question for the global warming deniers/skeptics? . . isn't it better to be safe than sorry?

Question

what has caused the warming over the past century?

or do you not think there has been any warming? do the thermometers and ice core samples have a liberal bias?

if you think man is not to blame (or that co2 is not the cause), what do you think the cause is? please use experimental data to back your claim. using only "natural" factors, the earth's temp would have risen .16 centigrades. the observed temp increase was .74 centigrades. this increase is not normal and by no means gradual. when you compare solar output, co2 levels, sulfate levels, etc. (all known factors) up against the temperature increase, the only one that correlates is the co2 graph. some scientists claim that there could be another factor at play (also take note how 99% of them believe AGW is likely), but the scientists have not said what that factor might be. if you don't know the factor either, then are you in agreement with me that man made global warming (by co2) is the only current possible explanation?

also, quick run down of some extra info:

i often hear misinformed people state the 800 year co2 -temperature lag is evidence that co2 is not to blamed. it'd take to long to summarize that argument, so here's the link:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=13

i also once had someone tell me that the sun is to blame. this is not possible. the sun goes through 11 year cycles. we've experience 30 straight years of warming. also, if the sun were to blame, all planets would be warming. they are not

begona, there were a very small number of scientists who believed in that. certainly no consensus. sorry, but your statement is misleading.

and by the why, i'm not looking for silly statements like that. i want you to answer one question and only one question: what has caused the warming? if you can't answer that question, don't answer at all.

Answer 1

Actually, no.

- The losses from the economy with the gains from competitors would likely never be made up
- The UN scientists tasked to study global warming have stated that if all pollution were to stop now, the effects on global warming would be insignificant (ie, we have already passed the point of no return)
- The effects of global warming are not the end of the world. Power bases will shift, wars will probably result, but mankind will move onward regardless

The smart thing to do is to start planning on how to makes the coming affects have as small an impact as possible. Like most scientists, I believe it is real but that man is only a part of the equation; not the cause. Whether or not that puts us in your criteria for denier/skeptic, I don't know.

Answer 2

There are only a few possible explanations for the current undeniable warming. Actually some people are trying to claim the planet isn't warming as much as we think due to baised surface temperature measurements, but this is an absurd argument. Even if surface temperature measurements were biased (studies have shown they are not), satellite temperature measurements show the same warming.

So the possible explanations for the warming:

1) Human greenhouse gas emissions. This is inconvenient, so people try to find alternatives.

2) The Sun. A plausible explanation, if it weren't the case that solar output has decreased slightly over the past 30 years as global warming has accelerated rapidly.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6290228.stm

3) Natural cycles. Unfortunately, according to these cycles we should be in the middle of a cooling period.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AnxRBU2RzMydTSiCK08JtVDty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071012135025AAHflpr

But most deniers ignore the evidence and cite explanation 2 or 3 anyway. Unfortunately these are simply wrong.

A fourth "explanation" is sometimes used, that we simply don't have enough information to take action at this time. If this were the case, then you are correct that it's far better to be safe than sorry. Studies have shown that the most costly action in regards to global warming is inaction.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ahj_9Ts6XCPlEPR8x0ZiSSPty6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071019104255AATLfpC

Answer 3

I’m going to summarized this by answering to your last paragraph which is also the answer to the rest of the nonsense in the previous ones.
30 years ago accordingly to the same environmental whackos of today, we were in the beginnings of the ice age. Since then is being warming up ever so slightly that we forgot we supposed to have our azzes frozen by now.

I did answer your question, buy you didn‘t get what you want it to hear. IT’S CICLYCAL I’ll put it in a simple way. I’ve been 57 years in this planet. I’ve seen horrific winters in my youth where people literately had to dig tunnels thru the snow to go to work and, in the same year have summer days with 100º+F and a draught. Granted that was in Northern Spain, but I lived since the 70’s in the Chicago area, and believe me, It’s not such thing as warming of the planet the way you see it. The fact that is warmer by such a minute instance, should not be alarming, and besides, who is to say that the warming that we are experiencing is not the right climate in the first place since it had been cooling before! And one more thing to point out. Consensus comes about a bunch of people that decide to agree with each other without necessarily doing studies or knowing why, that doesn’t make something scientifically true. If I recall at one time the consensus was that the earth was flat and turned out to be round.

Answer 4

- most measurements only factor in atmospheric temperature, and sometimes oceanic temperature, I have heard that the earth's core is actually cooling, now that is a serious problem! without a molten core there is no magnetic shield, and then everything on the planet will die a lot quicker than global warming could do it.
- the observed weakening of the magnetic field allows more radiation to reach earth, which could be a contributing cause of global warming. The cycle for the weakening/strengthening of the earths magnetic field is believed to be on the order of thousands to hundreds of thousands of years.
- air born particulates absorb a significant percentage of the suns energy and turn it into heat energy in the atmosphere. If we reduce particulate emissions it should help reduce the warming faster than reducing co2.
- pockets of undisturbed oil are estimated to fail in the next several hundred years, if they were to fail and leak into the oceans... can you imagine something like thousands of Valdez spills poisoning the oceans at once. Even if they didn't fail, what would happen if a magma flow spilled into one, yikes!

Answer 5

its actually recently been discovered that it was a conspiracy with the refrigerator makers!!!

ya see, those light bulbs that are supposed to go out when ya close the door.....!!!

well, they've been stayin on all along!!!
just think of all that extra energy that the power plants have had to produce, all that extra pollution!!!!

that's why your milk has been getting spoiled before the expiration date!!!

man, what a scam!!!

i hope congress looks into this and they are held accountable
just goes to show ya, when things go unchecked...!!!

Answer 6

yes this is true , however i am skeptical of knee jerk reactions and the wasted time and money in those situations