what do you think about global warming?

Question

long answers please on your opinion.

Answer 1

I think the facts prove this is real. I also think the causes have been proven to be true. We have become one of the biggest causes of global warming. With scientific study correlating the industrial revolution and the use of fossil fuels, there's no question, we have and are contributing and it's a real problem.

Unfortunately, money and wealth is GOD to many. Look no further than the speeches were our president said the economy would be adversely affected! Further proof that money is god to many is the fact Tobacco is still being sold around the world. Absolutely no medicinal value and proven to addict and kill yet, they are being solid in record numbers for record profits. Here's the real tip off. Our own government agencies have gathered and analyzed the very data proving global warming IS in fact being impacted by human activity.

The most powerful economic force in the world is advocating the death of our planet as we know it so long as at the end of the race, they have the most money.

Answer 2

Global warming has now become a complex scientific, engineering, political, and ethical issue, which is why even as some issues are resolved or agreed upon, the battles will nevertheless expand. There are at least five separate questions regarding the matter of global warming, which are:

1) Is global warming actually happening?
2) Is it the activities of man that's responsible for it?
3) How severe will the consequences be of this global warming?
4) Can anything be done about it to ameliorate the effects?
5) Should anything be done about it, and if so, how much?

The scientific community today largely agree, as with the majority of the people, that global warming is indeed happening, and we are now experiencing and will continue to experience climatic changes. Furthermore, the correlation is clear now between the exponential rise of fossil fuel burning with the rise of atmospheric CO2 levels, and the rise of average worldwide temperatures in the past 100 years. How severe will it be? We have the alarmists that predict the destruction of mankind and Earth, and we have the deniers that say, "This will be no different from the nice warm Medieval period we had a while back, let's enjoy it". The truith lies somewhere between the extremes. Can anything be done about it? Yes, even energy companies are willing to build CO2 sequestration equipment in power plants for a reasonable rise in billable energy costs, if Congress will mandate it, for one example. For another example, an extreme proposal has been made to disperse massive quantities of sulfate aerosols to cool things off until better means of controlling it comes along. And finally there's the question, should anything be done about it? This is the most political question of all, because it addresses the question of what people want for the environment, and whether or not they're willing to expend resources, when we have so many other problems to address. It's like the plaint, "Why are we sending men and rockets into outer space when we've got so many starving children on Earth to feed first?" Unfortunately, science cannot answer that, that's for people to decide, and that will guarantee that the "global warming problem" will never go away at least for the rest of the 21st century. It may even surpass global terrorism as the major geopolitical problem of the 21st century.

Answer 3

I think there is too much evidence from world renowned scientists to dismiss that humans are part of what is causing global warming.

I think this topic is going to turn out to be just like tobacco: 20 years from now, everyone is going to say "How could they not have known?!?"

There are still those who don't believe humans have a part in global warming, yet I don't understand how anyone can be so blind/ignorant. In America alone, most families have 2 cars; the majority of Americans commute; Trucks are all over the highways here. These things alone are only some carbon emissions that are being released into our atmosphere. And people still think we have no effect. Plus, the population is increasing at an alarming rate all over the world, and this is causing more pollution.

I think anyone who takes a look at what is going on in their environment around them should know that the world is changing, and not for hte better.

Yes, global warming has happened in the past and may be a natural occurence, however we are speeding it up.

The US and Australia are the only two industrialized countries who are so far behind in using green resources and admitting that humans are helping cause global warming. Isn't it time that we woke up??? I thought the US was supposed to be a progressive leader. Seems to me we are lagging way behind.

Answer 4

I have posted this before, but since you want long answers I'll post it again.

1. "Inspection of the global atmospheric temperature
changes during the last 1,000 years (Fig. 11) shows that
the global average temperature dropped about 2C over
the last millennium. This means that we live in the cooling geologic epoch (which comprises most of the Holocene), and the global warming observed during the latest 150 years is just a short episode in the geologic history. The current global warming is most likely a combined effect of increased solar and tectonic activities and cannot be attributed to the increased anthropogenic impact on the atmosphere. Humans may be responsible for less than 0.01C (of approximately 0.56C (1F) total average atmospheric heating during the last century)."

2. Despite the increasing trend in atmospheric CO2 concentration, the patterns of 20-year and 60-year oscillation of global temperature are all in falling. Therefore, if CO2
concentration remains constant at present, the CO2 greenhouse effect will be deficient in counterchecking the natural cooling of global climate in the following 20 years. Even though the CO2 greenhouse effect on global climate change is unsuspicious, it could have been excessively exaggerated. It is high time to re-consider the trend of global climate changes."

3. "Physical, mathematical, and observational grounds are employed to show that there is no physically meaningful global temperature for the Earth in the context of the isue of global warming. While it is always possible to construct statistics for any given set of local temperature data, an infinite range of such statistics is mathematically permissible if physical principles provide no explicit basis for choosing among them. Distinct and equally valid statistical rules cn and do show topposite trends when applied to the results of computations from physical models and real dta in the atmosphere. A given temperature field can be interpreted as both 'warming' and 'cooling' simultaneously, making the concept of warming inthe context of the issue of global warming physically ill-posed."

