do you think it's human at blame for global warming or it's a natural occurrence?

Answer 1

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.

Answer 2

At best, we could be responsible for a tiny proportion of the global warming. Humans may have added about 5 per cent of the CO2 levels but the actual levels are unknown. CO2 is a lagging factor. Temperature rise happens first and this is roughly followed by about 800 years when CO2 levels increase. This means that CO2 levels result in warmer temperatures and not the reverse. When temperatures warm, the oceans give off more CO2. When they cool, more CO2 is absorbed by the oceans. Because they are so large, the oceans lag behind by about 800 years. Obviously it is a natural occurrence. The only thing left in doubt is what small percentage, if it is even measure able, are humans responsible for the warming. The other point is that global warming has obvious benefits which are ignored by the apocalyptical Pharisees in the modern global warming movement.

Answer 3

We've had global warming since the peak of the last Ice Age. Humans are a factor in the most recent changes but not the sole cause.

Trying to out think Mother Nature is futile. She's compensated over time for everything that has happened and will continue to do so.

Answer 4

Check out The Great Global Warming Swindle on Google Video and do some research on wikipedia to make up your own mind.

Answer 5

Humans do effect global warming - the question is -- to what relevance. I feel we are a but a twig in the forrest. The Earth will outlive the human race whether we count or ignore carbon credits.

Answer 6

FWIW,

"Human caused" global warming courtesy of the eco-marxist religion is just that, a religion. If you "Don't believe" you are labeled a heretic in many circles.

Fact, the early Holocene was much warmer then present, this preceded civilization.

We are in an interglacial period, due in part to earth 180,000 year cycle of apogee/perigee, and also do mostly to high solar output as noted by the SOHO satellite.

It is natural, when I was in college 25 years ago, our environmental sciences were predicting an "ice age" nothing has changed except the messengers and their willing propaganda minions in the leftist media.

Human's contribution to "warming" is miniscule. The IPCC was written by UN bureaucrats and even many of the 2500 consulting scientists now join 17000+ climatologists of whom indicate that peer review of the data bypassed all scientific methods. The reports about 2% fact the rest pure and simple Marxist propaganda.


Educate yourself with some factual information
Two of the best sources are below:

http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm

http://www.junkscience.com

Answer 7

People will argue statistics all day, but CO2 is higher than any time in the last 400,000 years. Its now close to 400 parts per million, where many scientists think there will be a chance of serious climate change.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

How do we know that recent CO2 increases are due to human activities? The same way carbon dating measures fossils, by the ratio of the isotopes.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=87

Why does CO2 lag 800 years behind temperature in ice cores? This is a small part of the 5000 year warming trend. Once the CO2 is released from the ocean by the initial warming, it contributes to a further 4000 years of warming, due to positive feedback.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/

Is it just a natural cycle? No, natural cycles occur over thousands of years, the earth is warming much too fast for plants and animals to adapt, including us.

So, it appears most likely that humans are causing the large changes. This is not difficult since the atmosphere is 500 times less mass than the ocean, about 5x10^15 tons.

With 6 billion people, this is less than a million tons per person. Since affluent people produce over ten tons of CO2 per year, they are increasing CO2 in their share by 10 parts per million every year.

If it's getting warmer, and that's causing ecological and economic disaster, we should do something about it, by reducing the human contribution, however small.

Why do fanatical people disparage climate research? To avoid taking short term personal responsibility for long term global problems.

Ask yourself why are we in a rush to burn fossil fuels that took millions of years to accumulate. Surely we should leave some for future generations?

Answer 8

It is the natural swing of temperatures. If you go back to the 70's people were saying we were in a cooling time. Now it has swung back the other direction. If you really look at greenhouse gasses water vapor has a much bigger effect on things and it is not our fault. People just key in on carbon dioxide because us humans produce it. That way it is easier to blam us. What we need to remember is that the earth is always changing!

Answer 9

I think its natural, thanks for asking. By the way, glacier ice is blue because the intense pressure on the ice changes the properties of water. Even the melt water from the glacier is a strange blue color. Do you think maybe the pressure might affect CO2? Can we really compare gasses trapped in ice for thousands of years to the atmosphere of today?

Answer 10

I think it is a little bit of a combo of both. The earth goes through regular warming and cooling cycles and when we add CO2 and other green house gases to the air that warms the air up it raises bacteria levels that also produce it from organic matter in the ground so its kind of a snowball affect.

Answer 11

Changes on Neptune Link Sun and Global Warming-
Geophysical Research Letters ^ | may 14, 2007 | H.B. Hammel and G.W. Lockwood

Some how, man has made Neptune's weather change too. Wow, SUVs on Neptune, who woulda thunk it!