makes the planet very hot and get a thick atmosphere. we don't want that because that gives us acid rain.

visit my website at www.freewebs.com/save_our_earth

Answer 7

A)It will make all the people fell better to 'do' something. Something is better then nothing. The other side is the thing done might be wrong.

B)If you wait people will be bored and woun't fell that anything is getting done. Though you can wait for more data.

C)NO. Even all the scientest agree on this one. But 'something' has to be causing it.....so they pick evil America.

Answer 8

a) that depends on what is actually happening
b) advantages: if the panic-mongers are right, then hooray we are saved. If not, we have wasted our time.
c) proper analysis of the data. A scientific experiment must be devised to prove it - it hasn't been done.

I am personally convinced there is no significant link

Answer 9

Yes actually there is a way co2 is involeved,it goes into the atmosphere,and more and more goes up iit cause an imbalance in the atmosphere making it hotter

Answer 10

CO2 prevent the reflected sun rays from exiting earth and lead to increase in temperature