I am not quite sure, but I have lots of info that I think you will find quite helpful and enlightening:
http://ecowellness.multiply.com/ for excellent inspirational info within my blog to help not only our world and its creatures, but to also open peoples hearts and minds to many amazing wonders that life has to offer. I also have lots of info in my blog to help fuel peoples imaginations to many possibilities that can be found only in the minds eye.
Along with lots of environmental info, amazing environmental pictures and videos (These videos show the beauty of this world and what life can be like if people take the time to appreciate life’s true beauty).
Let us all strive for a greener/brighter future by helping to create a solid foundation for future generations to build upon, so we can hand them a beautiful world, filled with never ending awe and wonders!!
Where peoples differences and uniqueness are accepted, where we all live as one, helping one another so that we can all play our own mysteriously beautiful melodies in the never ending, awe inspiring, song of life :-)
I truly have faith in humanity and believe that someday our lives and the world in which we live will truly be transformed for the better.
2007-09-01 06:12:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by Qweemawva Anzorla Qwartoon (Male) 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no evidence against global warming. All data confirm that average global temperatures are increasing and have been for about 20,000 years. Man made global warming is, however, a different story. Probably the strongest argument against the presummed cause and effect link between man made green house gases and increased global temperatures is the fact that while the atmospheric CO2 concentration is almost 35% higher than it ever was in the pre-industrial past, the average global temperatures are still well below (3-4 degrees Celsius lower) the maximums seen during other warming periods.
2007-09-01 08:47:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
One of the important issues about why the human aspects of global warming may be less than claimed, is related to the sun's output. A NASA study indicates that the sun has been increasing it's power by .05% (some say .04%) per decade. The majority of climatalogists dispute that finding, because if it were true that would mean that mankinds contribution to global warming is much less than many scientists have staked their reputation on.
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/images/content/93617main_sun4m.jpg
Recently some scientists have taken the ACRIM solar information recorded by sattelites over the last 30 years and made some corrections to it. These corrections are called PMOD, and are invalid, as far as I am concerned, and as far as other people that have better credentials than I can offer.
Here is a good link (Below) to learn about the debate over PMOD and ACRIM. This controvery should be a nice bit of data for your evidence, and is not to difficult to understand.
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/Lockwood_and_Frolich_Review.pdf
Another Nasa study indicates that Solar Cycle 25 will be weaker than any in centuries. If this is true and the suns output drops by just a few watts, there will be no global warming in the middle of this century, regardless how much CO2 we generate.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/10may_longrange.htm
2007-09-01 04:13:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tomcat 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
All I've ever seen is blogs, wikipedia, and hoax and conspiracy websites. There is a huge cash reward offered by one of the oil companies for anyone who can produce a shred of scientific evidence against Global Warming. The reward has gone uncollected, and will continue uncollected. Bigfoot will arrive in a flying saucer and land on the White House lawn before anyone collects it.
2007-09-01 17:20:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
there's a valid reason to have self belief that worldwide warming is real. CO2 is a green-living house gas. The climate fashions are very complicated and there must be mechanisms that decrease the tiny contribution of the CO2. It basically bills for about .5 levels so a strategies and destiny contribution will in all risk impact it much less. The temperature is likewise bigger at evening and in chilly places. the better CO2 enables flowers to absorb greater CO2 and guard water. The longer turning out to be season enables greater vegetation to be planted. the hotter winters enables farmers to farm in earlier chillier places. it is no longer all undesirable or some form of dire effect for the planet. it fairly is political nonsense. it could have a comfortable advantageous or risky result even though it could no longer reason lots harm.
2016-10-19 21:19:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
the fact that al gore and leonardo di caprio first spoke of global warming like a year ago and now all of a sudden the world is ending in 3 weeks? thats pretty much scientific evidence that it does NOT exist......
2007-09-02 15:06:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The argument isn't if the climate is warming, but is man the cause.
Few will accept that the climate is warming slightly. This can be shown.
The cause is in question. Some think man is 100% to blame, others don't agree with that position because they know the climate is very complex, and we aren't smart enough to determine this yet.
2007-09-01 03:28:27
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dr Jello 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
A scientific conclusion is based upon fact.
The earth warms and cools, its a fact.
Climate change is a fact, witnessed everyday.
A consensus is a group hug, without leadership.
2007-08-31 22:00:26
·
answer #8
·
answered by Snoonyb 4
·
3⤊
1⤋
there are no scientific evidence against global warming.....it's a cycle.............it's like this.........ice age,global warming,ice age,global warming............we are supposed to start a new ice age, but all the pollutions has slowed it down.........but it will eventually happen....man cannot change what he destroys......Earth will live but people will probably die.
2007-08-31 18:53:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Pineapples aren't quiet Strawberries!! 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
There is none that the scientific community accepts.
But there has been some made up. You can read about it here:
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462
http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/DamonLaut2004.pdf
http://www.sgr.org.uk/climate/StormyTimes_NL28.htm
http://www.amos.org.au/BAMOS_GGWS_SUBMISSION_final.htm
2007-09-01 02:33:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by Bob 7
·
0⤊
2⤋