Global warming- How do we know if it is happening naturally or if humans are the cause?

Question

exp. the iceage. Man didn't bring that on. If you a have reasonable answer (beyond the tv/newsweek says so) please tell me the scientific references that helped you reach your opinion.

I haven't made my decision if I believe humans are to blame OR if it's Earth natual way of doing things. For one I haven't done the research to come to a proper conclusion. Just because someone says so on the cover of Newsweek of the 10 o'clock news doesn't prove it. That is why I asked for the scientific proof.

I will be honest. I wasn't insterested in it till I was reading a FICTION book. But the fiction book had references in the footnotes that are real.

Answer 1

I think global warming is a bunch of crap. if you look at the history of the earth, anybody in the natural science field will tell you the earth has always had minor temp. changes. dont get worried cuz the ocean temp rose half a degree

Answer 2

Greenhouse gases aren't the only contributors to global warming. There's also variations in the sun, for example.

1) We know global warming has been accelerating since the Industrial Revolution:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/

So what could be causing that acceleration?

2) We know that atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations have been going way up since the industrial revolution, due mostly to human burning of fossil fuels:

http://www.john-daly.com/bull120.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide.png

This by itself doesn't prove that CO2 caused global warming, but it's a correlation.


3) We also know from ice core data that in the past when CO2 didn't initiate global warming, there was first a temperature increase and then atmospheric CO2 levels increased and amplified the global warming roughly 800 years later:

http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/

So that makes me ask, if CO2 isn't causing global warming now, why is it increasing at the same time as global temperature instead of having an 800 year delay?

4) Climate scientists have modeled the global climate, and they can't account for the acceleration of global warming without taking into account the increase in greenhouse gases, which they find accounts for about 70-90% of the recent global warming:

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

That's why most scientists are convinced that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming. You might also want to read the IPCC report Summary for Policymakers, which summarizes the best climate science out there. It's only 18 pages long and contains lots of nice charts and graphs:

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html

Answer 3

That's a good question that I'm not sure that I have an answer to, but I like you're approach. Natural cycles are the default and man's contribution is undeniably there, at least in terms of the amount of emissions. We know that those emissions are very small portion of natural levels. What needs to be demonstrated is how these emissions affect future climate.

What I'd like to see to convince me that man is the primary cause is the following:

1. Independent studies demonstrating the amount of heat retention attributable to the Greenhouse effect.

2. Studies demonstrating the amount of total Greenhouse effect due to carbon dioxide as a function of concentration (all hypothetical calculations I've seen thus far remove water vapor from consideration)

3. Independent biological studies demonstrating the maximum capacity of photosynthesizers and carbonate-fixing animals to uptake CO2 , as well as studies demonstrating global capacity of CO2 absorption in precipitation and surface water (We are told that we are exceeding the Earth's capability to adapt to human CO2 emissions but I've seen no quantitative justification for this.)

4. Independent studies demonstrating a quantitative value for the hypothetical "tipping point". If climate models are as accurate representations of reality as claimed, then this should be relatively easy.

Answer 4

Global Warming refers to our current global climate change which has been influenced by human activities, primarily CO2 emissions (ancient sunlight) which we have learned is an important GHG (Green House Gas). Other human activities also contribute to the present warming (i.e. clearing forests). Most of the increased CO2 and warming have both occured since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution and despite climate change being a part of the Earth's cycle, NOTHING IN NATURE can explain the CURRENT climate change. - That's how scientists know it's because of human activities. Keep in mind also, 85% of the world's glaciers have been steadily and increasingly melting, at a rate more in this past century than any other in the last 10,000 years. Ten of the hottest years on record (global mean temperature) have all occurred in the last 15 years. 2006 was the hottest on record in Austraila, Asia, Antartica, North America and Central Europe. The evidence of Global Warming can be observed. Don't let a politician or lobbyist tell you that burning fossil fuels is not a concern. The main reason for the skeptism is because of ExxonMobil and the Petroluem Institute (see CEI).

Once CO2 increased to a point that it had an effect on trapping additional heat in our atmosphere, feed back loops further accelerated the warming (i.e. melting ice exposes dark water and rock which instead of reflecting radiation, aborbs it and accelerates melting, melting frozen tundra releases millions of tons of methane, another GHG, etc...)


The only solution...

1) Reduce greenhouse emissions to near elimination in 30-50 years (burying it, filtering it, developing and using alternate CO2 free methods to supply energy, etc.).

