Global Warming?

Question

So I know that probably not very many scientists use Yahoo! Answers, but if any of you do, can you tell me what you think about global warming? I have heard so many different arguments from both sides, and I am now very confused. I tend to lean toward the opinion that it is real, because of some comments on the opposition that I fundamentally disagree with, like that DDT should be allowed... So, educated people who know what you're talking about, what do you think?

I understand the arguments for and against pretty much, but I just don't know which ones are right, since they are so contradictory.

And I have seen an "Inconvenient Truth" and it made a big impact, but other people give "facts" to refute it. Are these real, or just misleading?

Answer 1

You know there is now a special separate category for global warming questions, and this isn't it.

Answer 2

If you think that DDT should not be allowed, you are truely confused. How many people need to die because of that knee-jerk reaction to an ignorant woman's OPINION?

You will get no true answers to the question of global warming because the people claiming it exists will not define it. If there were a definition, the concept could be proven right or wrong. Since the politicians, scientists, and general population that claim it exists want to make sure they can't be proven wrong, there will be no formal definition of global warming.

I consider myself to be an open minded and scientific minded engineer. I am serious about my own personal responsibility for protecting the environment. I think what I see happening within the global warming arguement is 10,000 times more likely to cause damage to the environment than to prevent damage.

If you can't understand it well enough to define it, how the hell can you react to it? If the scientists raising the fuss were legitimate, they could predict the temperatures in different places around the world at specific times over the next few years. If they could do that with reasonable accuracy, they could convince me that they understand what they are talking about. It would be okay for them publish an equation so that population changes and other variables are accounted for in the final accuracy evaluations so long as the data proves cause and effect.

I can program a computer to tell you any thing I want you to see. If you want 50 second minutes, I can give you that. The so called scientists making predictions with their software can also tell you any thing they want you to see. They want you to see global warming therefore their programs will predict it.

If mankind understood weather, weather reports on the news wouldn't be such a joke. Can your weather man tell you what the season high temperature will be this summer? Of course he can't.

If you want to see real efforts to solve real problems that really do exist, search for ROHS. Americans need to put the global warming garbage on a shelf and work on adopting ROHS.

Answer 3

Anthropogenic Warming (A.W.)is not established to the extent many think. A consensus is not a substitute for a proven event. The probabilistic modeling used to predict climate changes are scenarios and only as good as the parameters & defined variables in the model. Case in point: The Sun, pro A.W. camp claims to have accounted for Sun's effect by measuring Radiant Output. They totally exclude on these models, the strength of the Sun's Magnetic Field which impacts on the ability of cosmic rays interacting with the Earth's atmosphere & the resulting generation of clouds in the atmosphere.
Antarctic ice core studies, published in peer-reviewed scientific journals between 1999 and 2006. The ice core data allowed researchers to examine multiple climate changes reaching back over the past 650,000 years. All six studies found atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations tracking closely with temperatures, but with CO2 lagging behind changes in temperature, rather than leading them. The time lag between temperatures moving up—or down—and carbon dioxide following ranged from a few hundred to a few thousand years.

Answer 4

In the 1970's the planet was experiencing a global "cooling".
Today... many of the same scientists who witnessed or commented on this observation are now saying, GLOBAL WARMING is something to fear, due to human production of green house gases.
From a scientific perspective, we can observe the amount of pollutants produced then and now, and can easily say there are more green house gases compared to then and now.
However, the most undermined arguement for the increased temperatures is the fact the SUN has been bombarding the EARTH with solar flares (or solar storms), such that like when using the BBQ, when you crank up the gas, what happens?
The BBQ grill gets hotter. And so to speak, in the 1970's the sun was emmitting less solar flares onto the Earth. Hence, the one to two degree drop in avg temps.
So... after saying that, Global warming does happen. Question is.... if politicians are getting involved... is there another motive for publicizing so much fear? Is there profit to be made? Sure there is. Research and Development is the only key to boosting the economy... pollution gets to be reduced, hence savings in the Health care sector. etc etc...
.... sad thing is... if the SUN is the true reason for the increase in temps. THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT!

Answer 5

The questions is what are you doing? Taking the time to recycle walking instead of driving everywhere you want to go. Keeping the air condition up a little higher the heat a little lower. I am not a big believer in Global Warming but I do believe in personal responsibility

Answer 6

Yes, the world is warming.
Yes, it has warmed and cooled throughout history.
Yes, today's warming could become a very important event.
The question is, what is causing it.
There we have variance among all.
Al Gore most likely got a grant worth millions to propogate the global warming issue. Only his definition is that it is an event caused by industry. While industry MAY have a SMALL role, it is the money trail. It is a target to talk about, to justify grants, to employ himself and others..

Global warming is true, any of the causes sited by Gore are theory. I am working on a book of facts in this area. Many will hate it.. (those on the money trail) Most will love it.

Answer 7

It is astounding at how false the claims of Mankind caused climate change really are.
My favorite bit of information is about CO2 being a greenhouse gas and causing global warming.
1.) CO2 is not lite enough to reach the upper atmosphere very quickly if at all.
2.) CO2 reflects more heat from the sun than it lets through so if it does reach the upper atmosphere, it would actually cause cooling.
3.) If CO2 did go to the upper atmosphere, plants would not have any of it to perform Photosynthesis.

Answer 8

I am so AGAINST Global warming it's just not right.. If i found out that I was contributing to this I would stop and stay in my house forever, Well not really but I would do some thing about it.

Answer 9

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

i am not a scientist but i don't think global warming is a good thing. here is some reasoning. An increase in global temperatures can in turn cause other changes, including sea level rise, and changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation. There may also be changes in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, though it is difficult to connect specific events to global warming. Other effects may include changes in agricultural yields, glacier retreat, reduced summer streamflows, species extinctions and increases in the ranges of disease vectors.

Answer 10

the world is warming by about 2 degrees
its a bad thing
but on the other hand the weather is nice

Answer 11

well i am not a scientist i am a Canadian . our scientist have been telling us about this for many years. i can tell you that the Arctic is in huge trouble because of this global warming .
one thing that is awful is that a scientist who has spent over 20 years in the Canadian Arctic is now for the first time ever find polar bears that have drowned . this is because there is not enough ice bergs float about so where the bears would before swim 5 miles and then climb on a berg to rest they cant do that now.
that is very sad.