Global Warming?

Question

Is it really as serious a threat as people like Al Gore are making it out to be? Give evidence to back up your opinion. Thanks!

Answer 1

Nope I do not, not at least in the way it has been popularised in the media in the recent past. The media is stirring up loose scientific findings into a theory but its still theory as there are further scientific studies that need to be carried out to turn this theory into a fact. (The fact will either be, yes we are causing global warming or no we are not causing global warming).
The reasons I dont believe global warming to be accurate as they are suggesting is this:
1) Milancovitch Cycles have not been taken into account (these basically are the way the earth rotates, wobbles/tilts on its axis and rotates around the sun)
2) The volume of C=2 in the atmosphere is (if memory seerves) 0.014% which is pretty low. The biggest greenhouse gas is water vapour!
3) The volume of CO2 held in the oceans is about 2/3rds more that that in the atmosphere around 36 Gigatons Cubic.
4) The warmed the oceans get the more gas it releases.
5) Salt, due to its ionic content, causes the oceans to warm up .i.e it will have more of a bearing on the temperature of the planet since the more salt in the ocean means increased oceanic current temperatures i.e. the Gulf Stream.
6) CO2 never has and never will be a control on climate, its only ever an indicator, big difference here!
7) The temperatures that the studies have been on are surface temperatures not atmospheric temperatures which if there was a case of major global warming which we are being told to accept, these temperatures would also increase; they are actually decreasing.
8) The sun has more control over our climate than people think.
9) The cycle of CO2 is approx 800years behind the land temperature.
10) The Stern report (UK based)was written by an economist; since when did an economist become a respected scientist (Incidentally this report was written to massively exaggerate the findings.
11) Why are people so arrogant to think that we can control climate? Climate controls us in every shape and form, it will get hotter or cooler as it pleases.

These are just some of the opinions that I have to suggest that the Global Warming that the media are portraying to exist doesn't.

Answer 2

Forget Al Gore. He has nothing to do with the science. Here's the evidence. And I hope you look at the real evidence, the links.

This is science and what counts is the data.

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

Here are two summaries of the mountain of data that convinced Admiral Truly, short and long.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

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

It's (mostly) not the sun:

http://www.stopglobalwarming.org/sgw_actionitems.asp

And the first graph aboves shows that the sun is responsible for about 10% of it. When someone says it's the sun they're saying that thousands of climatologists are stupid and don't look at the solar data. That's ridiculous.

Here's the extent of the very serious threat:

http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNews/idUSL052735320070407

http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM6avr07.pdf

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/?p=1190

"Military leaders say global warming threatens US security"

Science is quite good about exposing bad science or hoaxes:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/ATG/polywater.html

There's a large number of people who agree that it is real and mostly caused by us, who are not liberals, environmentalists, stupid, or conceivably part of a "conspiracy". Just three examples of many:

"Global warming is real, now, and it must be addressed."

Lee Scott, CEO, Wal-Mart

"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."

Senator John McCain, Republican, Arizona

“DuPont believes that action is warranted, not further debate."

Charles O. Holliday, Jr., CEO, DuPont

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/329.php?nid=&id=&pnt=329&lb=hmpg1

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

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

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics. Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point,You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/

http://www.realclimate.org

"climate science from climate scientists"

Answer 3

From the word itself we must get an idea about the issue. The name itself suggest that the condition in which the temperature of the earth is rising. Just imagine a condition on earth if the temperature touches 50centigrade. we wont be able to live in such a condition. The crops wont grow there will be less water availabe as the water in the environment will be evapourated fast. There will be heavy rain in one place and sever heat in the other place. It will give rise to many calamities and there will be lots of diseases spreading in the world. Its high time that we take actions to prevent global warming or else we wont be able to predict its effects. BETTER LATE THAN NEVER.

Answer 4

Global Warming is not the threat people make it out to be.
My evidence;
Asteroid 1997 XF11.
Will hit Earth and kill us all in October 2028. I assume this be way before Global Warming is a concern.

Answer 5

FACT OR FICTION

FICTION
for many North Americans ,but they are used to fiction and feel more comfortable with fairytales instead of the truth,

Many blindly believe that our fate is in Gods hands ,and their focus is on the beautifull heaven that awaits ,they are not to concerned with the world their children will inherrit

whilst others wish to enjoy an Earthly paradise ,with out having to die first,they care what happens here and want to help the planet

there may come a time that for the sake of our survival the two views will be seperated in to Enemies and friends of the planet

World leaders are not concerned with the well being of the masses ,on the contrary .it was stated at a conference in Copenhagen,in 1998,by Kissinger, that the Agenda demanded a decrease in the world population of 60%,and you cannot achieve this if you start saving everybody.

scientists who work for politicians ,get paid by these politicians and they have downplayed the facts because solutions are expensive and means change and change effects many peoples incomes,and upsets profit margins,so most of the world is kept in the dark of the real things that are going on.for political and economic reasons