4. "The Arctic was as warm as or warmer in the late 1930s than it was at the end of the 20th century. "

Just a few of the hundreds of reasons I do not believe that global warming is anthropogenic in cause, and quite possibly flawed as a premise by use of a non-meaningful (thermodynamically) global mean temperature.

In adition, take all of the other information that is out there, be it cloud cover information, cosmic rays, the suns irradiance, the amount of CO2 "exhaled" from the land and oceans vs. that of humankind, and you begin to see a lot of information coming to the fore that presents a significant challenge to the premise of anthropogenic global warming.

EDIT:

Science Mag only found 928 articles from 1993 to 2003? I found 16,803 articles relating to the phrase "climate change" on Web of Science. That leads me to believe that the "study" was flawed or disingenuous. The results if this "study", therefore, are unreliable.

Answer 5

Yes I believe there is Global Warming but not all of it is man made. There was a time when most of this planet was hot, then came the Ice Age, not one ICE AGE but at lease five of them, why something changed with the planet. What no one knows. But this is true for each ice age the world had: there was also a warming up period that fallowed: WHY? We do not know! We only know that it did happen, and that it changed the face of the planet, we also know that man kind had nothing to do with causing the ICE AGE or the fallowing warning up period that fallowed. What I am sure of is this:this is natural but we are making things worse with all the smoke and bombs blowing dirt into the Atmosphere: Yet this mite be the ALL FATHER'S plan for us. To change earth as we know it! Can we stop it or reverse it: I have no idea. I believe no one knows except the ALL FATHER. It is in his hands!

Answer 6

The Current hype is driven by Marxist takeover of environmental movement. Pure and simple politics.

Watch this video, you decide.
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 7

Global warming is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans in recent decades and its projected continuation.

Global average air temperature near Earth's surface rose 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.3 ± 0.32 °F) in the last century. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes, "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations,"[1] which leads to warming of the surface and lower atmosphere by increasing the greenhouse effect. Other phenomena such as solar variation and volcanoes have probably had a warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950, but a cooling effect since 1950.[1] These conclusions have been endorsed by at least 20 scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the G8 states. Some individual scientists disagree with parts of this conclusion as does the American Association of Petroleum Geologists.[2]

Models referenced by the IPCC predict that global temperatures are likely to increase by 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 to 11.5 °F) between 1990 and 2100.[1] The range of values reflects the use of differing scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions as well as uncertainties regarding climate sensitivity. Although most studies focus on the period up to 2100, warming and sea level rise are expected to continue for more than a millennium even if no further greenhouse gases are released after this date.[1] This reflects the long average atmospheric lifetime of carbon dioxide (CO2).

An increase in global temperatures can in turn cause other changes, including a rising sea level and changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation. There may also be increases in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, though it is difficult to connect specific events to global warming. Other consequences include changes in agricultural yields, glacier retreat, reduced summer streamflows, species extinctions and increases in the ranges of disease vectors.

Remaining scientific uncertainties include the exact degree of climate change expected in the future, and especially how changes will vary from region to region across the globe. A hotly contested political and public debate also has yet to be resolved, regarding whether anything should be done, and what could be cost-effectively done to reduce or reverse future warming, or to deal with the expected consequences. Most national governments have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol aimed at combating greenhouse gas emissions.

Answer 8

In a study of 928 published scientific articles with the keyword "climate change" published from 1993-2003, the journal Science found that not a single one contrasted the consensus that antropogenic (caused by humans) warming is occurring (see the link for details).

Furthermore, "the American Meteorological Society the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling."

When it comes to global warming, opinions simply don't matter. The evidence and understanding that evidence is what is important. I've analyzed the data personally, attended numerous presentations, and read dozens of papers. There is simply little room for doubt that this is occurring and that we are the primary (possibly only) reason. In fact, the current global warming is in contrast to a natural cooling trend that we were in before we suddenly disrupted the system in a fashion that has not occurred for tens of millions of years (if at all). It's not simply that we're making it warmer - it's that we are doing it at a rate that the earth has never experienced before.

There is one final point I have to make - the only people who strongly oppose global warming are those who personally benefit from us ignoring the problem, like energy companies or the current administration which has direct, explicit ties to that the industry. The shame is that these same companies are enjoying record profits, the highest ever earned any companies ever, at the expense of taxpayers and the people of the world.

Answer 9

I am for Global Warming. I think that the earth is still too cold, and that an 8-10 degree (farenheit) increase in temperature would be good for most of the planet.

Answer 10

Global warming has happened many times in the history of this planet. This is fact. As for our contribution, sure, some of the things we have done has contributed. But it is such a minor contribution, it doesn't tip the scale one way or the other. One large volcanic eruption will create more harmful emissions than all the contributions man has made in his history.We didn't create it and we definitely cannot change it. Least we torch our selves off the planet with a nuclear holocaust. Then we wont have to feel guilty for having created it. Which we didn't.