Ok does anybody agree with me now?!?

Question

Ok so I've come to a conclusion after looking into different things on the earth warming and stuff, and those of you who saw my question earlier, I questioned global warming. My conclusion now is that the earth is always going to change and so of course it may be warming, but not because of us. That is un-realistic. It is just doing it's natural thing of warming which isn't going to hurt anything. Does anybody agree with me on this? I'll respect your opinions if you respect mine. :)

Like I say, the climate will always change but nothing killer. So I wouldn't call it global warming, just the climate doing it's own thing! Yes it may have gotten warmer over the past hundred years, but it could get cooler in the next hundred years! It will do its own thing and all we can do is just help take care of the climate, but not freak out about something terrible happening.

For the person who said that I got my information from a book from 1970, you obviously didn't read the whole thing. The book was written around 2005.

Answer 1

you have to go on studying a bit more
Global warming Kills 150.000 people a year at the moment which is expected to double soon ,
So it is a killer
after all

and man has been changing his environments and subsequently his local climates for 6000 years already
when people cut all the trees down and change the forest into a dessert how can you say that they did not change their piece of the world

Some are so desperate to absolve humanity from blame and it cannot be done they are hundreds of years too late ,

as for global warming hurting people there is evidence of that all over the world ,and it is gonna hurt you too when food prices rise and real good drinking water becomes very scarce.

not all of mans destruction is called Global warming but it sure adds to the phenomena http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AoBt.WhdUBzxzMd.CIKmEorsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20070904231626AAlpjcr

Answer 2

If you do not believe we are causing global warming.Here is a Little experiment you can do that will prove you wrong.Go in to any major city with a thermometer take the the temperature,then quickly drive to the country take the temperature again.You will always find it several degree`s cooler in the country.Is nature causing temperature change from city to country or is it are pollution.Fear of global warming is good.The fear of nuclear war is the only thing that has prevented it from happening so far.Nobody want`s to destroy world.

Answer 3

No sorry, I don't agree with you at all!

First of all, I took a look at your other question and you where mentioning a book from 1970!!! Hey, do you know how much research that has been done and how the climate has changed since then? It's like the stone age when it comes to climate science.
In just a few years there have been major improvements made in the understandings of these things. But it doesn't surprise me when people, who doesn't believe that man can alter climate, refers to sources done around late 90th (or like you, even earlier) because almost everyone of the skeptics back then believe in the greenhouse theory now. And these old alternative theories has been proven wrong since then.

"It is just doing it's natural thing of warming which isn't going to hurt anything".

Once again this is wrong! Whether or not this warming is natural (which it isn't) it's doing a great harm to lots of eco systems around our globe, just like rapid climate change has always done in earth's history. But if you happen to believe in creationism I will not be able to convince you about that, nor the human interference with the climate...

Answer 4

As all people yet Yankee followers have suggested i haven't rather observed any Sox followers overreacting...i think of there have been some undesirable calls yet that happens in video games and that i understand the Sox stands out as the income of undesirable calls in different video games...the only ingredient i became disillusioned by way of became that they did no longer toss Joba...i understand they gained't, yet i think of the MLB desires to positive and droop him...i like how he throws at Youkilis exceptionally much each hazard he gets and the final excuse he can arise with each time is: I wasn't attempting to hit him it became a accident...if absolutely everyone rather believes that its a accident i think so sorry for you.

Answer 5

Hi, I answered your previous question. Good that you're asking 'real' questions about climate change - some people don't.

The point you make about Earth naturally warming is a very valid one, and it's true. Ever since this planet was created it's been either warming or cooling due to entirely natural events. After it's fiery creation it cooled for billions of years and then fell into a more regular pattern of warming and cooling.

This pattern explains the coming and going of ice ages, we know there have been at least four full ice age cycles each spanning about 125 million years. At their peak, temps get about 20°C (36°F) warmer than they are now and at the troughs about 10°C colder (note 1).

Nested within these very long cycles are other shorter cycles, it gets more complex as there's cycles within cycles within cycles within cycles.

In terms of the time that humans have been on the planet, changes to the climate have been caused by the movement of Earth in space and changes in the behaviour of the sun. These changes follow regular patterns - just like the movement of planets in the solar system are regular. We know where the Earth and Sun are within these cycles, we can also map where we've been and where we'll go in the future (note 2).

The Sun has a role to play in determining out climate but changes are only of consequence in the long term. In time scales of decades the changes in the Sun are very small (note 3).

To put some numbers to it - in the 10,000 years prior to the Industrial Revolution the general trend was one of warming, during this period the ave global temp increased by 1°C, equivalent to 0.0001°C per year. Currently temps are increasing by 0.0177°C - 177 times as fast (note 4).

