Global warming...?

Question

I have been convinced by a documentary called 'The Great Global Warming Swindell' that our carbon usage has very little - if any - impact on the temperature of the planet.... The main factor in determining the planets temperature is (Surprise, Surprise) The Sun (and no I don't mean the national newspaper).

What do you think?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4340135300469846467

Answer 1

The theory of man-made global warming is false, it is based on falsified or incomplete data. Lets take a look at what the global warming crowd claims, they say that the human output of CO2 is causing the greenhouse effect which is warming the planet. To see how outrageous this claim is try to guess how much of our atmosphere is made up of CO2, the correct answer is 0.03% of our atmosphere, almost nothing. How can such a small part of our atmosphere have such an effect on our entire planet, correct answer it can’t. Greenhouse gases exist naturally and have always been in our atmosphere. Greenhouse gases such as CH4 (methane), N2O (Nitrous Oxide), and water vapor are all put out into the atmosphere naturally in far greater concentrations than humans could ever match. Let’s take a look at water vapor, water vapor makes up between 1-4% of the atmosphere far more than CO2. Water vapor is given off into the atmosphere due to evaporation, so evaporation causes much more global warming than humans ever could. Other natural sources such as volcanic eruptions and the decomposition of plant and animal matter also put far more greenhouse gases than humans ever could.
So what is causing global warming? Well first of all the earth may not even be warming. http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature/ This is a collection of global temperatures collected by NASA that shows a general cooling trend especially around the polar ice caps. So assuming the earth is warming what could be causing it, the sun. Look at this graph also put out by NASA: http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/17jan_solcon.htm, it shows that the intensity of the sun is directly correlated to global temperatures and recent studies have shown that the sun is now warming than ever before, coincidence? I think not. Also consider that the other planets in our solar system, Mars in particular, are also warming: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
You have to keep in mind that the earth goes through natural cycles of warming and cooling, take for example the ice age and later warming of the earth enough to melt the ice.
Advocates of global warming will try and post evidence but the fact is most evidence for global warming comes in the form of general statements like “think of your children/grandchildren” that try to guilt you into agreeing with them. These ads are devoid of scientific proof and seek to toy with your conscience. Every once in a while you will see a graph submitted as evidence mostly from http://www.ipcc.ch/. Take a look for yourself, I search in vain for proof of global warming on this site, sure there are dozens of graphs showing the same data: CO2 rising along with global temperatures but where are the graphs for other greenhouse gases that make up a greater percentage of our atmosphere and are put out naturally, or graphs showing the percentage of greenhouse gases put out by humans verses the gases put out by natural sources. These graphs are not included because they disprove the theory of man made global warming. The IPCC has had a questionable past, it has published a deliberately falsified graph, the so called hockey stick graph, which left out a period of warming during the 1400’s. This warming period in the 1400’s was more dramatic than what we are seeing today, and it took place long before humans industrialized. This falsification was proven and a reprint of the graph appeared in the journal Nature. You may have seen claims that there is a scientific consensus on global warming like this one: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686, this is an absolute lie, do you need proof? Here http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm the signatures of over 17,000 scientists who disagree with the theory of man made global warming (check out the report on this site it does an excellent job of disproving global warming). You may have also seen reports about ice cores supposedly proving global warming, this is not true. Here is the truth about ice cores http://www.john-daly.com/zjiceco2.htm.
You may have the question why anyone would support this obviously false theory, the answer is money. Average people with no scientific background are being converted to the global warming crowd by the dozens due to the repression of evidence against global warming. This mass of people is the reason why notable people are jumping on the global warming bandwagon. Politicians are supporting global warming for votes, scientists are joining for media time and grants, and CEO’s are pledging their allegiance to gain customers who want to shop where the environment is being supported.
You may also wonder why I care, you may think we can only help the environment if we agree with global warming what’s wrong with that? I want to distinguish between global warming and helping the environment. I have no problem with environmentalist causes, in fact I support them, but global warming is taking this idea to the extreme. If you were to follow the guidelines set forth by people like Al Gore your lifestyle would be, these people want to tell you what light bulbs to use. The main reason however is money, why waste millions on studying global warming when we could be rebuilding third world countries and helping the poor. Global warming is a fear tactic used to get your money and your vote by unscrupulous members of society. Hopefully this will just fade away like the global cooling scare which was brought upon us in the 1970’s by the same sort of people using the same tactics. A last link http://www.worldclimatereport.com/ possibly the best resource for answering many of the questions raised by global warming. I urge anyone who believes in man-made global warming to look into some of the resources I have presented. Do not sacrifice your money, time, vote, and conscience to the greedy members of society who are blinding you to the truth for their own greed.

Answer 2

No sensible scientist would dispute that the sun is the main influence on the temperature of the planet, but greenhouse gases are the amplifier and we are cranking up the volume.

Watch the popumentary again and notice how they don't show any data correlating solar activity with temperature after the 1980s.

Then take a look at Carl Wunsch's comments about how he feels mis-interpreted by the programme:
http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papersonline/responseto_channel4.htm

Then consider the physics of carbon dioxide - the programme state that because it is such a tiny amount in the atmosphere it can't possible have an effect. Do you think if I sprinkled your chips with cyanide would you eat it becasue the cyanide is only a small part of the whole meal? I doubt it, if you have any sense.

And the budgets - what is emitted by natural sources is taken up by natural sources expect for a little plus or minus which changes the climate on the long natural timescale. So any extra on top of this balance is all bonus carbon dioxide, which sits in the atmosphere and absorbs infra-red energy. It's not the absolute numbers that are important its the fluxes, the difference between what goes up and what comes down, and most of our emissions stay up and have led to an increase in 100ppm in the atmosphere - that doesn't sound much, but ice ages and warm periods had CO2 of betwee 150 and 270ppm, now we're at 376.

