global warming?

Question

hasn't there always been a global warming trend since the earth used to be in an ice age?

Answer 1

My stock Global Warming answer:

First, I suggest you read this article:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

Anyway, on to specific points:

1. Oceans are heating up. Yes, it does take lots of energy to heat the oceans. If they are heating, think about how much energy we've already poured into the global environment. Also, only a few degrees temperature change can make a HUGE difference. The oceans in the arctic are maybe three degrees warmer than they were this point last century, but the arctic ice cap is melting in ways never seen before. For example, there never used to be open water in the canadian archipelego, even in the summer - now, there are miles and miles of open sea.
On the canadian archipelago: http://newark.cms.udel.edu/~cats/healy_2005/science/index.html
On sea ice generally:
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article1603667.ece

2. Some people will say that solar activity is increasing as part of an 11-year cycle. Yes, solar activity is increasing, but most scientists believe that the effect on the earth's climate has been negligible.
From a NASA press release: "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..."
Source: http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/19990408/

3. Another frequent response from skeptics is "global cooling," a weather phenomenon that was loudly touted in the 1970s by some scientists. It's true that some climatologists (though not all) believed that we might be in a period of global cooling, it should also be noted that we knew a lot less about weather patterns then than we do now. Scientists also used to believe that the earth was flat, and that the body's health was regulated by the four humours. Now some people claim that the earth is round and that diseases are caused by genes and microbes. According to global warming skeptics who latch onto "global cooling" statements from 30 yeras ago, we should forget everything doctors and geographers say because they said something different once, too. That's not how science works - we learn, we study, we refine, we learn more, we study more...we don't just tell people to shut up because their predecessors were wrong before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

4. Many skeptics will say that what humans put out in terms of CO2 is far less than volcanoes, fires, or other animals. As for volcanoes, fires, and animals - those have always been there. They should not have any net effect on the planet's climate. The only changing factor among those and humans is humans and our increased activity.

5. If global temperatures increase, then the temperature difference between temperature zones will remain the same. So there will always be extreme weather events like heavy snowfall in Central Park in April. But you can't look at one data point and use it to make a trend - otherwise, you could say that all white people have red hair, because you just saw a white person with red hair. You'd have to ignore all of the evidence to the contrary.

6. One frequent question skeptics ask is "how did the last ice age end?" Well, that's hard to say. Ice ages have been on cycles for hundreds of millions of years, it's true, but the problem is that the last one ended right about the same time that people discovered farming. That might be a coincidence, but it might not - the question then becomes, "Did mankind's increased use of agriculture alter the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere and warm up the earth enough to end the last ice age, or did the end of the last ice age contribute to farming?" It's a tough question, but you should read about the Early Anthropocene Hypothesis:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_anthropocene

7. Finally, and I think this is the most persuasive argument ofr why we should change our behavior as a society: Both sides in the global warming debate have something to gain and something to lose. However, the anti-global warming side has much to gain by continuing to fight change - they have a direct expense that they can expect by having to change the way they do things, and by having to find ways to clean up their acts. Keep in mind that some of the most vocal critics of global warming theory are those who are either industry insiders themselves or who are funded by industry. On the flip side, those who are trying to convice the world of the reality of Global Warming have no direct benefit that they will gain - most do not own, say, environmental cleanup businesses. Their benefit is based entirely off of a belief in doing the right thing.

Answer 2

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 3

Awsome answer Brian! Couldn't have said it better myself.

As far as the cycles of the Earth's temperatures:
Yes, they have cycled. However, over the last 100,000 to 200,000 years, they have been bounded above. In other words, the average temperature never got above a certain point. But now, we are not only above this point, but the rate of change is still positive. If you know calculus, then you would describe the current trend's second derivative as Positive (aka, the rate of change is accelerating).
And, of course, this has been increasing since the industrial revolution.

I'm frustrated that the people who criticize the scientific support are people who don't know squat about science and statistics.
If you want to do research, don't search the internet. Look in academic/scientific journals. For example the journal Climate Dynamics did some modeling. Here's an abstract: http://www.springerlink.com/content/ujxgvmuknjbej5w9/

Answer 4

The earth has gone through MANY ice ages and MANY warming cycles. But amazingly, only this one has something other than natural causes. Well.. I mean only the last 100 years of this one..

It's easy to see why the Chicken Little crowd doesn't like to look at the past.

Answer 5

The earth heats up in a routinely basis, but meterologists have noticed that the trend is getting higher and higher in both heat temperatures and Carbon Dioxide as well. Some scientists say that global warming isn't true but it is and most of those scientists are paid by the government to say such things. Global Warming is definitely happening, but we seem to try not to notice. Better get ready for a very, very hot summer.

Answer 6

That's called natural global warming. Artificial global warming is caused by Al Gore not selling enough carbon credits (or you not buying enough, whatever).

Answer 7

One reason is that the sun's output has gone up by .2% in the last 40 years and Mars and Pluto are also heating up. Read all about it in a 2003 article that everyone chooses to ignore.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html

Answer 8

It still awes me that people don't believe that we are causing incredible damage to our planet. baffling really. well, anyways.... good luck on your research, hope truth rings clear for you.