Some simple questions for those who believe humans are causing global warming.?

Question

These are serious questions. Please do not bash or call names.


1. Why have we had periods of average global temperature higher than that of today if we are causing the warming?
2. Why was the increase in global temperature over the last century more in the first 1/2 of the century, prior to industrialization?
3. Why was there a reduction in temperature during the 80s?
4. Why are other planets in our solar system warming without human involvement?
5. Why is nobody reporting that solar flares have been measured hotter than during any period in history?
6. If people such as Al Gore TRULY believed that tragedy is coming, why do they not try to reduce in simple ways like flying commercially? They claim to be carbon neutral, but if I believed that humans could impact global warming, and believed that disaster was inevitable, I would fly commercial and live carbon negative.
7. Why do environmentalists not have Gore's head on a block due to the issues in number 6?

Nickel johnson...or whatever...are you staying in the Global warming section? My first couple of questions and this one are all that had Gore, and less than 5% of my answers...AND I HAVE BEEN IN THE GLOBAL WARMING SECTION A LOT! Get over yourself.

Parrot: 1. No, but it does show that the earth can and does warm with or without our influence.

2. I did not think anyone would not get the point of the fact that there has been an EXPLOSION in the last 1/2 of the last century, and global temperatures rose 1/8th as much in the second 1/2

3. Yep, in early BC, it was aerosol that caused it. ROFLMAO

4. Again, the point is that global warming can and does happen irrelevant of human intervention.

5. And estimates from NASA are contrary, but due to new technology, we are no longer guessing, but were in the past.

6. Gore is the spearheader of the Global Warming, so thus comment. He seems to be the hero of those who believe in man made global warming.

Answer 1

The real questions that have to be asked is why do people keep referring to the Man ET AL temperature reconstruction study, also known as the hockey stick graph, to make claims as to how warm the earth has been, when it has been refuted, and has even been dropped by the IPCC?
http://www.john-daly.com/hockey/hockey.htm

If aerosols are the cause of the mid century cooling, as stated above, then why did temperatures rise during the early part of the century when sulphate levels were high but co2 levels were low?

It is not the energy of the sun that is causing the warming, but it is the solar flares interaction with cosmic rays and clouds that is the culprit. If one looks at the correlation between sun spots and temperatures, it is way better than the correlation between co2 and temperatures.

Galactic cosmic rays, are not really rays at all, but are basically stripped down neutrons
and protons that are given off periodically throughout the galaxy when a supernova occurs. They bombard the
solar system and earth continually. An interesting correlation has been observed between the sun spot cycle,
galactic cosmic rays, and global cloudiness.

The abundance of low clouds corresponds very closely to the level of solar radiance, as indicated by the green
line. Both the proportion of low clouds and the level of solar radiance in turn correspond closely with the
proportion of cosmic rays striking the Earth. They are all moving in concert with each other.
Thus the more cosmic rays that strikes the earth at any particular time, the more clouds that form. The more
clouds that form, the lower global temperatures become, because they tend to bounce back warming sunlight.
Since there is an observed 1.7 percent variation in low cloud formation between a solar maximum and minimum
this is a significant variability capable of causing real climate change.
In summary then we have galactic cosmic rays continually striking the earth. Independent of the cosmic rays
striking the solar system the sun is continually going through sunspot cycles. As I mentioned previously, the
amount of solar flaring follows the 11-year sun spot cycle, and varies even more through the longer Gleissberg,
Suess and Bond solar cycles. The larger the number of flares produced by the sun, the fewer the proportion of
cosmic rays that strike the earth, as these flares tend to deflect the cosmic rays.
Thus when cosmic rays are deflected away from the Earth there are fewer clouds, which permits a little bit more
secondary radiation to penetrate to the surface. Thus we no longer have the problem caused by solar variability
only varying by 0.1% through a sunspot cycle, the change in global cloudiness permits more than ample solar
energy through, which can significantly change climate. There is now a viable explanation to explain the great
correlation that has been observed between solar records and temperature records. The correlation gets even
better through longer-scale solar cycles. For example, the intensity of cosmic rays varies by 15 percent through
the 11-year sun spot cycle. At the longer wavelength decadal-scale Gleissberg, centennial-scale Seuss, and
millennial-scale Bond cycles the cosmic ray intensity varies by up to four times that much, causing significant
changes to the climate.
For a complete explanation see http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Reference_Docs/The_Geologic_Record_and_Climate_Change.pdf

