You you "MAN MADE" global warming proponents read?

Question

Or do "FACTS" hurt you like Cryptonite?

Here is something to consider:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/02/070228-mars-warming.html

And here are the NUMBERS behind Earth's Greenhous Effect:
http://mysite.verizon.net/mhieb/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html

Read. Learn. Think for yourself. And stop letting Gore's long winded, disproportionately extended segment on KATRINA VICTIMS (???) in his "documentary" on Global Warming brainwash you!!!

Answer 1

I don't know about reading, but their math skills could use some work:

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/pdf/20070226_monckton.pdf

Answer 2

I wrote this a s an answer to another question; some of it is appropriate to this ramble on of confused question - not sure if it is a question:

Please read on:

Humankind is the only group in the history that has been able to purposely completely destroy whole continents which will change the weather patterns for that area.

Due to over farming in the mid-west of Canada and the U.S.A prior to the 1930's; large sections of that region was turned into a giant dust bowl (man made desert).

Another point to think about is up to 1000AD the Plains natives of North America had a large moderately advanced civilization which controlled most of the territory from the Rocky Mountains to past the Mississippi River and about half of Ontario. They deforrested most of the midwest to build towns and cities. As there civilization aged and weakened they defoliaged more of the mid-west to build walls around their cities. This has been discovered recently by Archeologist. It is one of the few moderately advanced civilzations that there is liitle trace of becaude they built with wood rather than stone. The relation of the above to Global Warming is the deforrestation of the mid-west. This changed the weather patterns for a large part of North America.

Whether or not it has actually attributed to Global Warming is questionable.

It is widely thought that the Mayan civilization which was quite advanced dissappeared do the the deforrestation of there regions.

The list goes on.

Mankind can completely destroy a whole Island or mountain in seconds. Blow it right out existance with one nuclear bomb.

About carbon dioxide: it is only one by-product of the internal combustion engine (which powers most transport vehicles).

There is Carbon Monoxide, Nitrous Oxide and many more.

Both Carbon Monoxide and Nitrous Oxide are extremely hazardous to all life and combine with sunlight + ozone to create smog. You do not require a large quantity to have this happen. It is a matter of balance.

Have you ever done any baking and used flavouring and colouring? if you have, it takes only one to three drops of falvouring or colouring to affect a whole large bowl of mix.

Carbon Monoxide and other oxides and ozone require even less to do their damage.

A small quantity of carbon monoxide in your house can lead to sickness, brain damage or even death.

Please do more research without any bias and with a completely open mind. You will learn a lot more.

Study hard and do not let others make up your mind.

Answer 3

I understand the planet cycles through warmer and colder periods and there is lots of evidence to back it up, but to say that man has had no influence on the acceleration or aggravation of said cycle is foolish and uneducated at best. Instead of digging up information about the nature of global warming through the history of earth you need to seek information on the impact of men on the planet's atmosphere. The "big picture" does indeed point to global warming being natural, but focusing on the modern era where man has polluted so much and destroyed so much of what makes the ecosystem works will allow you to better understand how it is that man really has made and impact. As far as Gore goes, I couldnt care less for him, he's capitalizing on all this, writing himself into history forcefully. Shame on him.

Answer 4

2 points. Your first link: Hah, one scientist's theory. Means nothing until he can convince the other experts he works with. He was probably bought by the industry. real scientists go to conferences and present there theories (I know, I am one, but not a climatologist) and If you can't convince your colleagues, I don't believe you either. I also factor in that big business pays people to say it's not man made, but no one makes a profit saying the other side. People have been slowly gathering evidence and convincing others of global warming since the 1960s, and the fact that they've convinced so many other scientists is enough for me.
Second link. No references, so I don't know if its even true. Also, water just changes form, the amount on earth never changes (in soil, on earth, in atmosphere) so the reason 'they' ignore it is because they are tracking an increase in other green house chemicals not the amount. Also, I forget my college chemistry, but CFCs and other chemicals hold many times the heat water does, some may be 1000x. That is why they ignore the water vapor. No hole in the argument I see.
PS, I've never watched Al Gore's movie, so ...

Answer 5

Read. Learn. Think for yourself. Take your own advice. Stop feeding us a party line of an administration that has done NOTHING BUT lie for 7 years. The preponderance of empirical evidence in support of Global Warming is overwhelming. We are facing a major climate change, the likes of which has not been seen in recorded human history. If heat levels get too high, we are facing the extinction of human life. It makes no difference if the main cause is natural or not. The vast majority of scientists believe that pollution is contributing to global warming to a greater or lesser degree. If the chance is only 1 in 1,000,000 that investing in cleaner industrial processes and tighter pollution controls will save us from Extinction, isn't that worth the investment? I've seen several 1 in a 1,000,000 chances happen in my lifetime. How about you? Stop pretending every thing's hunky dory and face up to reality you pansy.

