Is global warming a pile of bull?

Question

It said that greenland was all green when the vikings arrived
the planet goes in cicles, and nothing we do can cool it . and Al gorre has no hard fact. whats up, is this all some ones agenda.?

Answer 1

Global warming is bull.

Answer 2

This makes sense, but it hasn't affected where I live cause I swear it was cold until mid June. Then we had a heat wave for about 2 weeks and the other night it got down to 45. I haven't been able to swim in my pool until the end of June for the last 3 years because there is no Spring it goes straight from winter to Summer. But winter lasts until June and Summer lasts til November. One day its burning hot and the next it is cold. Weird Huh? Bring some global warming my way to Ohio.

Answer 3

Nope. It's not bull, it's science.

We know from ice core samples that historically when global warming occurred, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations also increased, but not until about 800 years later.

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

Many global warming deniers think this is evidence that CO2 can’t cause global warming. In fact, that’s the very first argument in the terrible Great Global Warming Swindle. On the contrary, this is actually evidence that human greenhouse gas emissions are currently causing global warming. Compare the following global temperature and atmospheric CO2 concentration plots from 1960-Present:

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

As you can see they’re both rising – not with an 800 year delay, but at the same time. If CO2 wasn’t causing global warming as was the case in the past, then why is there no 800 year delay?

This only proves a correlation between CO2 and global warming and not a causality. The reason we’ve concluded that greenhouse gas emissions are causing global warming (or more accurately, accelerating it) is because natural causes can’t account for the increase in global warming over the past 40-50 years. They account for most of the warming prior to that, but climate models have determined that greenhouse gases are responsible for about 80-90% of the recent global warming:

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

The very first inputs into climate models were solar, volcanic, and sunspot contributions, but they simply couldn’t account for the recent acceleration in global warming. Thus climate scientists have concluded that humans are the primary cause.

Answer 4

Yes no and maybe....

There's a lot of "hype" about global warming that just isn't realistic.

The scaremongers saying sea level will rise 20 feet have been smoking some really strange weed. They are off by about 19 1/2 feet assuming that ALL of the glaciers and both polar ice caps completely melt. Maybe if the northern ice cap wasn't FLOATING and most of the southern ice wasnt FLOATING then the sea levels would rise more... but floating ice that melts does not change the level of the water its floating in.

There are several factors at work related to global warming. The factors caused by man are MINOR and might be an accelerating force in the climate change, but WE are NOT the primary driving force.

Definitely there is some warming of the average global temperature.

There's also warming of Mars, and Venus and even the moons around Jupiter... I don't think MAN has caused THAT.

There's increased solar activity.

Scaremongers with agendas are hyping stuff that will make money for themselves. Al Gore wants to PERSONALLY PROFIT from the carbon credits program HE designed.

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

Regardless of the issue of global warming... we need to find and develop alternative energy sources. There is only so much petroleum out there and eventually we'll use it all.

We also need to be careful about polluting the oceans. the algae of the oceans has more effect on converting CO2 to O2 and sugar (food) than the trees and other plants on land. If the oceans die... Life on earth ends.

Answer 5

I'll address each of the points you mentioned in turn...

GREENLAND
It's sometimes assumed that the naming of the country Greenland derives from a time when it was a green land free of ice. In fact, the naming of the land was a piece of Viking propaganda designed to attract new settlers.

The Norwegian Eirik Raude, better known as 'Eric the Red' had been exiled from his native country because of his murderous ways, after taking up residence in Iceland he was again exiled for the same reasons. Setting sail in 982 he 'discovered' Greenland and after rounding the southern ice pack he landed and established a settlement. Three years later, when his period of exile had expired, he returned to Iceland in search of a population for his new settlement. To entice people he told them of green lands and a warmer climate, he christened the new land Greenland because "people would be attracted to go there if it had a favourable name". The plan worked and Erik returned to Greenland with the intrepid emigrants.