Answer 2

1. Why have we had periods of average global temperature higher than that of today if we are causing the warming? No one is denying that there a cyclical temperature changes on Earth and yes even drastic changes which can be attributed to volcanic eruptions (which emit aerosols and carbon dioxide), changes in the Earth’s orbit, and Changes in the sun’s intensity. Scientists are well aware of this and as a matter of fact you can follow glacial periods using CO2 levels, CO2 levels have been high during warm interglacial periods and during cool glacial periods, CO2 levels have been low. The point is we are adding CO2 the atmosphere in record amounts which is enough to cause feedbacks which may increase the effects of these cyclical changes.
2. Why was the increase in global temperature over the last century more in the first 1/2 of the century, prior to industrialization? I don’t know where you got this information but according to the GISS Surface Temperature Analysis land-ocean temperature data since 1890 shows a gradual increase… of course there are always yearly and daily fluctuations.
3. Why was there a reduction in temperature during the 80s? I don’t know where your data comes from but there is a high level of confidence that the global average temperature during the last few decades was warmer than any comparable period during the last 400 years. (National Research Council (NRC), 2006. Surface Temperature Reconstructions For the Last 2,000 Years. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.)
4. Why are other planets in our solar system warming without human involvement? You can not accurately compare other planets in the solar system to the Earth because they have completely different chemical compositions. Yes some planets are warming and some are cooling it depends some on the activity on the planet, the sun’s intensity and the orbit around the sun.
5. Why is nobody reporting that solar flares have been measured hotter than during any period in history? I assume you are talking about the research using mathematical models to determine if the Earth’s cyclical temperature fluctuations stem from the variation in solar flare activity. This type of association is very difficult to determine and there is varying methods and conclusions between the experts. However, no one denies that the Sun plays a role it the Earth’s temperatures… rather you have to remember this is not just about natural cycles it is also about the impact humans have and will continue to have in the future, because CO2 concentrations are increasing and is a major greenhouse gas.
6. If people such as Al Gore TRULY believed that tragedy is coming, why do they not try to reduce in simple ways like flying commercially? They claim to be carbon neutral, but if I believed that humans could impact global warming, and believed that disaster was inevitable, I would fly commercial and live carbon negative. Al Gore never claimed to be all knowing on the topic of global warming he is just the voice used to present complicated scientific data to the masses.
7. Why do environmentalists not have Gore's head on a block due to the issues in number 6? I am an environmentalist and never suggest putting anyone’s “head on a block” so why would I start with Al Gore?

Answer 3

No bashing. But my words won't convince you, you'll need to take the time to read the links, which are serious scientific research.

1. There have been natural warmings in the past. But the data (article below and websites referenced at the end of this) overwhelmingly shows the present warming is not natural. The fact that natural warmings have (rarely) been larger is not proof this one is natural.

# Meehl, G.A., W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym and C. Tebaldi (2004). "Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate". Journal of Climate 17: 3721-3727.

2 and 3. It's actually pretty close. http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record_png There was a brief interval where the warming slowed down because particulate pollution (aerosols) was partly blocking the sun.

4. All the other planets aren't warming, only a few. So it isn't the sun. The scientists who measured Mars temperatures say that it is probably due to giant dust storms on Mars.

5. The flares just haven't increased overall heat input to the Earth much. Details here: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html

6. Al Gore's personal life has absolutely nothing to do with the solid science that supports global warming.

7. He's a mixed bag. His example is far from perfect. But he has raised awareness. There are plenty of bigger villains in this story.

Comments: You seem to be skeptical. So I'll point out that the scientific proof is in the scientific literature, such as the references contained within these documents:

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

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

You need to go to the library and read the articles.

Of course, scientists have done that. And they overwhelmingly agree that global warming is mostly caused by us:

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

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

Answer 4

1) Unless you're talking about 1998 or 2005 or other recent years, we haven't had higher average global temperatures in the past 120,000 years, as you can see in these plots:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Ice_Age_Temperature.png

Additionally, the winter of 2006-2007 was the hottest in recorded history.

2) I don't think it was, if you look at this plot:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png

Depending on which points you pick. 1910-1940 had an increase of 0.5 C and so did 1980-2000 in 10 fewer years. Regardless, there are other contributors to global climate besides CO2, such as volcanic emissions, solar variations, etc.

3) If you examine the previously linked plot, there wasn't. There was a period of global cooling from 1940-50 and in the late '60s due to increased volcanic activity and human aerosol emissions blocking sunlight thus causing global dimming and cooling.

4) As I recall, the only planets which are warming are Mars and Pluto. Mars is partially warming and partially cooling. It has nothing to do with Earth, except for the solar contribution, which doesn't account for very much of our global warming.

