Is global warming real or is it a hoax?

Question

Originally, I assumed that it was clearly for real. Now, I'm not so certain. I don't know the answer, and I'm struggling to find out the truth - so please don't assume I have any pre-conceived notions. Thanks.

Answer 1

It depends on how you define global warming. The term literally refers to the average temperature of the planet (the oceans, land, and atmosphere just above the planet surface) rising over a specified period of time.

If you look at temperature data for the past 30 years, you could make an argument that the planet had some cooling periods during that time. If you look at the data for the past 100 years you will see a definite trend toward an increasing average temperature. Specific regions may have experienced cooling, and other may have experienced warming trends, but the average has increased over the last 100 years. This is accepted scientific fact.

There is currently a political debate over what the affects of this warming trend will be and how extreme the impact of global warming will be on the planet. In addition, there is a debate over how much of an impact human behaviour is having on the warming trend.

By burning fossil fuels, humans generate much more CO2 than would normally be found in nature. Some people believe that CO2 is a significant contributor to the "greenhouse effect" which is warming the planet. Other people argue that CO2 is only a very small contributor to the warming trend.

Some people say that a very small increase in the average temperature of the planet will occur in about 20 years and that the results could be flooding, stronger storms, and even an ice age. Other people believe that these predictions are too extreme even if the average temperature would increase.

So, global warming, in a strict sense, is definitely observable and scientifically proven. Even the president now accepts this fact. The current questions are whether humans are contributing to the warming trend in a significant way and what will be the effects of global warming. Take a look at the sites below for more discussion on the topic.

Answer 2

It is real. Everyone knows and agrees that massive burning of coal, oil and natural gas releases carbon dioxide into the air. And the level in the air can be measured accurately. And all people agree that the level is now much higher than any time in the last half million years or maybe longer. The only debate is how much of a problem that is going to be. Right now it isn't much of a problem at all. The argument is about how much warming that carbon dioxide will cause.

Answer 3

Hoax.

I would recommend you take time to view the real science.
75 minute documentary with several high level IPCC scientists and not the politicians driving the madness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XttV2C6B8pU


Media Shows Irrational Hysteria on Global Warming

"The Public Has Been Vastly Misinformed," NCPA's Deming Tells Senate Committee

12/6/2006 5:57:00 PM

To: National Desk

Contact: Sean Tuffnell of the National Center for Policy Analysis, 972-308-6481 or [e-mail]

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 /U.S. Newswire/ -- David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma and an adjunct scholar with the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), testified this morning at a special hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. The hearing examined climate change and the media. Bellow are excerpts from his prepared remarks.

"In 1995, I published a short paper in the academic journal Science. In that study, I reviewed how borehole temperature data recorded a warming of about one degree Celsius in North America over the last 100 to 150 years. The week the article appeared, I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.

"I had another interesting experience around the time my paper in Science was published. I received an astonishing email from a major researcher in the area of climate change. He said, "We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period." "The Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was a time of unusually warm weather that began around 1000 AD and persisted until a cold period known as the "Little Ice Age" took hold in the 14th century. ... The existence of the MWP had been recognized in the scientific literature for decades. But now it was a major embarrassment to those maintaining that the 20th century warming was truly anomalous. It had to be "gotten rid of."

"In 1999, Michael Mann and his colleagues published a reconstruction of past temperature in which the MWP simply vanished. This unique estimate became known as the "hockey stick," because of the shape of the temperature graph. "Normally in science, when you have a novel result that appears to overturn previous work, you have to demonstrate why the earlier work was wrong. But the work of Mann and his colleagues was initially accepted uncritically, even though it contradicted the results of more than 100 previous studies. Other researchers have since reaffirmed that the Medieval Warm Period was both warm and global in its extent.

"There is an overwhelming bias today in the media regarding the issue of global warming. In the past two years, this bias has bloomed into an irrational hysteria. Every natural disaster that occurs is now linked with global warming, no matter how tenuous or impossible the connection. As a result, the public has become vastly misinformed."

---

The NCPA is an internationally known nonprofit, nonpartisan research institute with offices in Dallas and Washington, D. C. that advocates private solutions to public policy problems. NCPA depends on the contributions of individuals, corporations and foundations that share our mission. The NCPA accepts no government grants.

http://www.usnewswire.com/

Answer 4

Global warming is not a hoax. Here's why I say that.

The problem with analyzing climate is that there's only one way to do it. You must look at a lot of data and do methodical analysis.

When you do that, all the ideas for it being natural are completely destroyed. But it takes data, not intuition. Here's a very short version of the data:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

Some people say it's solar variation. But carefully measured data on solar radiation (done repeatedly by many people in many places) shows the increase in solar radiation is 0.12 watts per meter squared. The increase in heat due to man's activities is 1.6 watts per meter squared, more than ten times as much.

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf Page 4.

Volcanoes. They create about 1% as much greenhouse gas as man does, and they create dust, which cancels that out.

http://www.geology.sdsu.edu/how_volcanoes_work/climate_effects.html

The natural world is incapable of absorbing the excess CO2 that man creates by digging up carbon buried naturally over many many years, and burning it real fast. The small teeth are nature (seasonal variation), we're the big surge upwards. We're "winning" big time.

http://scrippsco2.ucsd.edu/graphics_gallery/mauna_loa_record/mlo_record.html

Many links refuting the global warming deniers arguments here:

http://info-pollution.com/warming.htm#WEB

The "swindle" movie is bad science:

http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2355956.ece

"A Channel 4 documentary claimed that climate change was a conspiratorial lie. But an analysis of the evidence it used shows the film was riddled with distortions and errors."

http://www.medialens.org/alerts/07/0313pure_propaganda_the.php

"Pure Propaganda"

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled/

Explanations of why the science is wrong.

Serious people know that just arguing generalities doesn't work here, you actually need to look at the data.

And the data is why the vast majority of scientists think it's not natural, but us.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

People can trot out all the "logical" arguments they want. They can attack Al Gore's personal life. But the scientific data is completely overwhelming. This is the best summary of it right now. Thousands of scientists created it, and it underwent massive peer review. It's solid, and actually very conservative, as anything created by a large group of people is.

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

Global warming is real and it's us. Denying it is not scientific, it's right up there with denying we went to the moon or saying someone has a perpetual motion machine.

Answer 5

Ummm, try living in Iowa and stepping outside in the winter. Used to be freezing non-stop throughout the winter....now I can get through December without seeing snow.

Honestly, how do people deny global warming when all you have to do is step outside and observe the FACT that it is warmer now than it was 15 years ago?

Answer 6

Just look up the poster dsl67 and look at what this poster wrote on this subject "During the last ice age, what caused global warming since we didn't have cars and industry pollutants?". This question was posted earlier. Scroll down and look at the answer. It is the most complete and accurate information I have seen on Yahoo answers.

Answer 7

The Earth has always went through warmer and cooler periods. There is evidence of that. Mars' surface is also warmer. I pretty sure neiher the dinosaurs or Martians were driving SUVs around. It's just the new Communism. Another way for the Gov't to take your money and make you feel guilty. I wonder if anyone ever thought that maybe it was coming from the SUN!

Answer 8

yeah its a hoax genius