Answer 6

I have read and learned about global warming and I am not longer a skeptic. The CO2 level in the atmosphere is the highest it has been for millions of years. This is a big experiment we are conducting.

The leftists are using this issue to try to punish capitalism, and that is why so many people remain skeptical.

Gore is a political charlatan.

Answer 7

Great links, however, we need not battle over the point of the origins of global warming, but if man will be able to stop the fact that our planet (oceans specificly) are increasing in temperature and volume. This is my response from a prior "Global Warming" question, and a fact that most people do not know about, think about or desire to become aware about.

Common misconception. Global warming is not affecting the weather, but "Ocean Warming" is. Its not about being liberal or conservative, green or not. It is about common knowledge and common sense of the oceans and our world. The oceans absorb vast amounts more CO2 than our atmosphere. As this occurs, our oceans increase in temperature. Ice reflects heat and dark ocean surface absorbs heat. The more CO2 absorbed in the ocean, the warmer the oceans become. As the oceans become warmer, more ice melts, leaving more dark ocean surface to absorb heat. The more heat absorbed, the more the ice melts, and so on and so on. Currently this is a linear function, however in the near future this cycle will become chaotic and exponential. South London, Lower Manhattan, a majority of southern Florida, among other places will be under a few feet of ocean by 2030 no matter what we do right now. Not to worry though, the end of the sixth sun as accounted by the Mayans, will turn our world upside down before then. Research the increased seismic activity in the Arctic and Antarctic regions and what is known as the polar shift. This will commence in late 2012 and cause the Great Lakes to drain into the Mississippi and disrupt the gulf stream. Not to mention almost every Geo thermal feature on the planet erupting at the same time. Join us for pong!!
Source(s):
Google video, Polar shift search, oh yeah - COMMON SENSE.

Answer 8

I'm not sure, do facts hurt? because you people can't seem to take them.

Here is the update to your link:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/04/070404-mars-warming.html


this scientists and national geographic were a little behind the times, NASA has known about this for years:

http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2001/ast16jul_1.htm

The main point of your web page is seriously flawed and in fact, wrong. You assume the amount of water vapor is unrelated to concentrations of other greenhouse gases.

This statement is false:

"Total atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) -- both man-made and natural-- is only about 3.62% of the overall greenhouse effect"

the figure is closer to 12%

this statement is misleading and/or false:

" Anthropogenic (man-made) CO2 additions comprise (11,880 / 370,484) or 3.207% of all greenhouse gas concentrations, (ignoring water vapor)."

-anthropogenic CO2 comprise 3.207% of all CO2 emissions.
(it's closer to 4%). Your failing to account for the carbon cycle. Meaning this is the amount nature will not take back. It builds up.

Other greenhouse gases absorb a much wider spectrum of IR and are far more effective GHG's. CO2 may be the largest quantity, but it is only believed to be responsible for 50% of "enhanced greenhouse effect"

3DM's link uses fabricated data to basically lie to people:

here is the funding breakdown of ff.org :

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frontiers_of_Freedom#Funding

Answer 9

If I say your name backwards do you return to your alternate dimension for a while? Both of your links are absolute garbage. The second site is some student's study of other people's papers without even providing the context for his conclusions.

Drop the BS and get back to your studies. When you have a solid education foundation then you will better be able to argue a point without making a complete fool out of yourself.

Answer 10

The "skeptic" kooks have been quacking about that article for quite a while. All they are doing is showing how ignorant they are--they can't even undersstand a popular science article!

The comments in that article refer to the speculation of some scientists that additional factors could be aggravating the global warming that is being caused by human activity. Tha'ts all it says. But--of course--the kooks woudld need at least a basic understanding of science and minimal reading comprehension skills to grasp that! lol

Answer 11

You obviously have not walked in the tracks of man made destructions to Nature

,or seen the changes made to the original Environment by civilization.
or felt the different climates in these places because of these changes.

Such as deforestation,because of agriculture and expanding Urbanizations
desertification because of bad agriculture and over grazing
destructions because of war,

The green leaves being replaced by tar and concrete
I have
And Al Gore had nothing to do with my Opinions
the difference of walking in cool forests or in the Sahara is imense.
And thes kind of drastic changes have happened and are increasing all over the world

Collectively this has an enormous impact on Global weather
with less forests producing rain .and more desserts causing heat waves that move across the lands.

Pollution and the
facts fed to the public is another story that comes on top

Stop believing propaganda rubbish and go visit China ,Mexico,Africa or India before you start trying to lecture people on false facts.

desertification is growing all around and all of that is a result of Mans behavior.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ap7FoW.bZhduYRMwHsLai93ty6IX?qid=20070629101716AATW9R0
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AgGbjrIOcXiyXBpr6j7qlDLty6IX?qid=20070618163201AAyuI69
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArONfn5cFZYrDIpwm4e7Qtnty6IX?qid=20070706213344AAFjM9s