5) Since I'm not a reporter, I couldn't tell you. If you'll examine the following plot you'll see that solar activity plays a minor role in the current global warming, however.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png

6) Al Gore does other things like buy carbon credits. I'm not his keeper, so I won't presume to speak for him.

7) As previously stated, I'm not Al Gore's keeper. He has done a world of good by bringing public attention to global warming information, and for that we all owe him a debt of gratitude whether or not he's a hypocrite.

Answer 5

Question # 8. How do scientist know that humans arent keeping the temperature cooler?

Question # 9. What is the baseline measurement for climate changes?

Question # 10. How fast would the earth be warming without humans involved?


The truth is, NOONE knows..there isnt a single scientist that can give a definitive answer. Any scientist that claims to know is simply proving that they are preaching for the environmentalists and therefore can only be biased.

Answer 6

Well these are very good questions but you have to consider that other planets for example mars heat up to such a degree because they dont have a climate like we do. And other planets fluctuating temp. are the result of having no natural homestasis that the earth has made. Global temp. here on earth has been going higher and lower sometimes because of other species. In the times of the dinosaurs the earth was very humid, well most of it was. In the first half of the century was really when the industrial revolution went into full spin, and it was going far before then. In the 80' the natural homeostasis of the earth probably quicked in and since the fall of the soviet smoke stacks than that will play a role too.

Answer 7

1. Just because we weren't around to affect past climate changes does not mean it follows that we aren't affecting the climate now. That sort of logic is non sequitur.

CO2 acts as a greenhouse gas. that is a simple fact. We know that virtually all past changes were in some way shape or form largely driven by CO2. We also know that we have been releasing huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere over the past 100 years. So, assuming the laws of physics to be correct (and since I'm sitting here typing this now I think that's a safe assumption to make), we should expect some degree of warming. One or two scientists might dispute how =much= we should expect, but I don't think a single credible climate scientist today denies that humans have some hand in the current warming.

2. The 'Industrial Revolution" begin approximately a two and a half centuries ago (1), which corresponds precisely with the rise in temperature (2). So I don't know what you're trying to say here.

3. Because for a brief period of time, heavy pollution from aerosols and other particulates temporarily overwhelmed the CO2 signal. However, since tighter restrictions have been placed on these chemical's usage a warming trend has once again dominated the temperature graphs. (3)

4.The only planets in the solar system that anyone has claimed to be warming are Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s moon Triton, and Pluto. However, none of the observed warming on these bodies was global. And the warming that was observed was ultimately caused by variations in the planet's orbits.

Still, even if we assume that all these planets are warming, and that it's a global occurrence, not just a regional one, what about Mercury, Venus, Saturn, Uranus… and if you're including Triton in your argument, what about the other 100 or so sizable moons in our solar system? None of them have shown even the slightest bit of warming whatsoever. Obviously whatever is causing the warming on these other planets is entirely different from what's causing it here. (4)

5. Because they are not being measured hotter than at any point during history. In fact, according to research done the the Max Planck Institute (5), there has been no increase in solar irradiance for the past seventy years. Which all but rules out the sun as a possible source of the warming. (4)

6. I neither know nor care. What Al Gore does or does not do doesn't interest me in the slightest.

7. See 6.

Edit:

1. And no one ever said it didn't. We know the planet has warmed in the past without any intervention from humans. That tells us nothing whatsoever about whether or not the current trend is anthropogenic or not.

2. Temperatures have risen most quickly since about eighteen fifty, as you can easily see in the graph I provided. Which, as you said, is when the industrial era really kicked inot high gear.

3. I would hardly consider the 1980's to be early BCE. If you recall you referred to a downward temperature trend in the 80's.

4. I know what your point was, but since I had already addressed it I felt it would be better to dispel the myth of solar induced warming instead.

5. I'm not entirely sure what you were trying to say here, are you saying that data from NASA contradict the data from the MPI? I'd like to see it then please, because as far as I know all the data on solar variation from NASA matches perfectly with what I just gave you.

6. As I said, I have absolutely no interest whatsoever in a single thing Al Gore does. I appreciate his efforts in educating people about climate change, but his actions have no effect whatsoever on the validity of global warming theory.

