Even if he is wrong, who cares? How can you possibly believe that all of our carbon gases that we are emitting don't have SOME effect on the environment, at the very least. I would rather err on the side of caution and not run an uncontrolled experiment on the only home that we have.
2007-03-22 18:39:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by ♥austingirl♥ 6
·
2⤊
3⤋
Karen L, " Ice core data also shows that the Earth's average temperature is increasing more rapidly than it ever has in its history?" That is just the kind of nonsense that proves that global warming proponents are NOT interested in facts. The ice core evidence shows exactly the opposite of what you are saying.
See the attached link. It shows 2.5 deg rise over 2 centuries around 1200AD, 1.7 deg rise over 1 century around 2700 years ago, and 3 deg rise over 1 century 8600 years ago. Compare that to the 0.6 degree rise we had over the last century. Obviously your statement that temperature is increasing more rapidly than any other time in history is completely false.
2007-03-23 12:05:03
·
answer #2
·
answered by dsl67 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Give me a break!
forests which use carbon dioxide also contributes to the increase in carbon dioxide.
Most of the light energy from the sun is emitted in wavelengths shorter than 4,000 nanometers (.000004 meters). The heat energy released from the earth, however, is released in wavelengths longer than 4,000 nanometers. Carbon dioxide doesn't absorb the energy from the sun, but it does absorb some of the heat energy released from the earth. When a molecule of carbon dioxide absorbs heat energy, it goes into an excited unstable state. It can become stable again by releasing the energy it absorbed. Some of the released energy will go back to the earth and some will go out into space.
So in effect, carbon dioxide lets the light energy in, but doesn't let all of the heat energy out, similar to a greenhouse.
http://www.pa.msu.edu/sciencet/ask_st/08...
2007-03-23 01:43:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by cantcu 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
This is the biggest scam since the "second ice age" scare of the 70's and the "acid rain" scare of the 80's. Just wait, 10 years from now all will be about the same and Gore will declare victory for defeating global warming.
2007-03-23 01:42:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by Scott B 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes. All that hot air coming from Al Gore has to be doing something... I'm tired of listening to Al Gore railing on a subject with no balanced knowledge on the issue.
2007-03-23 01:48:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
Well let me tell you something I am not going to spend the time calling you this that insulting you instead I will attempt to prove to you that global warming is real. Not through opinion or news articles, but instead through science! I have taken it from a report I have done a few semesters ago. Please do not plagiarize. This was written so that an average person with just High School chemistry could understand.
The atmosphere acts as somewhat of a “selectively” permeable membrane due to its thin layer; in other words the atmosphere is penetrable by a quantity of solar radiation. The atmosphere is composed of nitrogen (78.084%), oxygen (20.946%), argon (0.9340%), carbon dioxide (381 parts per million by volume), neon (18.18 ppmv), helium (5.24 ppmv), methane (1.745 ppmv), krypton (1.14 ppmv), and hydrogen (0.55 ppmv).
The sun emits a variety of solar radiation that spans the spectrum of wavelengths. Visible light is between 400nm and to 700nm, infrared radiation between 700nm to 1nm, and ultra violet rays (UV) is between 500nm to 700nm. Basic quantum physics law states that energy of these wavelengths is the result of multiplying Pluck’s constant, h= 6.624 10-34joule-sec by the frequency (v) thus E = h v (frequency is established by multiplying the speed of light, c, by the wavelength, λ). So by mathematically utilizing these equations one can deduce that the shorter the wavelength (λ) the more energy the wavelength contains. Iinfrared radiation, ultra violet rays and visible light are among the shortest of wavelengths.
The atmosphere, in particular the stratosphere which contains the ozone layer repels most solar radiation by reacting with ozone (O3) yielding O2 + O, or simply O3 + UV => O2 + O (this will be discussed in detail later on). But visible light does not fully cooperate with the atmosphere; some visible light does penetrates the atmosphere as due to its enormous energy capacity. This visible light is necessary for life on earth because the dynamics of any ecosystem depend on the process of cycling of nutrients and the flow of energy. Now what happens to the solar radiation, the energy? The first law of thermodynamics, the conservation of energy principle takes control it states that energy can be changed from one state (liquid, solid, gas) to another but it cannot be created nor destroyed and as Albert Einstein proved, energy and matter, are connected ( the atomic bomb being a prime example of this connection).
A vast majority of the solar radiation is then used to accommodate photosynthesis by earth’s plant population (this is the change of state), carbon dioxide + water + light energy => glucose + oxygen + water; these results are an absolute necessity to maintain life on this planet. The remaining sunlight (solar radiation) is remitted into the atmosphere and at this stage is where the problem begins. A common misconception is that CO2 is the problem but this is not so CO2 as mentioned previously is also required for photosynthesis (not to mention plant respiration). The real problem of course is the increasing amount of carbon dioxide; many figures on the interent shows an increasing amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. Carbon dioxide is a green house gas, meaning that it does not allow heat to escape, therefore the solar radiation which was emitted, or reflected by the ocean must pass through this barrier of increasing carbon dioxide (in the troposphere).
Carbon dioxide consists of a carbon atom and two oxygen atoms covalently bonded. Quantum physics dictates that solar radiation heat is not permitted to be absorbed by a molecule unless it is vibrating asymmetrically. In order for the molecule to be vibrating asymmetrically the molecule must contain three atoms. As mentioned previously the atmosphere is composed of nitrogen (N2), oxygen (O2), argon (Ar), carbon dioxide (CO2), neon (Ne), helium (He), methane (CH4), krypton (Kr), and hydrogen (H2). This leaves us with two molecules that contain three atoms: methane and carbon dioxide, being the more abundant molecule (and growing). There was once a balance, the oceans would regulate the amount of carbon dioxide, by reacting to the carbon dioxide to yield carbonic acid (CO2 + H2O => H2CO3 ) but with increasing amounts of CO2 the rate of carbon dioxide conversion is slow in comparison to carbon dioxide production. Therefore, increasing amounts of carbon dioxide results in warmer global temperatures
Are you going to call this junk when I recieved a little less than full credit? From Ph.D. Chem Professor? Not to mention from UCLA. There is no debate over the validity of Global Warming. The debate is how to best and effectively solve the problem. Yes but I know you must stick to your party loyalties but I will give you some advice from two wise men that lived centuries ago.
”I am neither an Athenian or Greek, but a citizen of the world” Socrates
"It is a mark of an educated mind that can entertain a thought and not accept it" Aristotle
2007-03-23 02:23:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Now, don't you know Al is so much smarter than us he is doing us all a great honor anytime he says a few words to us lesser mortals. Remember, if you tell people a lie loud enough and long enough, most people will start to believe it. Look how many believe the Patriot Act, Homeland Security and a National ID card are all good for our own protection.
2007-03-23 01:40:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Paul 3
·
0⤊
5⤋
CO2 traps heat. We have expontentially increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. Simple. Ice core data also shows that the Earth's average temperature is increasing more rapidly than it ever has in its history.
2007-03-23 01:39:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Karen L 7
·
3⤊
3⤋
I dont know if he is right or wrong, but if there is a problem with global warming hopefully I will be long dead before crap starts hitting the fan
2007-03-23 01:39:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by darkcloud5757 3
·
1⤊
3⤋
You know it's a crock now because they have already changed their phrases to "climate change". Hell, the climate changes 4 times a year.
2007-03-23 01:42:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by bamafannfl 3
·
2⤊
3⤋