in other words there is only consencus on CO2 causing global warming not no conclusive evidence only the?

Question

connection to be a contributor to glabal warming. the real question is what is the cause of too much CO2 and the answer is not factories and cars, and who will tell all those billions of people they cannot have the same as Americans have V8s all round and if China is bringing on line two coal fired power stations per week how will putting in glow in the dark light bulbs in Australia help.

Answer 1

You might want to beleive that there's only a consensus but the conclusive evidence has been with us for 111 years. In fact, the proof is so simple that it can be demonstrated in any decent science lab using a simple gas diffusiuon experiment.

Whoever told you that there was no proof is either hiding from the facts or knows very little about the atmosphere.

We also know what the sources of carbon dioxide are. The greatest source is biomass including soil, the next greatest source are the seas and oceans. However, there is a carbon exchange between biomass, soil and the oceans. Each year they release 217 billion tons of CO2 but at the same time they absorb 220 billion tons thereby creating a 3 billion ton sink.

Anthropogenic CO2 emissions are a one way street - we emit them into the atmosphere but don't sequester them. In 2006 we emitted 29 billion tons, the greatest contributor being power generation (21%), industry (17%). transportation (14%), agriculture (13%), mineral extraction (11%), domestic and commercial (10%), biomass burning and destriction (10%), all other processes (3%).

You made the point about telling people that can't have the V8's that Americans have. The bottom line is that they don't want them, it's the Japanese and European car manufacturers producing the economical vehicles that are seeing sales booming worldwide whilst the gas hungry US models such as Ford and GM are seeing sales declining.

China is bringing on line two new power stations each week, primarily to fuel the booming economy which is being driven by our demand for cheap goods. If we manufactured our own goods this wouldn't be happening, effectively we've exported our carbon emissions to China. Also, China has just put out it's own climate strategy, it's doing something to address the problems that we're causing.

Answer 2

Please try to learn at least a little about science. When scientists say there is a consensus, its a shorthand way of saying that they not only have conclusive evidence, but that the evidence is so overwhelming that everyone is satisfied the conclusion(s) drawn are valid.

The rest of your post refers to policy--what steps should be taken to compbat global warming--not to the science. For instance--our primary concern in America is to address the ways WE contribute to global warming--not use the fact that China is burning coal as an excuse for not doing so.

As for the lightbulbs--here's a suggestion: get a $100 bill and light a match to it. Just burn it to ashes. You might as well--because that's what you are doing by not switching to energy-efficient lightbulbs. It's your money. AndFYI--while you are celebrating how much you don't know, practically everything you can do to help the environment will save you money either immediately or in the long run. So your self-imposed lack of understanding is costing you money--big-time. That $100 bill is only the tip of the iceberg of the price you pay for ignorance.

Have a nice day! :)

Answer 3

There is consensus BECAUSE there is conclusive evidence. But proving it can't be done here, the proof is far too long. You have to actually study the scientific data. That's what scientists do and that's why, outside of a few skeptics, scientists agree global warming is real and mostly caused by us.

Here are two summaries of the evidence, very short and very long. with references:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
summarized at:
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

Good site for more information:

http://profend.com/global-warming/

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

Answer 4

#1... if anyone points you toward Al Gore... note that Al Gore AL BY HIMSELF wastes more fuel and electricity than some small towns full of people.

Hard to believe that he really thinks global warming is a problem when he wastes a couple thousand pounds of jet fuel to go make a speech and collect $100,000 to $250,000 for 5 minutes of talking...

*************

Most of the global warming data is self-contradicting. there's only one consistent factor related to RECORDED temperature cycles... and that is the solar output.

Yep... when the temperature went down in the 1970's (and the big environmental scare was global cooling...), solar output was down. And now, when we have warming, solar output is up.

It has been proven that increased temperatures cause faster decay of vegetation, which causes increased rate of CO2 release... Its very possible that the largest contributor of CO2 is... warming due to increased solar output.

Answer 5

"an inconvenient truth" watch it... movie on global warming