Alas, they were to be disappointed, their new home failed to live up to Erik's promises and instead of a lush green land they found a barren wilderness of ice where crops could only be grown in two locations and at certain times of the year when the ice melted. They has become the victims of Viking propaganda. [Source - The Saga of Erik the Red, Eirik Raude's Biography, available to read online here http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/17946 )

EARTHS CYCLES
What’s been referred to here are Milankovitch Cycles, these relate to the way the earth ‘wobbles’. Rather like a spinning top it wobbles slightly up and down (precession), wobbles slightly on it’s axis (axial tilt) and wobbles in its orbit around the sun (eccentricity). These cycles occur over tens of thousands of years and can be mathematically predicted with extreme accuracy. Such movements do contribute to global warming and cooling but over very long periods of time. There's more information regarding Milaknovitch Cycles in this Wikipedia article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

COOLING THE PLANET
Ambitious schemes have been proposed that would manipulate our climate through geoengineering. These contentious schemes include constructing a giant sunscreen to block out some of the sun’s heat and artificial trees to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. If these schemes are successful they could prevent global warming from getting worse and may be reverse the warming trend. There's more about these schemes in a summarised version of a report I worte - http://profend.com/global-warming/pages/combat.html#4

AL GORE
Al Gore isn't a scientist, the science he presents is that of other people. In his movie and book An Inconvenient Truth he makes reference to the science of a great many people. A lot of what he mentions isn't all that new and has been known about within the scientific community for decades, some aspects having been established more than 100 years ago. It is fairly meaningless to say he has no hard facts when he is using scientific data that has been known about and established for such a long period of time and is amost unanimously accepted by all those who are knowledgeable on the subject of global warming.

IS IT SOMEONE'S AGGENDA
This is a question that has been asked a great many times. If it is some sort of aggenda or conspiracy then it's the most elaborate and best kept secret the world has ever known and is one which relies on unbroken co-operation from every single government in the world, even amongst those nations which hate each other and those that have nothing to gain but everything to lose of global warming is real. Why for example would the Saudi's view global warming as the most serious threat facing humanity. The cost to their economy will be staggering and they can't even recoup the losses though taxation as Saudi citizens pay no taxes(except for a fixed 2.5% Religious Tax).

It would also have to be a conspiracy involving all the thousands of scientists involved in the study of climate change (myself included). It's nigh on impossible to keep a secret within a single organisation let alone group of thousands of different organisations whose work is open to public scrutiny.

Answer 6

It is so interesting to me that the Western world has spent so many decades and even centuries - but especially the last century - saying that decisions have little value unless they are based in scientific data.

Now that top scientists from more than 90 countries have agreed about the reality of global warming and its most prevalent cause, people all of the sudden want to claim that science is a political 'agenda'.

That's called denial, and of course denial can be expected because it's such a difficult situation. The faster we all come to accept it and our part in it, the less pain we'll have to go through to mend things. The longer we wait to get over denial, the more painful it will be to try and change some of our habits and the more people will be without water and food in many areas of the world. Our environment is not separated by national boundaries.

Answer 7

Yea it is. Since there is no static climate, the climate will either warm or cool. Right now it's warming - slightly.

"Global Warming" is only a political movement (Hence Algore) that justifies the reduction of human freedoms by imaginary environmental problems.

Vote for us or you're for people dying bull.

Answer 8

No bull. By the way, are you from Cincinatti?

Greenland was NOT all green when the Vikings arrived, just a narrow strip along the coast. The name was a con job to lure people to settle there.

http://www.greenoptions.com/2007/04/26/green_myth_busting_greenland_was_once_green

There are tons of hard facts supporting man made global warming. Some here:

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

The other explanations just don't match the data. The scientific equations don't work for them. The numbers come out wrong. Most questions are answered here:

http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462

Good general information on global warming. with data and pictures:

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

Answer 9

The recording of temps over the last 100 years show it is warming a bunch and the fact that the fluorocarbons did change the ozone is proof enough for me that we are in a man made global warming....but maybe the best way to prove it is when a gallon of gas is $20. a and the summer average temps are 130 maybe some people will begin to realize it is happening for real...

Answer 10

Al Gore is a liar. Global warming is not true. We are not warming the planet. It's final.

Answer 11

No, but nothing we can do might be close to the truth. But we can try. It is common sense really - industrialization -> co2 emmissions and co2 is a greenhouse gas meaning it traps heat which is good, but too much and more heat is trapped than we might like, so co2 emmissions -> warmer than would otherwise be. This could be a good thing in a few hundred thousand years time, but right now when things are naturally getting hotter because we're at that stage in the cycle, it's a very bad thing and the T-shirt slogan

Where are we going?
Why am I in this handbasket?

is very appropriate ;^)