English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I would say mankind might cause a bit of the problem but the Sun is obviously the main culprit

2007-03-21 09:15:45 · 5 answers · asked by podunksunshine 5 in Environment

5 answers

There is no evidence that this is so.

"... to the extent it is sensible to speak of a mean temperature for Mars, the evidence is for significant cooling from the 1970's, when Viking made measurements, compared to current temperatures. However, this is essentially due to large scale dust storms that were common back then, compared to a lower level of storminess now. The mean temperature on Mars, averaged over the Martian year can change by many degrees from year to year, depending on how active large scale dust storms are."

2007-03-21 09:21:30 · answer #1 · answered by Keith P 7 · 0 0

Its humorous to me while AGWers say the controversy is settled. there is not one element of the controversy it is settled. what remains in debate: Is CO2 a familiar stress interior the international temp? Is guy generating adequate CO2 to even have an impact on the quantity of CO2 interior the ambience? If the two questions above are specific, then how plenty will the temp boost? How a lot of a temp boost might reason mankind issues and how long might it take? might the organic procedures already in place, fix any quantity of harm we are able to do? (as an occasion that's relatively-known that plant life improve swifter with extra CO2) it could additionally be conceivable that liberating the CO2 back into the ambience might advance the ambience, provided that the planet became plenty extra lush interior the previous than that's now and plant life thrive while CO2 stages are better. will boost interior the quantity of water held by using plant life and the ambience might stability any boost in sea point by using melting ice. in basic terms people who've a tendency to have faith propaganda, have faith any of those questions are "settled". what's relatively-known, that no-one argues against, is that fossil fuels are a constrained source. So artwork in the direction of nuclear potential by using lifting the regulations that have made it so costly interior the US. try this, and we are able to do away with a difficulty that all of us understand exists (constrained fossil fuels) jointly as additionally removing a difficulty that could or will possibly not exist (guy-made worldwide warming).

2016-11-27 20:15:14 · answer #2 · answered by ozkardes 4 · 0 0

The Sun has increased its' radiation. And that may be the cause of Martian warming. But the data proves it's only a minor factor in global warming on Earth.

Increased solar radiation has been carefully measured by many people. It's 0,12 watts per meter squared. Man caused warming is 1.6 watts per meter squared. Page 4 of this report.

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

Here's what scientists think, and definitely not from the liberal media:

"While evidence suggests fluctuations in solar activity can affect climate on Earth, and that it has done so in the past, the majority of climate scientists and astrophysicists agree that the sun is not to blame for the current and historically sudden uptick in global temperatures on Earth, which seems to be mostly a mess created by our own species."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258342,00.html

2007-03-21 09:47:05 · answer #3 · answered by Bob 7 · 0 0

Global warming is not "completely a man made phenomenon." Several factors warm the Earth, above radiant energy from sunlight. The most important factor is our atmosphere. In the 4.5 billion year history of our planet there have been many episodes of global warming and cooling, as our atmosphere has been influenced by such things as the evolution of phytoplankton, the evolution of gymnosperms, the evolution of cyanobacteria, and geological activity, such as supervolcanic events. Supervolcanic events are of particular interest because they pour great amounts of carbon dioxide (a greenhouse gas) into our atmosphere. For instance 665 million years ago (mya) the Earth was very cold, even the oceans were frozen over at the equator. Supervolcanic activity at that time terminated that "Iceball Earth" era. 251 mya huge volcanic activity buried an area in Siberia the size of the United States in 300 feet of lava. The resulting global warming led to the extinction of 90-96% of all species on our planet (Permian/Triassic mass extinction event). All life everywhere on Earth was almost snuffed out. 14 mya less extreme supervolcanic activity warmed the Earth, resulting in tropical forests spreading through Europe and my home state of Florida under 200 feet of ocean (I love to dig for 11-14 mya marine fossils in my backyard here). Supervolcanic activity, including a huge eruption of Yellowstone, also helped to bring about the end of the Pleistocene Ice Age.

As far as current global warming trends, human production of carbon dioxide approximately mimics a supervolcanic event. If the trend continues we will expect to see my home in tampa, Florida under 3 feet of water in 100-200 years.

2007-03-21 09:50:58 · answer #4 · answered by Dendronbat Crocoduck 6 · 0 0

I don't know, but Al Gore is genuinely frightening in his quest to be the New Age Messiah

2007-03-21 09:18:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers