i hope you understand that when dealing with a scientific phenomena as complex as global warming, everything is estimates, nothing is 100% true.
Temperature increase plotted next to solar activity and CO2 concentration in the atmosphere:
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/600px-Temp-sunspot-co2.svg.png
estimated contribution of components using a computer model- plotted next to the observed temperature:
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/Climate_Change_Attribution.png
main source:
http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/glob-warm.html
2007-10-08 14:40:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by PD 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Two places have a lot:
http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/
Some of my favorites are:
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record_png
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:1000_Year_Temperature_Comparison_png
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution_png
All have references to the peer reviewed scientific literature. 100% true.
jim z's graph isn't bad, but his interpretation is wrong.
Note that the graph goes backwards, right to left. The top three graphs are the three pieces of the Milankovic cycle. Note that two out of three are headed down. The 4th is the total, the combination of the first three. It is total solar radiation. Note that it too is headed down.
Solar radiation is decreasing now. But we're warming, because of CO2. Details:
"Recent oppositely directed trends in solar
climate forcings and the global mean surface
air temperature", Lockwood and Frolich (2007), Proc. R. Soc. A
doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1880
http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf
News article at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm
2007-10-08 23:14:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by Bob 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you really want to understand it, look at the attached graph on the bottom. It shows temperature and time over the last 1,000,000 years. Note that to the left is now and a million years ago to the far right. It shows that we have gone through several episodes of glaciation and subsequent warming. As can be clearly seen on the graph we have been on a warming trend for the last several thousand years. Because the graph is nearly vertical in the last 10,000 years, that indicates it has been warming rapidly. Those that pretend that evidence proves the latest bit of warming is caused man are ignorant of the facts in my opinion and are generally engaged in pushing a political agenda that has more to do with socialism than science IMO. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
2007-10-08 22:29:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by JimZ 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
This is a horrible topic for the fact that all agencies that are involved have graphs that are different from everyone else. I'm not sure of the website exactly, but do a search for the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
2007-10-08 22:05:05
·
answer #4
·
answered by Lost...i think 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
That first post (patrick) gives good data and plots
What you want to show is that until like 1900-1950
everything is pretty much flat, or oscillations cancel out, but around 1950 levels suddenly change and rise, then
it is most likely due to human devt rather than nature.
2007-10-09 08:54:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by ed s 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Try the source. This site has no direct relationship with Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or any of their projects; however, the founder of this site is a supporter, contributor, and administrator on the English Wikipedia.
2007-10-08 22:01:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/co2_data_mlo.html
longest running carbon dioxide measurements in the world...Mauna Loa, Hawaii
2007-10-08 22:12:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by ecoandy 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends...
this is a really good graph. check it out.
2007-10-08 22:47:45
·
answer #8
·
answered by tracy 2
·
0⤊
0⤋