PROVE man-made global warming. Put up or shut up.?

Question

"The UN says so" is not proof.

Anyone else saying so is not proof.

Accusing me of hating the planet or being a Christian fundamentalist is not proof.

Accusing me of being paid by Exxon is not proof.

Accusing me of working for the Bush Administration is not proof.

Pointing out that the Iraq war is going badly is not proof.

Accusing me of having similarities to the tobacco lobby is not proof.

None of those things are even relevant.

Repeating that it's us over and over again is not proof that it is.

Accusing me of putting my head in the sand is not proof.

Proving that it is warmer than it was 100 years ago is not proof that we are the cause of it.

Denying that it was warmer 1000 years ago than it is today not only is not proof but is another reason for me to not give you the benefit of the doubt even though you don't have proof.

You're trying to limit others' activity. I'm not. In a free society that makes it your burden of proof.

Put up or shut up.

It's amazing - every single response fits one of the above categories.

Proof that we're emitting a lot of CO2 isn't proof that it is causing the warming. It's been warmer in the past even though CO2 levels were lower, and the totality of 200 years of emissions is that 1/11,000th of the atmosphere that wasn't CO2 now is.

1/11,000th.

Proof that we're emitting a lot of CO2 isn't proof that it is causing the warming. It's been warmer in the past even though CO2 levels were lower, and the totality of 200 years of emissions is that 1/11,000th of the atmosphere that wasn't CO2 now is.

1/11,000th.

Schmorg, nice try, I can point you to a physics book detailing the experiments by which Sir Isaac Newton proved gravity.

Just like you could post a link to the National Geographic article detailing the experiments that proved man-made acid rain.

But you can't do that for man-made global warming.

The closest thing to proof is the cooling stratosphere - but when that STARTED happening, Monica Lewinsky was giving hummers in the oval office - - so, okay, even if you assumed that that meant that ALL the warming from that point on was caused by us and none was caused by whatever was the cause of the earlier 20th century warming, that's 15 years out of the 115 years, it's 0.2 degrees F out of the 1.2 degrees F. 0.2 degrees F is not material.

Amarugia, we emit CO2, CO2 traps heat, thus we contribute but we don't know if we do so on a material level.

If it's not material there's nothing to be done, no excuse to radically alter people's everyday lives.

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

Look at the answers so far - all capable of being categorized among my above answer types, and none capable of being called proof.

It's all Emperor's New Clothes - it's all "well smart people say so so you must be stupid to deny it."

Sorry I'm not going to be intimidated by third-grade insults - - "say it's man-made or I'll call you stupid" is not working, and as you can see right in front of you that's all they have.

The silence really IS deafening....

46 hours.

Anti no, there is proof that it's warmer than it was 100 years ago, there is proof that we've increased the CO2 level in the atmosphere, there is no proof that the one caused the other, and because it has been warmer despite lower CO2 levels in the past, we cannot infer that the one caused the other.

You're right though, this is a new category - just deciding to declare victory when you never even fought - jumping and declaring it to have been proven already without ever proving it.

Obviously I can prove I'm on a computer, there's a record of when this posts.

You can't prove that humans are a material cause of the present warming period.

And denying the past warming periods reduces, rather than increases, your credibility.

And seriously Shiraz, the 150 degree temp inside your car proves the greenhouse effect? So, we're emitting glass too?

OK it's not Exxon's fault, get this, it's Giant Glass' fault!!!!! 1-800-54-Global Warming!!!!!

My GOD you are stupid.

Keith natural causes cannot be ruled out - that's not a true statement. The true statement would be that you can't prove that this warming is the result of natural causes - you can't identify the cause. Well, you can't identify the cause of the last warming period either. Find, the HM was caused by Milankovich cycles but the MWP wasn't. But it WAS warmer than today.

And what of the Roman Era warming which while it didn't reach present temperatures came pretty close?

What caused that?

PROVE man-made global warming. Put up or shut up.

It's a simple request.

So far you haven't honored it.

Answer 1

I'm still wondering what happened to global cooling. They were going nuts about that in the 70's.

Answer 2

To date the Proof has not been delivered. There is a reason for that and it is "dis-agreement" in the science community. Al Gore and his disciples are quick to tell you that they have 2,000 scientist that have proof and the ignorant lazy masses follow as the sheep they are. It is coming from all over the world so it must be true?, not.

What they don't tell you is there are over 12,000 scientist that don't agree with them. These others question the theories and the methods that are being used to generate the Global Warming assumptions. These assumption come from the use of computer models that generate scenarios. The data being used is being questioned and thus the dis-agreement on cause. The assumptions they are useing are similar to polling. Frame it in a manner to get the result you want.

