78.2 degrees?
45.7 degrees?
54.1 degrees?
96.7 degrees?
whatever degree the or a "theory" suggests?
2007-08-28 23:34:28 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Global Warming
NASA Chief Michael Griffin agrees with what you are saying.
He is a man with a PhD, six masters degrees, a bachelors degree, and one more masters degree in progress.
He said this three months ago and was quickly denounced and muzzled by global warming extremists:
"I have no doubt that global -- that a trend of global warming exists. I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with. To assume that it is a problem is to assume that the state of earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change.
First of all, I don't think it's within the power of human beings to assure that the climate does not change, as millions of years of history have shown, and second of all, I guess I would ask which human beings - where and when - are to be accorded the privilege of deciding that this particular climate that we have right here today, right now is the best climate for all other human beings. I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take."
2007-08-29 12:16:41 · answer #1 · answered by Edward 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, what a good question! The most extreme global warming activists would say that it must stay exactly as it is now; that any change at all would be catastrophic. I would not agree with that view.
Now, an additional question is, what IS the global temperature? It is definitely less than 96.7F. I suspect it is less than 78.2 and more than 54.1, but I am not sure. Any global temperature would obviously have to be a computed average. How to do that? Is it accurate enough to just average all the thermometer readings you can find in the world at one moment? What about the lack of thermometers at the north pole? Wouldn't that make the average higher than it should be, missing all those cold readings you could have gotten? Do you need a thermometer on every square foot of the Earth constantly being read to get a good number? And then would you need to average it over a year, to average out the Summer and winter? Day and night? Do you need readings every hour? Every minute? It is clearly impossible! So when I see graphs of global temperature showing an increase, I wonder how accurate that really is. More useful is things like retreating glaciers and sea temperature. The Sea temperature changes much more slowly.
2007-08-29 03:23:44 · answer #2 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
There is no ideal temperature. Nature evolves and adapts to meet natural changes in the climate and has done since life began. Some species thrive in warmer temps, others in colder temps. Some can adapt to changing temps, some can't. Some evolve, some don't. Some live, some die.
I'm not sure what the significance of the figures are that you've mentioned. 78.2°F is close to the optimum temp for humans, 45.7°F is close to the coldest temp the planet gets to of it's own accord, 96.7°F is close to the highest natural temp and 54.1°F is close to the current global temp (74, 42, 59 and 95 would have been closer).
The temperature now would be 57°F if there had been no human influence. That's not particularly the ideal global temp, just where the planet would have been in respect of the warming and cooling cycles it goes through.
2007-08-29 00:07:11 · answer #3 · answered by Trevor 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Ha. Typical teacher's question. The Earth functions fine at any temperature. Humans are the limiting factor. I assume the person asking means degrees F not C. 54.1 degrees F would be the best answer for human life on Earth.
2007-08-29 04:22:43 · answer #4 · answered by Owl Eye 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ideal Global
2016-12-10 17:52:14 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Earth can function at many temperatures. Of course there are differences in species that thrive and those that don't, depending on the temperature.
But our modern civilization can't stand a rapid change. That would change coastlines and severely damage modern agriculture. We can't just move like nomads.
Most scientists think the relatively stable climate that''s existed for the last few thousand years was important to the development of civilization.
2007-08-29 01:51:12 · answer #6 · answered by Bob 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Stability is more important than any specific temperature. Entire ecosystems adapt over millenia to the specific conditions of the planet at the time in which they live. The problem with GW is that it is happening too fast for life to adapt. Entire ecosystems will collapse, food prices will ri- ... oops, they are rising / have risen already. Crops are failing around the world and the lunatics in charge think it is a good idea to use the remaining food as fuel. Better save those raked up leaves, you'll need something to eat this winter.
2007-08-28 23:49:45 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
What ever temperature that is lower than todays that will cause panic among the feeble and impressionable.
The panic should be strong enough for them to demand that the gvmt start raising taxes and gain control of others lives.
And it should be low enough to ensure that there is no way that we could ever reach these levels ever again, thus insuring these feeble and impressionable continuously look to gvmt control as the solution to an imaginary problem.
2007-08-29 00:12:38 · answer #8 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
All of them are far too hot.
You probably don't want a global average temperature above 20.
2007-08-28 23:51:20 · answer #9 · answered by bestonnet_00 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
i dont know, didn't think about it before
2007-08-29 00:59:30 · answer #10 · answered by baby gal 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