HOWEVER CLIMATE CHANGE IS FACT FOR MILLIONS
Global warming is a very complex collection of many effects

this text only covers some aspects of global warming mainly man made desertification

industrial contamination ,the contaminating effects of the cities ,is another story

there are natural cycles in the planets life
but mans existance has its effects,and this is increasing with overpopulation,putting strains on Natural resources and increasing contaminations as well as destructions of essential componants the ensure living conditions for all life forms

in North Africa,India,Mexico ,millions of people are effected by land loss and desertification and some have died as a result

in china, thousands of what used to be farmers are running for their lives from the dust storms that have burried their towns and turned their lands into dessert,

,the Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year
and all of the desserts we know are a results of mans actions ,and they are increasing ,not getting less ,in the dinosaurs days ,there were very few desserts.

collectively this planet is drying up because of bad farming practices like,over grazing and fertilizers,

each degree rise in temperature means 10%crop loss

and there is less and less water (because of deforestation),to irrigate this production ,
and there are less and less farmers to do it..
and there are 70 million more peole every year that have to eat and drink and wash

who are overpumping deep carbon aquifiers
who are plowing more and more unstable lands because they have lost so many million hectares to desertification ,
because of bad farming practises ,such as using fertilizers and heavy machinary or over grazing

RISING SEAS
The northpole is melting ,and we will know it without ice in our life times.
this does not affect the sea level because it is ice that is already in the water.but the melting ice from Green land and the south pole ,are another matter.



http://www.greenpeace.org/international/...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/natur...



if forrest are being exchanged for ashalt,concrete and desserts
what is gonna keep this planet habitable for us

We as humanity can behave in a less stressful manner as far as the Environment is concerned ,but it will mean global co operation between all countries ,and taking into account human nature and the world politics ,it is unlikely that this will happen,

Answer 6

yes..def. i have watched many things on global warming and i talk to my science teacher a lot he showed us the effects that humans have on the world..if you pay attention to all the places that are mostly made of ice you will see they are slowly melting..and the more they melt the more water is pushed up on coatlines...so in some years california and new york will be covered with water

Answer 7

of course it is. do i need to, the evidence is everywhere

Answer 8

The theory of man-made global warming is false. Anyone who believes otherwise has not investigated the evidence or is purposely remaining ignorant to the legitimate opposition to global warming. I have given up an one and a half hours to watch “An Inconvenient Truth” so I ask you to do the same and watch the movie detailing the opposition.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=great+global+warming+swindle.
And another video for those of you short on time: http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=3
Some more general resources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_controversy
http://www.friendsofscience.org/index.php?ide=4
http://www.john-daly.com/

CO2 is not causing the globe to warm the opposite is true, the warming is increasing the atmospheric CO2. When the world heats it gradually increases the temperature of the oceans which serve as the largest CO2 sink. As the oceans heat up they release CO2 which is stored in them. The information comes from the same data Al Gore uses, the temperature always goes up before the concentration of CO2 goes up.
http://www.lavoisier.com.au/papers/articles/ninelieslaunch.pdf#search=%22vostok%20figure%20125%22

CO2 makes up only .03% of our atmosphere. Water vapor, another greenhouse gas, makes up 1-4% of our atmosphere, this gas is acknowledged to be the main greenhouse gas. All human activities combined contribute only 6 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere each year. Animals, through respiration, decomposition, etc contribute 150 Gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere. So humans contribute only a small amount of CO2 to the atmosphere which is already in very small concentrations in the atmosphere.
http://oco.jpl.nasa.gov/science.html This is where my data came from, it is an interesting site, it displays the same graphics as Al Gore in his movie but it tells how low the human contribution is. So Al Gore is using the same data but coming to a different conclusion, who do you want to believe a politician with no scientific training or the NASA CO2 laboratory, a group of scientists who spend their entire careers studying CO2.

We know the greenhouse effect is real it is a necessary effect to keep our planet at a habitable temperature. However if our current warming is due to greenhouse gasses it would cause warming in the troposphere , but the troposphere is actually getting cooler.
http://wwwghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/temperature/. That points to other explanations to our current warming.