They do all agree that the earth has become warmer and there is no question on that. They don't agree on the true cause and effect and that is where the problem lies. The intellectually dis-honest will not let the facts be heard or seen. The media that is supposed to report does not put the facts out because they as the Gore's of the world have decided, so it must be true?, Not.

This planet has had 5 ice ages so far. Now did this planet not warm up before and then cool into another ice age. In the 70's we were told we were on the verge of another ice age and guess what, they were wrong. Global warming is not the greatest threat to mankind as Al Gore says it is. It is ignorance that is the greatest threat.

Answer 3

The exhaust manifold on my car's engine is too hot to touch.

That is proof that man made global warming.

President Bush has built a house in Texas that is heated and cooled geothermally, because he believes my proof also. He must believe it even more than Al Gore since he is taking such wonderful action and Al Gore is not.

And you are WRONG, my answer does not fit into any one of your categories.

The fact is, one can deny any proof of anything exists, and dare someone to prove it, and say the proof is crap.

Prove that you are not really a computer AI? You can't!

Prove that you are not just dreaming and not really on the internet? You can't!

There is physical proof, and there is extrapolatory proof, and there is logical proof.

The exhaust manifold on my car, which has a heat engine, is physical proof.

The 150 degrees temperature inside my car on a hot summer day is physical proof of the greenhouse effect. So are greenhouses.

Planets such as Venus with mostly carbon dioxide for an atmosphere are also physical proof of the green house effect. Even though it is closer to the sun. Venus is 400 degrees hotter than it would be if it were in earth's orbit. Proof that carbon dioxide keeps the heat in, aka, greenhouse effect. There is some extrapolation there, to add a bit of doubt. But that is more than offset by the greenhouse effects that we already observe in cars and greenhouses.

The other proof, is negative proof. Those who profit the most from the wanton release of carbon dioxide in the air, are the ones that deny the proof the most. Conservatives, Arab countries, Venezula. Negative proof is valid proof. If Hugo Chavez says there is no such thing as global warming, I call that proof that global warming is a problem. You fall in the same category as Hugo Chavez.

Extrapolatory proof.

1. Carbon dioxide in the air reduces the amount of heat energy that can escape from the earth.

2. If you increase the carbon dioxide in the air, more heat will be held in.

3. If you hold in more heat, the average temperature rises.

4. If you add carbon dioxide to the air, the amount of carbon dioxide in the air will increase.

5. It doesn't matter whether man or volcanos add it.

6. If man adds more carbon dioxide to the air via automobiles, trucks, ships, aircraft and so forth, carbon, it will increase faster than if man does not add carbon dioxide to the air. This is simply math and has been proven by the mathematical formula 1 + 1 = 2. Which you probably will deny also.

7. When the average tempurature rises enough, the polar ice caps will melt, and the ocean levels will rise about 200 feet or more. 50,000 years ago, the ocean levels were 300 feet lower. The "narrow strip of land" between Alaska and Asia, was 600 miles wide. It is now under water.

8. Florida, Netherlands and many other lowlands will now be under water.

9. It might even get too hot to survive.

10. It doesn't matter if man or nature is the cause, or if you believe it. Your descendants will die because of it.

11. Saying that nature will fix it is stupid, because nature's fix will probably be the end of humanity.

Answer 4

Carbon dioxide traps heat from the sun. Trees take in carbon dioxide and in turn give out oxygen. A lot of trees are being cut down per year and less and less virgin forests exist which causes more carbon dioxide to be left in the air. Emissions from vehicles and factories like carbon monoxide (which turns into carbon dioxide once it has come in contact with oxygen) trap the sun's heat by creating a layer that stops the sun's radiation from escaping into outer space. CFC's (Chlorofluorocarbon) from refrigerators, air conditioners, hair sprays and other products eat away at the ozone layer letting more of the sun's rays in. Soot, black carbon resulting from incomplete combustion, is said to contribute to global warming and, even worse, climate change. We are not the only cause. There are a lot of natural contributors. But with the earth's growing human population, it's hard to ignore the fact that we may be contributing a lot to this thing.

Answer 5

The issue here is that global warming is now totally politicized and it's BS. The very act of posting this question/initiating debate on the subject is just perpetuating the politics.
I am not disagreeing w/you. I believe it IS real; I also believe it has been happening since this planet was "born"...climate trends are a natural occurrence. Last but not least I believe very little of it (if any) is caused by man. It is disgusting that something of this nature is being used (and used, and used) for political gain. AND that so many people are getting sucked in.
If you want to recycle, great. If you want to ride a bike instead of drive a car, excellent. If you want to change all the light bulbs in your house, switch to solar power, use one square of TP to wipe your bum, good for you! There are definitely ways that we human beings can keep the well being of our planet in tact. However I am NOT going to cast my vote for ANYONE who is trying to profit from this issue. I am so friggin sick and tired of it.