Hope this helps. Just as something of a side issue, the planet won't be cooling in the next 100 years (unless we do something to cause it). Partly because the natural cycles ensure warming but also because of the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmopshere. These take varying lengths of time to disipate (from 4 days for water vapour to 31,500 years for sodium hexaflouride). The concentrations currently in the atmopshere will ensure the planet warms for many years yet even if we were to cut our emissions to zero.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

SUPPLEMENTAL EXPLANATIONS

Note 1 - Earth is 4.567 billion years old, we have climate date going back 542 million years obtained using oxygen isotope analysis (O18), we can't go any further back using current technology. From this data we know there have been four complete ice age cycles, it's likely there were other earlier ones as well. Not many as for most of the life of the planet it's been cooling since it's creation.

Note 2 - The Earth 'bounces' up and down in space - orbital inclination, it also changes the path it takes around the sun - eccentricity, varies the amount by which it is leaning towards the sun - obliquity, and spins like a gyroscope on it's southern tip - precession. These cycles interact with each other but they are very slow, the shortest frequency (one of the precessional cycles) being 19,000 years. They are the reason for the approx 100,000 year advance and retreat of glaciers. 18,000 years ago we entered a warming phase due to these cycles, they'll keep causing Earth to warm (very slowly) for many thousands of years yet.

Note 3 - The heat we receive from the sun (solar irradiance) is measured in Watts per square metre per year - it's the amount of heat energy reaching the Earth's surface. The mean is 1366Wm2yr, during the entire course of a solar cycle (sun spots) this varies by just 1.3Wm2yr - a deviation from the mean of less than one two-thousandths. It's not enough to have any noticeable effect unless there's a positive or negative deviation that spans hundreds of years (this last happened approx 500 years ago) and even then the effect is a very slow but cumulative one.

Note 4 - It's more complicated than that as there are other factors involved, when these are taken into account the rate of warming isn't as dramatic and the planet is only warming 17 times as fast as it should be.

Answer 6

Sorry,no. The fact tha tthere have been warming or cooling periods in the past doesn't tellus much about what is happening NOW.

The current global warming isn't a matter of debate--it is an established scientific fact. But it is different in two important respects. First--it is occuring VERY fast. natural cycles in the past took centuries or milllenia. The current global warming is happening in decades.

The second is that we know specifically wha thte cause is--primarily a rise of CO2 in the atmosphere. And--contrary to what the "skeptics" keep saying--things like solar output changes are not the cause, or volcanoes, etc. Scientists thought of all those things--and more--years ago and checked them out as possibilities. And showed they were NOT responsible for the current global warming.

There are natural sources of CO2--but those are in an "equilibrrium state"--as much is absorbed back into the environment as is produced. The ONLY source that can account for the observed rise in CO2 is human activity.

My point--its good you are thinking about this--but you need to do some more research. This isn't a "debate"--the scientific debate has been over for some time, and the existance of the current global warming--and its human origins--are established scientific facts.

Answer 7

Feel good about your self you are one of the few who is smart enough to research it and embrace the facts and not the emotions . Global warming is becoming the new world religion. An new religions can and do become very dangerous.

Answer 8

Isn't it funny that the only people claiming that global warming is a "scientific fact" aren't scientists?

Anders - Your "research" does NOT tell me that humans have emitted any CO2, only that measurements taken today don't match air samples trapped in ice for 150 years. Which means what exactly?

Answer 9

I agree with you, but I'm thinking in bigger terms. I'm thinking in thousands and tens of thousands years. We've only been recording weather for a few hundred years. We've had ice ages and "little" ice ages, the earth naturally warmed up long before we were here to melt that ice. We don't know what the earth is going to do next. I personally believe that we're in-between ice ages now, just part of the cycle.

Answer 10

If you take a careful look at how forrestation have changed on Earth's surface due to Human interactions,, I think you should see that Humans alter the Earth.

Regarding climate change:
The Earths surface is 510,065,600 km, or 5,10065600e +14m2.

The CO2 levels has risen (from 1850) from 280 PPM to 383 PPM today. This translates in to a weight percentage of 0.0582%.
("0.0383 V% x [44.0095/28.97] = 0.0582 m% CO2
whereby molar mass=44.0095 g/mole
and mean molar mass of air=28.97 g/mole")

The Atmosphere weighs 5.1480e +18 kg. (According to NOAA, AGU ).

"The total weight of CO2 = 0.0582% x 5.1480 e +15 tonnes
= 2.996e +12 tonnes."

Divided by the Earths surface, 510,065,600 km, we get that Humans have, since 1850, emitted enough CO2 to create a surplus of 5874 tonnes CO2 per square kilometer. Now, that is a lot of weight. You are telling me that all that doesn't matter?