So what is causing our current warming, it is the sun.
http://web.dmi.dk/solar-terrestrial/space_weather/
http://www.aip.org/enews/physnews/2003/split/642-2.html
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060926_solar_activity.html
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/040803093903.htm
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2003/17jan_solcon.htm
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=900
The fact that only the earth’s surface is warming points to direct heating from the sun rather than heating due to greenhouse gasses. Also other planets in our solar system are warming pointing to a common cause of warming, that common cause being the sun.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/070312_solarsys_warming.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/mgs-092005.html
http://www.nasa.gov/vision/universe/solarsystem/mgs-092005-images.html

The global warming crowd says our glaciers are melting and animals will suffer this is another false claim.
http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V8/N46/EDIT.jsp
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA235.html
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/

The global warming crowd also insists our seas are rising due to global warming, however this is not entirely correct. Seas in certain areas are rising, there is no global sea rise. The seas have been rising ever since the last ice age: http://globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Holocene_Sea_Level_png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Post-Glacial_Sea_Level.png
These two sources show that sea level increase now has actually leveled off from a very steep rise for the past 20 thousand years. For proof of this look here:
http://www.climateark.org/articles/1999/markhotd.htm
A mark left by Sir James Clark Ross, an Antarctic explorer, in 1841 is still visible. Not only that but the mark was placed in 1841 to show how high the sea was, not only is the mark visible it is 30cm above current sea levels. Now it is possible that the mark was placed at high tide and the picture taken at low, but even then the mark would still be above current sea levels. The seas have risen dramatically over the past thousand years not due in any part to us. If you want proof of that take a look at one of the dozens of ancient underwater cities that spot the globe. When these cities were built they were on land now they are deep underwater: http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2004/s1107203.htm
This shows a dramatic increase in sea level during human time but long before the world became industrialized.

The global warming crowd also claims a scientific consensus on the issue, this is wrong in two ways. One, there is no consensus, this is a false claim to make you believe in global warming by suppressing the opposition. http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
Second, even if there was a consensus it would mean nothing, science is not politics, you don’t vote on theories to determine their legitimacy.
Here’s 21 pages of websites that disagree with global warming.
http://www.climatechangedebate.org/documents/CCD_read.pdf
The thought that the only scientists who disagree with global warming are paid by oil companies is simply a stupid statement with no reality. This is the most illogical argument by people in support of global warming. Aside from being completely false it begs another question: Who pays global warming supporters? The answer is big environmental agencies that make millions off of global warming each year by teaching, publishing books, and selling environmentally clean products.

The IPCC is the main supporter of global warming, their statements are defended blindly by people who don’t want to admit that global warming is not real. People will claim that they took into account natural sources of CO2, they didn’t. Take a look for yourself:
http://www.ipcc.ch/activity/srccs/index.htm. That is the latest IPCC report, read the entire report, do a search of the documents, there is absolutely no mention of natural sources of CO2. The natural sources have been completely ignored. Also people will claim that the IPCC took the sun into account in their report, this is not entirely correct, while the sun is mentioned the report it’s effects have not been accurately represented.
http://www.john-daly.com/forcing/moderr.htm. The IPCC did not take into account the Svensmark factor. This would greatly reduce the effect of solar radiation on the earth. Look back up to the solar resources to see the effect of the sun correctly represented.
Also allegations have been by IPCC scientists who disagreed with the IPCC statements. They say that their research was censored or taken out of the IPCC report. This is not the first time the IPCC has lied, they forged the famous “hockey stick” graph, which later resulted in a reissuing of the IPCC report.
Here’s another source that disagrees with the IPCC: http://rpc.senate.gov/_files/Sept1004GlobalWarmingPG.pdf
And another: http://www.sepp.org/Archive/NewSEPP/ipccreview.htm
And another: http://www.john-daly.com/guests/un_ipcc.htm

Quotes form politicians, CEO’s, and others are not proof of global warming, they issue these statements to get votes and customers. Scientists are able to get published and get time on the media by supporting global warming. The IPCC continually lies and misrepresents data so they keep their jobs.

In regards to the precautionary principle that says we can only help if we switch over to alternative energy, this idea is not correct. While this may seem legitimate it only helps the first world, third world countries can not afford to switch to the more expensive energy options. Also the US currently spends 4 billion dollars a year on global warming research which could be better spent on research for disease or to fight poverty. For an excellent example of how the precautionary principle is harmful you do not need to look further than DDT. This pesticide was cheap and incredibly effective but it was banned because of it harmful effects on egg shells. Now thousands of people die every year in third world countries because of malaria, a disease that could be easily controlled with DDT.

I hope anyone who believes in global warming they will take a look at the resources I provided. These resources should convince you that global warming is not man-made, it is caused by cycles in the earths climate. If you are not convinced I hope you at least take a new look at global warming as an unproven idea. Remember that global warming is big business for anyone who aligns themselves with it.

I could not go this entire post without mentioning global cooling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
http://www.michaelkubacki.com/cooling.htm
In the 1970’s it was claimed that there was a consensus on the fact that the world was headed into an ice age. We have seen once before how damaging a false claim about our climate change can be to our world. Most of the global warming crowd does not want you to know about this scare because it is so similar to the scare today. Government panels were formed and claimed the world was headed to an ice age, evidence poured in supporting the claim, a consensus was claimed, then the whole issue just faded away. That is what will happen with the false scare of global warming.