2) Block a percentage of the sun's energy

3) Prepare for rising sea levels by improving infastructure

4) Continue to improve and implement green clean technology in all future development

5) Use fusion HHO (amazing, trust me... search Denny Klein) technology world-wide and immediately

6) Develop and implement CO2 filteration and ground storage

7) Develop and implement massive networks involving sea water filteration systems

8) Develop and implement additional means to block sun's radiation from coming in

9) Replace all Nuclear reactors with Fusion power plants, build them all over the world. It's already a reality but to be at the point for which it will start coming into play will take another 30-60 years depending on how hard we try.

A nearly free and absolutely clean energy source, fusion from water, will in most of our life times, become the world's main source of energy. One bathtub full of water will be able supply a middle-class family for a year. Compare that to the tons and tons of carbon we put into the air every year now (example, one gallon of gas converts easily to roughly 20 pounds of Carbon Dioxide but it takes 200,000 pounds of vegetation millions of years under pressure to make a gallon of gas)

World human fossil CO2 emissions emit in a single day what the equal to all the vegetation and organic matter in the world if it was for example all burnt. And to think there are people that can be convinced our CO2 emissions is not a problem, lol - terrible.

We can do something - our race can do something about this.

Click the link below to find several useful videos on this subject...

Answer 5

I dont care about arguing "the cause" repeatedly with fools, even the professional people who are arguing "it's not man made" are admitting it's happening. Does it matter who or what is to blame?

I have two degrees, my 1st in Physics and my 2nd in Geophysics and spent 15 years in the nuclear field before forming my own green consulting company; I'm reasonably qualified in the "natural science field". People who say they know how energy is distributed on this planet and simultaneously that a one degree change in temperature means little are clueless, uneducated, narrow minded morons who argue for the sake of being heard. They have no concept of the difference between energy density and temperature.

It all comes down to YOU! Do you believe 4 out 5 qualified scientists or don't you?

If you want direct references, browse the Hadley Center for Atmospheric Studies and stop listening to the unfounded opinions of pre-pubescent naysayers!

Answer 6

Forgive the length. But you wanted the references.

Here's a few ways. It's not all humans, just mostly.

Look at this graph. Natural factors were pretty important until about 30 years ago. Then man's ability to produce greenhouse gases trumped natural forces.

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

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

Read this report. 150 authors, 600 reviewers, hundreds of references to peer reviewed scientific articles.

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
summarized at:
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

IPCC, 2007: Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignor and H.L. Miller (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 996 pp.

Of course, that's unreasonable. But you could read the summary and/or listen to the scientists who know what's in it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

Ice ages were caused by changes in solar radiation.

Milankovitch, "Canon of Insolation and the Ice Age Problem"

But the data (first graph) shows that this time it's not the Sun. The Milankovitch cycles say we should be in a relatively stable period.

Bottom line (OK, it's a news article, but it tells the story):

"While evidence suggests fluctuations in solar activity can affect climate on Earth, and that it has done so in the past, the majority of climate scientists and astrophysicists agree that the sun is not to blame for the current and historically sudden uptick in global temperatures on Earth, which seems to be mostly a mess created by our own species."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258342,00.html

Good websites for more information:

http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"

Answer 7

The planet has had higher average temperatures and lower average temperatures than it is now, the way you can compare is at the rate that these averages climb or lower.

The planet naturally fluctuates through temperature. The planet is currently on a natural rising cycle. However, the proof of global warming comes from the fact that the rate at which it is rising, is higher than ever in history. The average temperature of the planet has been higher in the past than it is now, but the rate at which it is climbing, has never been seen by the planet before.

Answer 8

Ithink it's a combination of both. I wonder how much co2 is released in the many forest fires ? Their are scientists on both sides, although it does seem the media,celebrities andcertain politicians have a larger influence harping on human causes.

Answer 9

Okay, here we go. The earth's temperature does fluctuate naturally. It may be naturally getting warmer now. But human activity is making that natural trend go much higher, much faster. Our contribution may be a small part, but it's enough. It's the straw that broke the camel's back.

Answer 10

We contribute to a small extent but this is mostly a sheeply reaction based on hysterical reporting by Al Gore. See yesterday's news article by scientists that present a good case for the opposite happening by 2060 (I believe) as the sun goes into historical cyclic decline and our weather will be significantly cooler. Be very careful in buying into the current hype that we are causing global warming as it is based on bad science or no science.

Answer 11

The point is that BOTH are contributing to global warming.