why is global warming worse than originally believed by scientists?

Answer 1

originally they thought greenhouse gases caused the global average temperature rise of 1 degree F. They thought air pollution also contributed to global warming as part of the greenhouse gas effect. But later they realized that air pollution has 2 effects. One is the originally thought that the gases of air pollution contribute to global warming, and the second is that particulate matter such as soot and ash has a more interesting aspect - that is the soot and ash particles are usually black and absorb solar radiation so that less solar radiation heats the surface of the Earth, and that these particles provide a place that water vapor may condense on. When water vapor condense on these particles to form tiny droplets, the droplets reflect sunlight and that also means less solar radiation heats the Earth. Because particle pollution is "dimming" the sunshine, it is keeping the Earth from feeling the full effects of global warming. Without the particle pollution dimming effect, the greenhouse gases would cause a 2 degree F rise instead of a 1 degreeF rise, which means global warming by greenhouse gases is worse than originally thought.
So even though China and India is contributing to global warming with their power plants and industry - if they ever scrub the particles from their emissions to improve air quality, then global warming will increase or be worse. The real and maybe only solution is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Answer 2

Two reasons

1) Nothing much has been done. We've had other problems that threatened to end life on this planet, but we worked on them until they were no longer a threat (or at least less of a threat). Since the 1970's there has been a lobby seeking to block action on Global Warming. The same people also lobbied successfully for tearing out our mass transit systems and building the interstates so they could sell more gas and cars. Since 2000, there's been a substantial influx of money to this lobby (I suspect from Saudi Arabia). None of the people who made the original predictions expected these things. They assumed the rate of warming would not increase much more, and would then decrease.

2) The other factor is the predictions themselves. These have evolved quite a bit in my lifetime. Now they use computers, whereas before they didn't. With or without them, the prediction depends on what data is included. Models today include data from other planets, not just the earth. That's improved accuracy a lot, and brought the models closer to real time events. Up until recently, almost everybody used a different computer model, and they are working to consolidate them into one that everyone can use. When the International panel for Climate Change was created, naturally they wanted to include some factor for the human contribution to warming. Nobody could agree on a figure, but the scientists of all the countries agreed there was some contribution. At the last minute the United States Government and the Saudi Arabian Government announced they would not sign off or support the findings if any data related to a human contribution were included. In order to get the report out, the predictions were made on the assumption that humans produced no greenhouse gases at all. Naturally, that predicted a slower rate of warming than what was actually happening. In the next report, (following a blistering condemnation by the UN) a human contribution was included, but at a fraction of the actual value. Instantly, the smallest version of the discrepancy between the models and real events jumped from about 75 years to about 40. At the same time, many things are still excluded due to politics. For example, the polar caps are melting, faster than anything that's happened before. Ice helps to slow the rate of warming. As long as there is ice available, the heat will melt the ice before the temperature rises much. When it's gone, there'll be a steeper rise. The melting is happening sooner than predicted so the amount available is less than 1-5 years ago by a large margin. Predictions are not being adjusted for the rapid loss of the ice, so once again, events seem ahead of schedule.

If we did our predictions honestly, to the best of our abilities, I'm sure the predictions would match events quite nicely.

Answer 3

Global warming may (emphasis on "may") be worse that originally believed because scientists are just learning about other factors which may have clouded the effect of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide and methane).

The calculations and models the scientists were using were based upon the temperature readings recorded around the world. However, it now appears that these recordings may have been misleadingly low because of two factors:

1. There is a solar cycle and the period we are now in is the low period. The sun has not been active recently. But the cycle will pick up to more "normal" active levels and that should make us hotter.

2. Industrialized countries emit pollution in the form of incomplete combustion and this results in smog-like particles being placed in the air. Water vapor condenses on these particles and act an a mirror reflecting light back away from the earth. This is called "Global Dimming" and it cools the earth. (Like when the earth gets cooler following a major volcanic eruption.) As countries clean up their pollution sources it will result in the greenhouse gases having a more profound effect.

Answer 4

Honestly, Global warming is a religion. The phrase global warming was not even used 10 years ago, or even 5 years ago. The science is so new they don't know what the effects will be if any at all. Scientist can't predict what the weather will be 10 days from now let alone 10 years.

Answer 5

Here's a fabulous concept: when you click on this site, Care2 makes a donation that will remove one pound of carbon dioxide emissions from the atmosphere. It doesn't cost you a thing and every click really counts. Check it out:
SIMPLE SOLUTION: Race to Stop Global Warming
Peace
GG

Answer 6

Because the original belief was not serious enough for the liberal politicians to use as a means of putting the government in complete control of every aspect of our lives. So, they had to make it worse.

Answer 7

because the truth is starting to get out about the lie.

global warming is getting worse and happening quicker to scare you more into "believing" and motivates the missionaries get out to proselytize more converts.

Answer 8

They found a direct correlation between the severity of global warming and their funding.

Currently they are predicting that global warming is going to get much worse and they are preparing for it by increasing the size of their budgets.

Answer 9

Because theories and computer models are pretty much current versions of crystal balls and chicken bones. They're making educated guesses (at best).

Answer 10

It isn't its just normal nature