global warming?

Question

what is the deal with global warming these days, but if we have anorther ice age will we be able to survive it at all?

Answer 1

The earth goes through cycles -as evidenced by the "ice age" that varies temperature. This happens very slowly and certainly we will hardly notice it in our lifetime. I may just vary a few degrees until a cooling happens again and so it will go as long a earth endures.

Answer 2

There were a couple good answers. The global warming zealots always expose their ignorance and their politics. They are so willing to believe that humans are the cause of everything bad, they're willing to believe every idiotic idea that is thrown at them. "We are all going to die because were going to be flooded. The children will die of fevers. Frogs will die, etc..... Do they stop and think for a moment that there might be some good coming from a our warming trend. The warmth is generally due to moderation in temperatures especially at the colder end. These people need to get a grip on reality or they need to be ignored and treated like the ignoramuses that they are. There has been far too much nonsense already. Based on the past, an ice age is all but inevitable. These are cycles that happen in thousands of years, not tens so our grand-children's grandchildren won't know any significant difference, barring some unknown catastrophe (i.e Yellowstone going off). We will survive an ice age but it would be far more devastating than global warming. Perhaps by then we will be able to affect the temperature more. It is certainly beyond our ability now.

Answer 3

The ignorance and self-importance of the human race leads us to believe that the Earth's climate as it is, is how it's meant to be. Many humans simply think it should stay this way forever, and that our actions can contribute towards this happening.

Newsflash.

That's just not true.

Take sea levels. Sea level rises are apparently a new, evil phenomenon caused by humans. So, why can't you walk from China to Japan anymore (not so long ago in terms of Earth history, you could)? Because of all the cavemen driving round in 4x4s? No, it's because the Earth's climate has never been, and never will be, stable. Humans or not. A simple look at climate history graphs will tell anyone that.

Climate change will happen. Warming spells will happen. Ice Ages will happen. It's not an if, it's a when. At best, human activity is speeding up a natural cycle of warming. Which will lead to a period of cooling. Which will be followed by warming. Then cooling. And so on, and so forth.

Humans today, with the modern technologies and the like, will easily get through another 'standard' Ice Age. Millions will probably die as a result. But humanity as a race can easily cope with it.

Whether there are any humans left by the time of the next Ice Age, though, is what we really should be asking.

Answer 4

While global climate change may be a normal cyclical event, not all climate change should be viewed as normal and cyclical.
While most automobile collisions are accidental, you can't say that all collisions are accidents and victims are blameless.
Since the 1850s, man has been pouring millions of tons of carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide into the air. These are known greenhouse gases. Their increase must be addressed. It could be coincidence with the increase in degree-days each year and the decrease of glaciers. But absence of a definite link does not mean there is no link. Just because you can't prove that man is warming the globe, it doesn't mean that he is not.
As for us surviving another ice age. It is unlikely. Wih a huge shift in food sources and other stresses, evolution would likely shift to a better suited organism.

Answer 5

yes we will if we have another ice age. global warming heats the earth, but now its going to quickly so there won't be any ice age

Answer 6

Some will!!! Its all about how long the ice age last human are very good at adapting to things.

Answer 7

The deal is this.

Left unchecked global warming will cause coastal flooding and severely damage agriculture.

Rich countries can cope, but it will cost each of them hundreds of billions of dollars and send the world into an economic depression. Poor countries can't cope, many will die of starvation.

If we want to prevent the worst, we need to start working very hard right now.

Answer 8

Global warming is harder to stop than global freezing.
It's easier to get out there with our aerosol cans and spray away than to get that stuff back into the cans.

Answer 9

First detected in the 1980s, globalwarming is an increase in the average temperature on Earth. Some scientists believe that the increase in the Earth's average surface temperature—approximately 0.8° C during the 20th century—is caused primarily by increased emissions of several gases into theatmosphere, particularly carbon dioxide, methane, and water vapor. These gases remain in the upper regions of the atmosphere, trapping heat emitted from the Earth, a phenomenon known as the greenhouse effect. By far, the most prevalent of the greenhouse gases is carbon dioxide, the molecule that is emitted naturally through the respiration of animals and humans. The vast bulk of carbon dioxide emissions, however, comes from the burning of fossil fuels such as oil, gasoline, and natural gas, resources that are consumed heavily in automobiles, industrial production, and the generation of energy that is used domestically. The demand for these fuels is so widespread that it would be virtually impossible to stop their production and use on a global level. It was thought that, instead, a drastic reduction in their use might help decrease the amount of emissions into the atmosphere. However, the prospect of curtailing economic development locally in order to reduce greenhouse gases worldwide came at a time when many developing nations were firmly committed to making great economic strides and it proved to be a bitter political pill that fewnations were prepared to swallow.

Although no single event could be blamed for the observed warming trend, scientists have suggested that the total effect of human activity on Earth since the Industrial Revolution contributed to the problem. Fossil fuel emissions were only one aspect of the scenario. Along with industrialization, human population growth resulted in increased demand for goods, services, and shelter. For example, high market demand for meatproducts results in increased livestock ranching, which contributes to increased greenhouse gases in two ways: not only do increased numbers of livestock mean increased emissions of methane gas, but they require increased grazing land at the expense of wooded habitat. Trees take up more carbon dioxide during photosynthesis than does grass; therefore, the clearing ofland results in fewer trees that can use up the excess carbon dioxide in the air. Destruction of natural areas for urbanization also constitutes a two-pronged attack: trees and plants are cleared in favor of areas that can shelter enormous concentrations of humans who consume energy in tremendous amounts. Increased human population results also in higher demand for goods that are produced in factories that burn fossil fuels.

In some parts of the world, widespread deforestation worsened the problem of greenhouse gases. In Brazil, farmers were routinely encouraged by the government to burn their land in exchange for loans. In 1997, a record-breaking drought led to a dramatic increase in the need for loans, which resulted in a higher than usual incidence of these fires. The fires released greenhouse gases directly into the atmosphere and created smoke levels that threatened the environment and the surrounding human population; 30 percent of nearby residents sought treatment for respiratory problems.

Although no one disputed that greenhouse gases were emitted during the burning, there was disagreement about exactly how much was released. The Brazilian government contended that the country contributed less than 2 percent of the world's greenhouse gases—1 percent from the burning of fossil fuels, and 1 percent or less as a result of the intentional land burning. Some scientists believed the emissions were considerably higher,perhaps as great as 6 percent from the land burning alone.

According to an international scientific panel, their best estimateregarding global warming was that a doubling of carbon dioxide in the 21st century would yield an increase in the Earth'stemperature of approximately 3.5 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100. The increased temperature would drastically affect world climate and precipitation patterns. More frequent droughts and floods would accompany an intensified cycling of water between the oceans and the atmosphere. These droughts and floods would seriously affect agriculture, especially in Africa and other tropical areas. Sea levels would rise by almost 2 feet (0.6 meter), covering low-lying coastal areas. Increased nighttime temperatures would result not only in milder winter evenings but also in more disastrous heat waves. Increased air temperatures, along with increased humidity, would also result in an expanded range for disease-carrying insects, such as mosquitoes.

Some studies posited that it would be possible to limit the globaltemperature increase to a mere 1.5 to 2 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2100. This could be achieved, however, only by keepingthe carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere at 450 parts per million. This level—nearly twice the level of carbon dioxide duringpreindustrial times—might be impossible to achieve and maintain, but some policy makers focused on it as the next plateau to reach. Most scientists, however, felt that stabilizing carbon dioxide levels at 550 parts per million might be a more realistic goal. The level of atmospheric carbon dioxide in 1997 was 360 parts per million.