Answer 8

well sugah, I was fixin to give you a long answer but after reading all the other tripe on here I will just say that you are right, The earth is warming and cooling as it has done for thousands of years. We are just arrogant enough in this generation to think that we are the cause and that we can reverse or stop what mother nature decides to do with herself. As to Al Gore, I am right there with you. I have always called him Al Bore and he couldn't have his moment in the sun as President so he is trying to be the forerunner on a hotbed topic like Global Warming to get regocnition. NOw if ya'll will excuse me I'm fixin to go eat dinner.!!!

Answer 9

I wish life were so simple that we could just count the number of scientists who say something, and act accordingly. In 1900 you could find 2, 500 scientists who said nothing is left to be discovered. In 1920 you could find 2,500 scientists to tell you that rockets cannot operate in space. (none would say that today) In 1945 you could find 2, 500 scientists to say that we should give the atomic bomb to Stalin so that there would be peace in the world. (they changed their minds by 1958, at which time they moved the Doomsday Clock to 2 minutes to midnight) In 1970 you could find 2,500 scientists to say we would run out of oil by the year 2000. If you want to read a hundred ridiculous things scientists said that year, read Future Shock where some even predicted many of us would have gills by now since we would run out of land and have to live in the ocean. In 1980 you could find 2,500 scientists predicting President Reagan would start a nuclear war, either directly or by trying to shield us from one. (he started no major conflict) In any given year, thousands of scientists will sign a petition swearing to the most preposterous nonsense. Many of them have a narrow education, an out of control ego, and a political agenda that makes them think they know everything about everything when all they know is their very small area of study. How many of your 2,500 have simultaneous degrees in geology, chemistry, and climatology that is needed at a minium to grasp the issues? Let's not take billions of people on a hay ride just because some self annointed experts who will change their minds in a decade or two have the fanciful notion that humans are the key cause of this round of global warming. They don't have the tools, the facts or the proof to put the complex puzzle together.

Answer 10

1 - The key word is 'average'. The changes effected by global warming on a short term basis are small (an increase of 0.0156 degrees C per year) and there will always be periods of above and below average temperatures. Just as the average lifespan is getting longer there are still people who die earlier than expected.

Looking at the longer term, we're presently experiencing the highest average global temperatures since humans first inhabited the planet.

2 - I guess you mean the century before last as that was when industrialisation began in earnest. Temperatures in the first half of the 19th century fell slightly, the rapid rise began in approx 1850 as can be seen on this chart - http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison_png This rapid rise coincides with the onset of industrialisation.

3 - There wasn't. There was some decrease in temperatures between 1940 and 1970 which was caused by the massive amount of pollution in the atmosphere blocking out sunlight and in the case of SO2, reflecting sunlight back into space. Levels of pollution were so bad that thousands of people were dying and as a result, in 1952 the smog in London alone claimed thousands of lives a day. Consequently Clean Air Acts were past and when the pollution dissipated temps began rising again. See this chart - http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record_png Ironically removing the pollutants from the atmosphere has led to higher temperatures.

4 - There are very few planets and moons in the solar system that are warming. There are two bodies that are experiencing global warming, Earth is one and Pluto is the other. The warming on Pluto being occasioned by a tripling of atmospheric pressure in the last 14 years (pressure increases temperatures).

Reference is often made to Mars warming but that's only part of the story. The southern polar ice cap may be melting but at the same time the northern polar ice cap is expanding. Events on Mars are localaised and it's thought that climate changes are occasioned by the solar dust storms that sweep across the planet for several days at a time.

Sadly, there are some skeptics who distort the reports of Mars warming by leaving out the parts of the report that don't conform to their way of thinking. The same NASA reports that mention warming on Mars also state that it is not caused by solar activity and is not related to warming on Earth.

5 - Solar flares are just one aspect of the suns behaviour, there are many others. Collectively these contribute to Solar Variation which is very accurately measured. The maximum heat output from the sun is called Insolation Maxima and conversely the minimum is called Insolation Minima. The difference between the two is very small - it's a variation of less than one thousandth of the mean (the mean is 1366 Watts per square metre per year, the variation is 1.3 W/m2/yr). Over thousands and millions of years this has a dramatic effect on our climate and is one of the primary reasons we have had several ice ages in the past.

6 - Al Gore is effectively a messenger delivering the science of others. I've never met him so can't vouch for his credentials but ultimately whatever he does or doesn't do has no bearing on the scientific evidence and consequently he is of little interest to me.

I'm sure he is carbon negative as to be anything other would give the media rope with which to hang him.

7 - Whatever Al Gore's carbon footrpint and carbon balance may be, he is a high profile person and has succeeded in bringing the message of global warming to millions of people. He's probably not the best person for the job but he's put himself in the firing line because of something he believes strongly in.