Global warming skeptics out there, how do you object the 'over 300ppm' thing?

Question

I do believe that the earth is warming up (Global Warming) and I do also believe that GW is caused by humans

In Al Gore's movie and book (page 47) there's this spectacular plot showing CO2 concentration rise (from ice drilling samples), it sort of fluctuates for 500000 years then in the last decades in goes up to 300ppm and even more, it is therefore very very likely due to humans

My question: how can someone object this? Is the data wrong? is it falsified? Is another effect causing the rise? Please explain your theory. I am open to GW being wrong or fake only if someone can convince me

snck do you watch TV news, do you read papers? how do you believe that men went to the moon or we have a war in irak if you never went there? we must trust someone at some point

Answer 1

Global warming skeptics generally ignore scientific facts like this, as you can see from the answers so far.

They'll make general nebulous and inaccurate claims like 'oh CO2 doesn't cause warming it lags behind it' or 'oh humans only cause 3% of the CO2 in the atmosphere' or some garbage like that.

It's really quite simple. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Humans are releasing CO2 which has been trapped for millions of years by burning fossil fuels. The natural carbon cycle cannot absorb these extra emissions, so the CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere.

As a result, CO2 concentrations are now above 380 ppm. They have not been above 280 ppm in over 650,000 years. This increases the greenhouse effect, thus causing global warming.

Global warming skeptics never have an intelligent response to this simple science. They try to step around it by saying that global warming is just a liberal hoax or Al Gore is fooling us in order to make a bunch of money, but when it comes down to the science, they're simply ignorant or in denial.

Answer 2

A single eruption by a volcano puts more CO2 into the atmosphere than mankind has done since we have been here. Have you ever heard Al Gore or the other Chicken Little's complain about volcanoes? You are seeing a manipulation of real facts to fit an specific agenda. That is commonly called propaganda.

The real problem for the earth is over population. But that is to political for the whiners to talk about. Because the minorities are the top breeders.

Answer 3

Yes of course the CO2 levels have risen, and this can in part be attributed to man.

If that's where you stop, then you are only scratching the surfac of global warming science.

OK, so what's the relationship between C02 concentration and heat increase? Please research this yourself. You will become one of the 1% of global warming alarmists who actually have spent time understanding the science.

You will see that around 95% of the heat radiated by the earth is already absorbed even at 250 ppm. The point is that there is not much heat left to absorb. This fact puts a hard limit on the amount of additional heat that can be trapped due to greenhouse gases.


OK, so I state something that is accepted as fact to all who study the earth heat balance and for that I get thumbs down. OK, maybe some would say 93% or up to 98% of the heat energy is absorbed. But I have taken an average at about 95%. But you guys give me thumbs down!?! Please do your homework. I am NOT a global warming skeptic. I simply have some understanding of the physical processes involved and am trying to steer you away from a purely emotional, herd-like, informational cascade approach, in favor of getting you to form your own opinion base on science.

But perhaps, science is dead, and the informational cascade created by the wb and children cannot be stopped. Oh well, life was fun while it lasted........

Answer 4

Few people dispute that. Sometimes someone asks a question about whether the concentration of CO2 is really as high as is claimed, but not very often.

The atmospheric concentration of CO2 isn't controversial, neither is the reason why it's there or it's opacity to infrared radiation. What is controversial is something called radiative forcing positive feedback. If you don't believe in radiative forcing positive feedback then you have a reason to believe in any significant man made global warming.

Answer 5

a lot of the "facts" were based on assumptions. huge leaps of faith based on unproven science. if a scientist has a theory, it should not be referenced as fact on another theory based on the first. a lot of what al gore says is like this. I'm not saying GW doesn't exist, but if you look at the REAL facts, the same people that claim GW nowadays were claiming an ice-age was coming 30 years ago. yes, pollution is a huge problem that we, as humans, have introduced into this world. i agree on curbing some of the behaviors we have, but to listen to al's speculations as dogma is asinine.

Answer 6

You get all your facts from Al Gore and his movie and book. Ask yourself if Al Gore has any alterior motives first. Have you verified these numbers yourself? Have multiple labs verified the source AG is using for his movie and book?

There are alot of people out there that dispute alot of what Al Gore has said about the enviroment and GW. They have facts and figures as well. Why dont you use your brain and go do your own research instead of basing your believes around what one individual or side of the arguement wants to present you.

Answer 7

If you have to believe something, it's not science, it's mysticism. No one 'believes' what the speed of light is. This is a known fact provable by anyone.

CO2 has been higher in the past. The Earth got over it.

CO2 is a symptom of warming, not the cause.

Answer 8

Global Warming is happening, however it is not man made.

Those levels of CO2 are a representation of the eruptions from volcanoes. There is a lag time between the eruption of the volcano and the effects of the climate.

The Earth is enormous. Humans do not have the power to change the Earth's climate. What we put out with our cars and industries is minuscule to what volcanoes put out.

Answer 9

I saw this movie today in class. It is very moving. I agree, I don't know how anyone can object. Unless they don't know much about science or math. They are too blind to see the truth. Science doesn't lie, the evidence is right there.

Answer 10

Hey, you're asking a climate change skeptic to THINK? No fair.