Unless the climate was static (unchanging), wouldn't the earth have to be either cooling or warming?

Question

It would just stay at the same place. For example, it cooled between 1940-1970, during the same time there was a drastic rise in CO2 emissions which lead to ice age theories. Then it started to warm, and now the warming theories. Rather than blame man for Global warming, wouldn't it make more sense to acknowledge that the earth is constantly changing?

Answer 1

Of course it's constantly changing. But the current rate of change is much much more than previous ones, and it correlates very very closely with one of the largest increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the history of the planet, and also with the rise of human population and industrialization. It's not just the change, but the extreme scale of the change that is the issue.

Answer 2

Global warming concerns are not based on the normal temperature cycles the earth has gone through over it's billion year history.

Global warming concerns are about the level of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere climbing to an unprecedented level (orders of magnitude higher than ever seen) and the effects that will have on the planet's ability to reverse the current warming trend.

In other words, man's influence of producing ever increasing amounts of CO2 will prevent the Earth from continuing it's normal cycle of heating and cooling. It will just keep on heating on an exponential scale.

Answer 3

no, co2 levels increased more rapidly after 1970 (faster than at any time in history when man lived) and temperature increased faster with it. As the earth heats oceans release CO2 and the greenhouse effect increases (a domino effect).
It would be completely stupid to assume the sun is solely responsible considered the warming trend is initiated at the same time as a massive boom in human co2 emmisions.
from 1940-1970 [co2] increased 15 ppm
from 1970-2000 [co2] increased 60 ppm

Answer 4

What Bush's neo-con apologists who are ignorant of even basic science don't get is that thefact that there are normal climate cycles has nothing to do with whether THIS climate change is man-made--which it is.

And they are also so uneducated they don't comprehend that scientific questions aren't settled by their political rhetoric. They can yap from now till the cows come home--facts don't change to suit their propaganda.

Answer 5

Constant change is one thing.

Marked change in one direction over an extended period of time directly correlating with the industrial age of mankind is another.

Wake the f**k up. There is a 100% consensus in the scientific community that global warming is a trend - one that is not necessarily caused, but is definitely exacerbated by human activity.

Anyone that tells you otherwise is being paid to do so.

Answer 6

Absolutely. However, speeding up the process is a different thing all together. Are we prepared to deal with unforeseen consequences such as the disappearance of honey bees? Without bees nothing pollinates plants, where will we be without fruit and vegetables?

Answer 7

Nothing stays forever, not even the earth and sky

Answer 8

We can look back a hundred or a thousand years and see one thing or another.

http://www.stuffintheair.com/ancient-climates.html

We can look back a million years or a hundred-million and see things entirely different. If you look enough, you will see that changes occur and they take us in all directions.

Answer 9

your absolutley right. man plays a small role, but the earth goes through heating and cooling cycles naturally.