What do you think of Global Warming?

Question

Is it our fault (greenhouse gases) or a weather cycle or both?

Answer 1

There simply is not enough data to answer this question with certainty. One of the last remaining mysteries that would solve the problem of how much of global warming is solar and how is caused by humanity, is the satellite record of solar energy levels reaching earth. Unfortunately there is not a consistent record over the last thirty years of total solar irradiance (TSI), so there are two basic TSI datasets, one called ACRIM and one called PMOD. Unfortunately the space shuttle challenger disaster caused a gap in the ACRIM data during a critical time of solar maximum, so there is some disagreement on how to bridge the gap.

http://www.acrim.com/

ACRIM by some climatologists put the warming in the last three decades at 35% solar or more.

PMOD puts the warming over the same period by only 10%.

See table 1 in the following paper for various trends computed.

http://www.fel.duke.edu/~scafetta/pdf/2005GL025539.pdf

If ACRIM were integrated into climate models and all of the positive feedback mechanisms associated with the increase in solar energy were properly factored in the solar based contribution to global warming would likely excede 35%, by a substantial margin.

Answer 2

It's both natural and manmade.

The Earth's climate has always changed, it swings from lows of approx 5°C to highs of approx 35°C then back again, a cycle that takes around 125 million years to complete and is the reason for the coming and going of ice ages.

The natural variations are governed by a complex series of cycles affecting both Earth and the Sun. Being cyclical we can map them, we can then effectively perform an equation taking into account all the negative and positive contributory factors to give us a net result. When we do they the result shows the planet should be warming very slowly of it's own accord. Indeed, this is precisely what has been happening for thousands of years now. The calculations are absolutely spot on.

However, in recent decades the rate at which temps are rising has gone way beyond anything that could possible be attributed to natural causes. Not that this is a surprise.

We know the role that greenhouse gases play in our atmosphere and in maintaining the planet at a habitable temperature, in simple terms, they retain heat. The higher the concentration of greenhouse gases the more heat is retained. It's effectively an insulating layer.

Since the onset of industrialisation, human activities have pumped over two trillion tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, this is many times more than natural processes can handle. The inevitable result is an accumulation of surplus gases such that at no time since humans have been on the planet have concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases been as high as they are now or been rising so rapidly. Ultimately this causes greater retention of thermal radiation (heat) and a progressively warming atmosphere.

The whole basis of global warming is in fact an extremely simple one - greenhouse gases retain heat. It's so simple that it can be demonstrated in any reasonably well equipped science lab, something that no amount of argument or skepticism can ever possible change.

Assigning a specific figure to the contribution made by manmade and natural effects is difficult, or at least to provide a precise figure. The reason being that the underlying natural warming trend isn't a constant one. Strip away all human components and the Earth is warming but not at a steady rate. For this reason we use long term averages (30 years and more) but even so, there are still many variables to which a specific value can not be assigned. So instead, we can assign zero or minumum values and maxuimum values to give a range of outcomes. Doing so means we can confidently say that at least 80% of the current warming is human induced and that the most likely figure is in the 90 to 95% range.

Answer 3

Government is the institution which stands to gain from enviromental protection. More EPA regs mean more revenue for the local, state, and federal government by increased fines and taxes.

Our country in particular has been harped on for over 20 years about global warming. And before it was GW scientist were saying that greenhouse gases would cause another ice age.

The problem is people put to much blind faith in science and never question for what intent research was done, how it was done, and how data is processed. Then ever worse, people expect the government to do something about it. The last thing we want is the gov't to fix our problems.

So why do we still use gasoline? Does the gov't want us to use something else? Of course not, taxes on gasoline sales provides revenue for the gov't. Do scientist want to solve the problem, no. If they did then they'd lose their funding.

GW is a front for something more diabolical. It's an attempt to attack capitalism and convince the populas that consumerism is evil.

Scientist are not always right, the data isn't always pure, and the conclusions are not always sound. And don't believe everything a politician says either, they depend heavily on the science of GW and it's simply a sham.

Answer 4

The Climate always has changed one way or another, always will. Only a fool would deny that. I'd say it's negligable, and irrelevant, given the timescale that AGW is threatening to work in. If the climate reaches tipping point (+3C) then humanity is in trouble.

We can't do anything about normal cyclical change we can about greenhouse gases.

Answer 5

60 Scientists Debunk Global Warming Fears

http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264777

Answer 6

To say that we've affected the earth in only a few decades of internal combustion engines is one of the bigger, if not biggest.. ignorant bs you can spew out

Look up the Medieval Warm, we had no engines back then
Its temperatures were MUCH MUCH MUCH MUCH higher than todays

No engines, all natural non mechanic warming
Global (CLIMATE CHANGE)
is real, but not caused by people
No, we don't help out, but we don't make it as worse as people are trying to say.

Saying that we caused something that is all around NATURAL is ignorant- Just stupid.

We didn't cause the moon and the stars, we didn't cause winter

WE DID NOT CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING

Answer 7

I think as a world, we should all work together and do some things like: turning lights off when not needed and turning water off, walkin to work or cycling, and switching things off at the plug. Not only would we all add years to our life by decreasing global warming, but you would have more money because you wouldnt have to spend as much on electricity.

Answer 8

It is we, who emit the green house gases at an uncontrolled rate nd hence it is mostly our fault

Answer 9

Real. Mostly (not entirely) our fault.

There's so much evidence from so many angles, that this will be long. And the real proof is in the links.

This is science and what counts is the data.

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)
Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command

Here are two summaries of the mountain of peer reviewed data that convinced Admiral Truly and the vast majority of the scientific community, short and long.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report.html
summarized at:
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

It's (mostly) not the sun:

http://solar-center.stanford.edu/sun-on-earth/FAQ2.html

And the first graph above shows that the sun is responsible for about 10% of it. When someone says it's the sun they're saying that thousands of climatologists are stupid and don't look at the solar data. That's ridiculous.

Science is quite good about exposing bad science or hoaxes:

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/ATG/polywater.html

There's a large number of people who agree that it is real and mostly caused by us, who are not liberals, environmentalists, stupid, or conceivably part of a "conspiracy". Just three examples of many:

"Global warming is real, now, and it must be addressed."

Lee Scott, CEO, Wal-Mart

"Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming."

Senator John McCain, Republican, Arizona

“DuPont believes that action is warranted, not further debate."

Charles O. Holliday, Jr., CEO, DuPont

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/412.php?lb=hmpg1&pnt=412&nid=&id=

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

"There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know... Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point. You really can't find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away."

Dr. Jerry Mahlman, NOAA

Good websites for more info:

http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"

Answer 10

greenhouse gases but it's probably both.