Please explain why you DON'T think CO2 is a contributing factor in global warming.?

Question

Allot of answers in a previous question has me curious, esspecially since i am now leaning toward human accleration of the otherwise cylic behavior of earths atmosphere.

Answer 1

There is actually no evidence, one way or the other -- and can't be, since conducting a controlled experiment is obviously not possible. We know for sure that the CO2 level is rising, by amounts that suggest that human activity is responsible. We know probably that the earth is getting warmer, as glaciers are melting. We know for sure that the earth's temperature has been changing throughout its history. The only knowledge we have about whether the CO2 level is related to this is computer simulations, which anyone who has ever tried to predict the weather using one will have doubts about. We know that the CO2 level now is only about a quarter of what it was during the dinosaur era. We also know (and this is the sticker) that attempting to reduce CO2 will be almost unbelieveably expensive; the UN has proposed a program whose price tag is $557,000,000,000,000 -- far more than the total value of every asset on the planet.

Answer 2

CO2 is just one of many things that may affect global temps, but a more likely explanation for global warming is one of the natural cycles of earth. In the past earth has gone through many such cycles. Earth has been very hot, very cold, less or more oxygen than today, less or more CO2 than today. There has been massive droughts that almost extinguished life itself.

The most powerful factors that influence global temperature are the amt. of radiation from the sun, earth's internal temp, the circulation and salinity patterns of our vast oceans and outside factors from the solar system that affect earth. The earth itself creates and releases CO2 and in the past record we can see that these amounts of CO2 were very large, much larger than humankind can create.

Most likely global warming is yet another cycle in the earth's climatic history, just part of the everchanging globe we call home. I still think we should watch emissions of any compound into our atmosphere because humans are the fragile ones (not earth), and we could possible contribute to our own demise.

Answer 3

One reason for questioning the issue is because it requires a lot of energy to change the climate and CO2 does not generate energy. If you do the math you will come to see the energy balance needs to change by so much just for a temperature change of 1/10th of a degree something more than a change in the CO2 level is the cause. As for the belief that CO2 is the cause; how do you determine this is in fact true? For another thing climate change has been going on way longer than humans have been around.

Answer 4

There is a growing body of scientific work that is showing that the minor growth of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere is a result of rather than a cause of the the recent warming period. The main source of the increased carbon dioxide is postulated to come about as ocean temperatures have warmed slightly and decreased (again slightly) their ability to dissolve carbon dioxide.

Furthermore, there is evidence of the Sun's increased output that could be driving the slightly warming temperatures.

So, your proposition that CO2 is a contributing factor in global warming has not been proved.

Answer 5

CO2 is a major factor and thats just the facts, but its not the only major factor. Another major factor is that the suns ultraviolet rays are very powerfull and the ozone blocks out about 95% of them. But the ozone can only take so many hits, the ozone is slowly disappearing and therefore, allowing more u.v. rays to hit our earth, causing global warming. Without CO2, most of rays that the earth absorbs (terrestrail radiation) would leave the earths atmosphere. We would have global warming, but at a much much much much slower , barely there, way. C02 acts like a barrier blocking terrestrial radiation from leaving out atmosphere. This heat is trapped in our atmosphere and this is basically, the greenhouse effect.

hope that helped.

Answer 6

CO2 may be a factor, but how much of a factor? How much are humans to blame? We are observing global warming occuring on Mars now, with shrinking polar ice caps. That argues for a solar cause, versus a human cause. Remember the 70's, when global cooling was the alarming topic of debate.

Anyway, who knows. The real question is, what can we possibly do to curb greenhouse emissions? China especially will become the world's largest polluter, and they have zero intention of signing on to any treaty that would stunt their industrial development. It would take huge international investment to bribe them to follow something like Kyoto. When it comes down to it, it takes taxpayer dollars. It's easy to love the environment in casual conversation, but what will happen once people have to put their money where their mouth is?

Answer 7

Personally I DO think it is a factor. However there is pretty good evidence that past temperature changes do not correlate with past changes in CO2 concentration, or so the book in the source says.

Answer 8

I obviously can't think of an answer since I totally think CO2 is one of the main factors in global warming.

Answer 9

merely repeating the comparable previous junk technology would not make it actuality,your fist assumption it fataly incorrect,the sunlight has been emmitting image voltaic flares stonger than any recorded in two decades when you consider that 2001,indicating an strengthen of a minimum of 40,000,000 jewels of electrostatic microwave warmth which greater surely clears the outer and inner layers of the earths keeping ozone layer,to my expertise we've no result on the suns skill to warmth or cool its self and this actuality has by no skill been disproven or perhaps disputed because of the fact it replaced into positioned forth in 2002 purchase the meterologist sociity,this actuality on my own will clarify an will strengthen interior the exterior tempreture over the final 3 many years,and probable longer,additionally your declare of the present fee of warming is base on the Luger-Albertson laptop form based on the quantity of oxygen contemporary in middle samples drawn from glacier ice,yet this finding is desputed by way of various scientists as a incorrect formulation,so even this might account for a incorrect result interior the assertion you made as to the linked fee of temp strengthen after the final ice age,yet a Toronto scientist Dr Calvin Woodridge has positioned forth his opion in this rely putting forward that the speedy strengthen if shown and that i repeat IF shown perfect could quite characterize at climatic height preceeding a calm down previous to the onset of yet another ice age at a while interior the destiny,Please understand that picking out human beings and orginizations that positioned forth the opion and statements which you consider would not talk properly of a guy or woman objectivity,and by way of no way cause them to information.

Answer 10

Because when you look at the historical data there is no correlation between co2 and rises and drops in temperatures. While there has been a link between sun activity and temperatures.