Will anyone ever come up with proof of manmade climate change/global warming/cooling?

Question

I mean something besides, "I read it on the internet so it must be true."

Answer 1

Most of the "global warming/global cooling" theories are based on computer models and projections.

Most scientists admit that there's no proof of any type that human or animal activity has any effect on climate.

The alarmists are using this to get permission to slap large taxes on everything people do. It's sad that so many have bought into such nonsense.

They control the government schools, so they force kids to watch Gore's movie and other propaganda about polar bears drowning and such lies that the kids are being traumatized.

I heard about a new book out that helps in this matter. If you have children who have been unduly traumatized by the propaganda, look into this book:
-----------------------
"The Sky's NOT Falling: Why It's OK to Chill About Global Warming"

Are you a parent who's had to comfort a child upset by Photoshopped pictures of drowning animals and faux "the end is near" documentaries? Then this smartly-written book about global warming, designed to educate, not indoctrinate, is just what you've been looking for.

"The Sky's NOT Falling: Why It's OK To Chill About Global Warming" (ISBN 0976726947, Paperback, $17.95 list) is exactly what a book for kids on climate and today's environmental challenges should be -- fact-filled, fun, apolitical, and optimistic about the future of our planet.

In "The Sky's NOT Falling," natural resources policy expert Holly Fretwell shows kids 8-12 that it's human ingenuity and adaptability - not a mindless fear of change - that are most likely to guarantee the Earth a healthy future.

An adjunct professor at Montana State and a fellow at The Property and Environment Research Center (PERC), Ms. Fretwell brings both educational credentials and practical experience to the debate, giving kids the straight scoop about the earth's current natural warming phase -- and the potentially devastating human and economic consequences of politically motivated responses to it.

• Appropriate for ages 8-12
• The author is a mother of two
• Peer reviewed to ensure accuracy
• Provides a balanced look at a complex issue
• A refreshing, accessible combination of science and economics

Sure, our planet is changing, but it has before and will again. There's a lot more to the climate change story than your kids may have heard! Can we really adapt to a changing world in ways that help animals and the environment while keeping people working and countries growing strong? Of course we can.
-----------------------

Answer 2

No proof, one persons smoking gun for a theory is another persons smoking gun against a theory. I think people like to read material with the peer review stamp of a approval, without actually looking at the data.

The stratosphere:

1971-1981 warming;
1985-1991 warming;
1995-2007 warming;

The stratosphere has been warming for 27 years of the 49 that equates to 55%. So that kind of blows that smoking gun out of the water. But instead of the majority of the scientific community attempting to understand why does the stratosphere cool so dramatically after certain volcanic erruptions, they spin the data as proof that manmade global warming exists, and call it a smoking gun.

http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/images/update_images/global_upper_air.png

That is why the debate is far from over.

.

Answer 3

man made global warming is caused by greed and power on the part of environmental groups.

the first real attempt was the big scare for global cooling in the 70's.

fllow the track record of the movement, see how accurate these "experts" have been.

here are some of the predictions i grew up with over the past 40 years:

famine
mass death
shifting of food production regions
climate change
overpopulation
global cooling
mass starvation
massive glaciers
uninhabitable places on earth
running out of fossil fuel
pollution physically altering man (through adaptation)

all this was supposed to happen by the year 2000, and if man didn't stop using fossil fuels. we had 30+ years of "irrefutable data" showing that man caused it too.

but we didn't stop, we used more!

STRANGELY, NOT ONE PREDICTION HAS CAME TRUE YET!

now we're suppose to "believe" in global warming?

Answer 4

The Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is now available for purchase from the Cambridge University Press. I believe it can be downloaded, too. The book is called "Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis."

The insights and research results of individual scientists, even scientists of unquestioned genius, are confirmed or rejected in peer-reviewed literature by the combined efforts of many other scientists. It is not the belief or opinion of the scientists that is important, but rather the results of this testing.

The link below is available on the Internet, but the information was gathered by many people from many different institutions & agencies. Give it an objective look, please, and let us know what you find. I'm willing to bet that you'll start to see what so many have been talking about. Yes, many ill-informed people are jumping on the bandwagon and citing facts poorly or out-of-context. This source is the real deal and will inform you.

Answer 5

That happened in the 1940's. Where have you been?

Afratta, everything you list was predicted by scientists and has occurred or is occurring, EXCEPT global cooling and massive glaciers (do you mean "ICE AGE"?), and the last item. Those two were not predicted by the scientists, they were predicted by a denier, Lowell Ponte. He went to war with the scientists, and is still at it today.

The last item is of course, a Star Trek episode.

Answer 6

Well you have the other standard line "A Consensus Of Scientist Say It's True" or the Variation of that "90% of scientist say global warming is true" so that's proof global warming is real.

We left objective science long ago. Global warming is true because it gets the most votes, I guess.

Answer 7

It's been proven long ago. Will any skeptic ever read it?

1. If the current warmth is caused by the Sun, then Earth is receiving more energy and the entire atmosphere should be warming. But if the greenhouse effect is increasing, then we're getting the same amount of energy from the Sun, but it's being distributed differently: more heat trapped at the surface means less heat escapes to the stratosphere. So if it's the sun, the stratosphere gets warmer, and if it's greenhouse, the stratosphere gets cooler.

We've been taking regular stratospheric temperatures by radiosonde balloons since the 1950's, and the stratosphere has been cooling nearly the entire time. This is a "smoking gun" proof for increased greenhouse effect. Here's the data.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/temp/sterin/sterin.html

2. If the current warmth is caused by the Sun, then we're getting more energy in the daytime, which means daytime temperatures should be most affected. But if the current warmth is caused by increased greenhouse effect, then we're losing less heat at night, which means nighttime temperatures should be most affected. So if it's the Sun, the daily temperature range increases, and if it's increased greenhouse, the daily temperature range decreases. (On Venus, with its runaway greenhouse effect, day and night temperatures are identical.)

Once again the data are easy to find, and once again we find that daily temperature ranges are decreasing, because nighttime temps are rising faster than daytime temps. This is a second "smoking gun" proof of increasing greenhouse effect as the cause of the current warmth. Here is the peer-reviewed science:
http://ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0450(1984)023%3C1489:DDTRIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2
http://www.bom.gov.au/bmrc/clfor/cfstaff/jma/2004GL019998.pdf

3. The increased greenhouse effect is caused by increased greenhouse gases in the air, which are human caused. The most important of these is CO2. The level of CO2 in the air had been stable at about 280 ppmv for 10,000 years prior to the industrial revolution. (Here's the data):
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_data.html
... but in the last 200 years, the level of CO2 has increased to 383 ppmv, a 38% increase. Here's the data:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/law/law.html

And we know that the increased CO2 is due to fossil fuel burning, because isotopic analysis shows that increasing amounts of atmospheric CO2 is composed of "old" carbon combined with "young" oxygen. Here's the science:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984JGR....8911731S
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mksg/teb/1999/00000051/00000002/art00005
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/256/5053/74

So what's left to prove?

Answer 8

No, we cannot prove if man has had an effect on global warming. The reason we can't prove it is because we can't test the theory on another, uninhabited earth. We will never know what the cycle of the planet itself, without humans doing what we do, would have been.

Answer 9

I would probably qualify that with "significant" man made climate change since I am sure we have some effect, but I am also sure it is greatly exaggerated.

Answer 10

Got a garage? Close its doors and turn your car on inside of it. Stick around for awhile inside the garage, but not too long. The politicians don't want to loose your tax contributions. If people can't realize what they are doing to their environment, they don't deserve a place to live and chances are good that in a short time (by histories clock) they won't have one.