Is global warming a natural process or manmade?

Question

No yes or no, BE SPECIFIC AND GIVE DETAIL TO YOUR ANSWER!

Answer 1

It is a completely natural cycle. You have to remember what the world went through. It started as a ball of molten rock. Very different than it is today. But thats a much larger cycle. There have been examples where a scientist in the early 1800s studied the cycles of the sun and as the sunspots patterned in their appearances, the wheat sales went up and down. Al Gore's movie "A Convienient Lie" (His dad made all his money in Occidental, even though Gore claims to be a life-long crusader against global warming, gave Occidental hundreds of thousands of dollars) His movie has been disproved so many times. Such as the ice core. The CO2 levels rise AFTER the heat. Didn't know that, did you? Look at the links below. Get a book called "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism" by Christopher C Horner.

Answer 2

I've done a LOT of research on this; going way beyond the usualy headlines and political, agenda-driven stuff.

My take? The evidence is inconclusive; not for lack of good scientists working hard - there's tons of data. The problem is, we only have a few years - like a couple of decades - of real, scientific data. And we don't have the computer power (yet) to accurately model the climate. So we just don't know. The data can be interepreted in a number of different ways.

Here's what I'm pretty confident about:
- in its history, the earth has experienced HUGE temperature swings. As in, tropical jungles at the poles, and a different time, frozen tundra in Kansas. All this happened long before man came along.
- it just happens that right now, we're at a peak of warmness compared to the rest of the earth's history.
- it's pretty clear that there are natural cycles and patterns on a very long time scale that have temperature swings that far exceed what scientists have measured lately.
- it's not proven (to me and others) that human emissions are significant enough to over-ride these larger, natural swings. I'm open to the possibility, just not convinced.

Regardless, the issue has been so politicized that we're seeing pure silliness. Cmon, is a hybrid car going to "save the earth" when China is industrializing at an amazing rate, with no emissions controls at all?

Anyway, there's your answer.

Answer 3

Both natural and man-make.

recently, many data proved the the correlation between solar activities and the weather on the earth. It also indicated that CO2 was the result instead of cause in the past.

However, both sides are going to extreme. They missed one thing. Data for the pass few yearsindicated that the warming was in step with CO2 and solar activities.

So far, there is not even an empirical formula to correlate the effect of CO2 and weather or solar activity and weather. It just the words "direct proportional to"

Perhaps, the economy down so much, politician need to create some imagination to free the economy by encouraging people to waste more. Perhaps, they need to cover up the high fuel spending of F15 in order to win the wars.

Anyway, the situation is much complicated than the past due to much higher population and much complex industrial processors. CO2 does have direct influence on the weather. Perhaps, you need to let the opposition to directly drinking the rain-water so they learn how acidic it is.

The temperature in atmosphere seems good to the opposition., but they forgot thermal equilibrium. In addition, when large amount of energy reflected to the earth, it would not heat up the top. They should learn more on Radiation.

All in all, human can control the release of CO2 but not the solar activities.

Answer 4

There is no concrete evidence that there is global warming. It's still debatable among scientist. But it's both, some say humans are speeding up the process too quickly. But some say we have nothing to worry about.. Right now I think it's more political then anything. Politics like to play on the fears of the people.
If you remeber the same people, not long ago were saying we are in for another ice age. When that did'nt work they went for global warming.

Answer 5

i've got have been given executed extremely some learn in this; going way previous the usualy headlines and political, schedule-pushed stuff. My take? the archives is inconclusive; now no longer for loss of effective scientists working stressful - there is extremely some archives. the venture is, we purely have some years - like a pair of many years - of actually, medical archives. And we don't have the workstation capability (yet) to top sort the climate. So we do extremely now no longer know. the archives would desire to be interepreted in limitless distinctive approaches. good it extremely is what i'm extremely powerful approximately: - in its history, the earth has experienced extensive temperature swings. As in, tropical jungles on the poles, and a distinctive time, frozen tundra in Kansas. All this handed off long till now guy have been given right here alongside. - it extremely happens that applicable now, we are at a precise of heat temperature on the same time as while in comparison with the something of the earth's history. - it extremely is very sparkling that there are organic and organic cycles and types on an exceedingly long term scale that have temperature swings that far exceed what scientists have measured these days. - it extremely isn't shown (to me and others) that human emissions are significant adequate to over-experience those better powerful, organic and organic swings. i'm open to the possibility, extremely now no longer confident. Regardless, the venture has been so politicized that we are seeing organic and organic silliness. Cmon, is a hybrid motor vehicle going to "keep the earth" on the same time as China is industrializing at an spectacular fee, with out emissions controls in any admire? as nicely, there is your answer.

Answer 6

Both. Man has been burning fossil fuels and adding to acid rain, smog, and pollution more in the last 50 years than all the years before. The fires, volcanoes, droughts which cause dust storms, etc. are mainly acts of nature (God's wrath?) but they have harmful effects that spread world wide.

So, what can we have any hope of limiting? Not volcanoes; fires only to a small degree; drought - heck, we're adding to that ourselves. If we can do something, we ought to at least try. doing nothing and continuing on the path we've been on hardly seems the wisest choice.

Answer 7

I think global warming is a natural process, but man contributes/produce the precursors (NOX, CO,aerosols, etc)of speeding up reactions such as formation of smog, formation of bulk amount of ozone in the atmosphere while depleting presence in the stratosphere, etc. Man activities had resulted to imbalances of chemical reactions and proportioning of compounds and element, thus, global warming evolved.

Answer 8

Truly you cant answer this question one way or the other. Scientist will lean towards man made 'cause no one can come up how or when global warming actually started. We didn't keep records on such things at the beginning of time, so natually Scientist would say man made with the records that were kept on climate change.

Answer 9

if it even is then were screwed becasue india, china pakistna, vietnam, cambodia and alot of other countries are going through industirial revolution so even if america was green were still gunna be polluting for like 50 more years personally bring the heat i love heat i live in mass it was 21 degrees tonghit adn 35 in the morning,

Answer 10

It is a bunch of gooblety gob that AL GORE made up to get elected. It is just as cold and been even COLDER , even in the SOUTHERN states these past 3 to 5 years......
Sorry, dont have my vote.....No such a thing as 'global warming"