Answer 6

Fine. I'm dumping eighty tons of manure on the common area next to your house. Prove that it looks bad and stinks up your yard. That land belongs to everyone, so prove that my fertilizer is messing up your yard. Come on, you can do it.

Or, if you want logic (doubt it, but here goes), what makes you think we live in a free society? There have been restrictive laws on all sorts of people's actions that cause no harm to their neighbors ever since this country was founded. Being more free than a lot of societies does not make us a free society. You certainly are not free to do anything you like unless someone proves that it harms them. That isn't the American way. You need to join either the hippies or the libertarians if you want to go that route--it just doesn't work for Democrats or Republicans--both pass laws restricting that kind of freedom all the time.

Besides, you are using the wrong standard of evidence. In order to convict someone of a crime, they do need proof. But for other matters, the standard courts use is preponderance of evidence, which is clearly on the side of humans causing global warming. And the question is irrelevant, or merely acedemic anyway--even if it is simply caused by nature, the people of the world should do what they can to prevent catastrophe.

Answer 7

I agree with you. I want those who believe in man-made global warming to prove their point. I have yet to hear a convincing argument. Global warming is not caused by CO2. I have not heard any other case for man-made global warming.

CO2 accounts for less than 1% of greenhouse gas emission. Humans generate less than .5% of CO2. The largest source of CO2 is the ocean, the second largest is volcanic activity. Water vapor is the most prevalent greenhouse gas. Increased CO2 is an effect of global warming not the cause.

Answer 8

1. When coming out of an ice age, the earth typically warms by 4° to 7° C in a period of about 5000 years. That's a warming rate of 0.14° per century, or less.
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Pub_FAQs.pdf (page 21).
In the last century, earth has warmed by 0.7°, a rate at least five times faster than any natural warming.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

2. This unprecedented rate of warmth exactly coinicides with an unprecedented rise in the level of CO2 in earth's atmosphere. The level of background CO2 (taken far from cities) was stable for centuries prior to the industrial revolution at about 280 ppm. It currently stands at 383 ppm, a 37% increase -- and is increasing exponentially with no end in sight.
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/law/law.html

3. The current rise in CO2 is due entirely to human burning of fossil fuels. Burning fossil fuels releases CO2 into the air. Furthermore, there are isotopic signatures in atmospheric CO2 prove that it is indeed coming from the burning of fossil fuels and not any other source.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=87

4. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, responsible for between 9% and 26% of the total greenhouse effect on earth.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2005/04/water-vapour-feedback-or-forcing/

5. By increasing the level of CO2, we therefore must be increasing the greenhouse effect of CO2 as well. The amount of "forcing" (energy increase) caused by increasing CO2 can be measured in the lab is therefore known. The increase in anthropogenic CO2 has caused an increase of about 1.7 Watts per square meter of longwave (infrared, i.e. heat) radiation trapped at the earth's surface.
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1...

6. This increase of 1.7 W/m² should cause an increased average world temperature of 0.8° ±0.4° C in that same time – which is what we have actually observed (see point 1).
http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/222.htm#635

7. Ice ages and interglacial periods are caused by "orbital forcing", small changes in earth's orbit caused by pertubations of other planets and the Moon. Since planetary positions can be computed for thousands of years into the past and future, we also know that orbital forcing caused a temperature peak about 6000 years ago (the Holocene Maximum) and has been cooling the planet since then.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/207/4434/943

8. Solar activity has been overall stable over the last three 11-year cycles, and is actually down from the mid-20th century peak in 1957.
http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/stp/SOLAR/ftpsolarirradiance.html#composite

9. Since natural causes can be ruled out and anthropogenic causes exactly account for the increase, the scientific case is extremely solid. When the IPCC wrote that there was a 90% chance that humans were causing global warming, many -- perhaps most -- of IPCC's climate scientists objected. But they objected because they thought the 90% confidence UNDERSTATED the amount of evidence available.

Answer 9

I read recently ( and can't point to a link, so forgive me), that if ALL of the cars and other creators on Greenhouse gasses stopped RIGHT NOW, it would only have a .01 degree of difference in the AVG earth's temp.

Now I'm not saying that Man hasn't ADDED to the issue of "climate change", but to say it's is Man's fault, is to be dealing with very shaky science indeed.

Answer 10

They can't, there is no proof. I'm sure you will get several links to site's claiming their so-called evidence, but the fact remains global warming has as many scientists who deny it's affects, as support it. But, it's going to be news if you claim the world is ending, so they get the press. Just like the "second ice age" scare of the 70's, and the "Acid rain" scare of the 80's. You'd think we would learn by now.