And the time lag issue? As the earth's orbit changes and brings it closer to the sun the oceans warm and release more CO2, then warm some more and release even more CO2.

You can't expect a 'popumentary' to sneak up on the laws of physics. If you still don't believe me when I say the GGWS is nonsense then I expect you will within ten years.

Answer 3

I've just finished studying this a university and the evidence does seem to point to man having very little impact on global warming.

Global warming is real and has been happening for Thousands of years, at the moment the world is coming out of a cold period peaking during the 15th century and is slowly heating up, the world is still colder than it was 1000 years ago.

The hole in the ozone is an unusual as it should not heat the planet up but cool it down, the ozone is what creates the greenhouse effect, any hole and the heat would escape.

Man made global warming is a myth, plants produce 100x more CO2 (decomposition, etc), volcanoes over 1000x more than that, than human pollutants. A point that seems to be missed a lot by the media is the CO2 lag time. Most CO2 is stored in the oceans of the world, the deep you go the high the concentration, for the amount of CO2 to be the cause of the heating of the planet it must show heating graphs to ocean water temperature graphs. It takes around 800 years for the oceans to react to the surface temperature so the all CO2 levels must be offset by a period of 800 years against surface temperature and this shows almost no coloration between to two.

I'm not convinced regarding the storm argument either. How are tornados and the storms over the mid west caused. Cold air mixing with hot. If the cold air isn't there then the storms will not form, or at least to the same intensity. Hurricanes are formed when warm air rised and is cooled by the cold air above, again if this air was warm hurricans would not form.

Answer 4

As a matter of fact a Danish scientist explains the global warming with the variation of flow of the cosmic rays, being these related to the solar activity and responsible for the formation of water droplets in the upper atmosphere. The presence of these (to us) invisible clouds explain the reduction or increase of the radiation reflected by our planet. On the other hand, as a technician, I can tell you that the standard air composition of 1960 (the standard air composition is used for combustion calculations) indicated a content of carbon dioxide much lower than the 0.36 vol.% measured today. Since we cannot influence the cosmic rays, let's satisfy ourselves with the reduction of the carbon usage. We will be saving some money, some oil import, some bronchial diseases.

Answer 5

If you wish to receive grant money for climate research, do you think that you'll get a cheque if you say," I need the grant, as I think that I can prove that the figures that the current paradigm is based upon are wrong" ? The great environmentalist, David Bellamy, has been silenced, and refused airtime. There is still no proven causative link between the amount of Co2 in the atmosphere, and an increase in global temperatures. The WWWF photographs of the polar bears swimming were taken in the Arctic summer; when the ice cap partially melts, as they couldn't get up to photograph in the winter. The ice was too thick! The East-Anglian uni research figures. "Oh! The figures don't match our expectations. Oh well. Keep quiet. Because we know that we are right." When the belief, and the faith is more important than squarely facing the legitimate doubts of a lot of non grant-supported scientists, science has been superceded by religious zealots. As Oliver Cromwell colourfully said." I pray thee, in the bowels of Christ, consider that thou mayest be wrong."

Answer 6

Who can really blame politicians and policy makers for latching on to global warming as a device for justifying measures for dealing with our impending energy problems?

However you cut the deck, existing and projected energy requirements are not going to be met for much longer by using up fossil fuel reserves.

Solving long term problems is a nightmare for political systems based on consensus and short term goals.

"Global warming" as a concept, whatever the underlying reality, has a lot going for it in that a lot of disparate groups within society can sign up to it:-

The pro-nuclear lobby have a new rationale for promoting their cause.

The tree-huggers have a justification for promoting an alternative lifestyle.

The capitalists have a social responsibility rationale for maximizing profits.

It gives those on the left a reason to promote social responsibility backed up by central control.

It's a justification for doing what wealthy people always do when a resource issue occurs. Price the peasants and poor people out of the market altogether.

Answer 7

That is a plausible idea. But so is the idea that CO2 is the cause. And there are other plausible ideas too.

But there is no doubt that people are increasing the amount of CO2 in the air and that cannot go on forever because at some point it will be a problem. If not the warming then the toxicity. Life in the oceans is already suffering from chemical changes in sea water caused by the extra CO2 dissolved in it.

Answer 8

Considering the Sun's output has changed little during the last few hundred years (this includes the Sun spot cycle) then on what grounds do you base your argument? Solar astronomers vouch for this, not climatologists, politicians etc.

I saw the program that you are talk about and there are some very serious holes in their argument (read on for details).

You appear to accepted the view of a few scientists against those of the vast majority of scientists from various disiplines.

This is a response to the program http://ocean.mit.edu/~cwunsch/papersonline/responseto_channel4.pdf

Also see http://www.ipcc.ch/

Answer 9

I'd just like to respond to the idiot who brought up how much CO2 is in our atmosphere compared to other gasses as to why global warming is false...get a clue, it's not always the gasses that are most abundant that cause the most...consider Nitrogen, which makes up 74% of our atmosphere...should we be using Nitrogen tanks instead of Oxygen tanks since oxygen is only about 23%...The answer is no freakshow...

Answer 10

there is a reason why the sun does not directly cause us harm and that reason is a part of the atmosphere that is very thin, because of its nature the pollution of the atmosphere by CO2 is causing it not to function like it should so the suns rays are more dangerous to man as we are kinda trapping the rays hence creating global warming which is changing our climate drastically. over the past 5 years very many countries have recorded their hottest temps ever is it all a coincidence? i personally dont think so

Answer 11

I didn't see that programme myself, but I believe there MUST be other reasons for global warming. Although I agree that we're not solely responsible for the changes in the planet, I still like to do my bit to help, by recycling etc. After all, who wants a messy planet if it is possible to reuse stuff?