Could global warming be a natural cycle?

Question

If you believe so, please qualify your answer with reliable facts or sources.

We know the world was warmer millions of years ago but these warm peaks were the culmination of warming trends spanning millions of years. If the planet warmed for the next million years at it's current rate it would reach 17,715°C (3 times as hot as the surface of the Sun).

So, where is there anything that proves or even suggests that at any point in Earth's history it has warmed at a anything even close to the current rate of warming?

If the current warming is a natural cycle then clearly this evidence exists, otherwise how else could such a conclusion have been drawn?

Alternatively, could it be that no one can produced the evidence to indicate the current warming is natural and therefore it's just an assumption or error of judgement by some people?

Answer 1

Haha that's funny, I asked the exact same question in the Politics section (because that's where I see most people claiming it's just a natural cycle) less than a half hour ago. I got some pretty amusing answers, I think.

Speaking of amusing, I like Tim's answer.

Answer 2

i'm really not an authority yet I do attempt to save up with new assistance in this challenge. So the following is my laymans time period answer as I comprehend it: in accordance to this application I talked about on the heritage channel, that they had some data that portion of international warming is by using a organic cycle. notwithstanding, they stated in this application that people can take portion of the blame and really are contributing, yet a number of it has to do with the sunlight. As you likely understand, the sunlight rotates because it spins. particular parts of the sunlight have more desirable photo voltaic flares. The sunlight is rotating to the point the position it truly is drawing close the realm the position photo voltaic flares are truly undesirable and this fringe of the sunlight is quickly dealing with the earth. This portion of the sunlight has not been uncovered to the earth for over 100 years. The very last time this occured back contained in the overdue 1800s, you'll study the confusing winters, floods and droughts that made heritage. those photo voltaic flares can actual attain into our environment and reason warming of gases, or international warming which outcomes our climate. back, people at the prompt are not off the hook, yet they don't look completely responsible. Can they help by using slicing back on emissions? maximum likely. large question!

Answer 3

Global warming IS a natural cycle that continually evolves over thousands of years. The issue isn't whether global warming is 'real' or not; the issue is that mankind has, since the start of the Industrial Revolution 150 years ago - helped to escalate the process. This doesn't allow time for humans, plants and animals to adapt to global changes in climate.
We humans are responsible for this: it's our smoke-belching factories; vehicle emissions; intrusive coal mining; rape of the rain forests; exploration of natural gas; destruction of mangrove forests; oil drilling; overfishing of the oceans; and disregard for the natural habitat of Earth's plant and animal kingdoms that destroy the natural cycle of things.
For those of you who haven't started planning a family yet, be especially aware of the impact global warming will almost certainly have on your ancestors IF we don't do something to curb this problem within the next few years.
Imagine that your daughter gives birth to a beautiful little grand daughter thirty years from now. As that darling grand daughter sits on your knee and asks, "Grandpa, why didn't you do something to stop the global warming problem?" - HOW will you answer her??
Fifty years from now, if we do nothing, there will not be any clean water left on Earth, there will not be enough pure air to breathe, and all of Earth's natural wonders will be gone. No trees. No ocean life. No forests. No exotic frogs. No insects. No polar bears. No sea otters. No blue whales. No venus fly traps. No mushrooms. No corn fields. No babbling brooks or streams. No clean lakes.
And you can so, "So what?" But if caribou can't live on the Earth; or fish can't swim in the sea; or birds can't breathe as they fly through the air - humans won't be able to survive either.
So maybe your gas-guzzling SUV or Hummer is more important to you than your family heritage. Maybe your fancy homes, stock portfolios, Armani suits and country club memberships are more important to you than your great-grandchildren. But all those 'things' won't bring you much comfort in your old age.
All we will have is horrendous pollution (which might mean your little grand daughter will have to wear a gas mask to breathe), with a world covered in asphalt and cement. -RKO- 10/12/07

Answer 4

Tim's answer made me chuckle.
Same thing I said in Dana1980's q-some people cling to their excuses and apparently travel in circles where nothing new or different is ever discussed or heard.
You know, I remember hearing Rush Limbaugh say that there was no GW-it was all made up...the next time I was forced to listen to that obnoxious lying hypocrite, he was trying to say that Gw existed, OF COURSE, but it was manmade and there was nothing to show that humans had anything to do with it.
I don't see how anyone with common sense couldn't get wind of all the natural resources that are being depleted and how enormous human population has become, no matter what some fat*ss windbag preaches to them at the top of his obnoxious lungs.

Answer 5

Similar symptoms do not always indicate the same disease.

Different root cause, global warming is superimposed on natural climate patterns, they haven't gone away, but they are not the same thing.

Answer 6

it is not like you would care. Everybody has heard the same arguments on both sides. You, as with everyone else here, has formed his or her opinion. It doesnt matter what you read, you will not change your mind. (And you will probably ridicule the answers on another forum, like Dana did here)

Answer 7

yes the second ice age millions of years ago was a natural cycle way would this be.

Answer 8

You don't get it. YOUR debating science. Theories, facts, observations, trends, etc. THEY are debating politics. It isn't about science for them. It's about proving that Liberals are just stupid smelly hippies that will say anything to get what they want. When you quote science facts to them, it sounds exactly like the Bible sounds when they preach to you. They are thinking, "Here we go again. Crazy hippy is gonna tell me that "science" has all the answers. Jesus help us."

Answer 9

It could be partly becaue of that. I think it may be some by man and some by natrual.

Answer 10

I guess it depends on which proxy dataset you believe in. Do you believe in the little iceage? It came and went fairly quickly and seemed to be a natural cycle.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-Spencer-on-global-warming.htm