Global Warming?

Question

Are people that deny global warming really convinced it is not a problem? Are you just scared to change your current way of living? Or do you just not understand how CO2 works as a greenhouse gas?

All the arguments against global warming happening I have heard are pretty weak. None of them can deny the fact that high levels of CO2 in the atmosphere increase temperatures at the surface, just look at the atmosphere of Venus.

Of course CO2 levels can rise naturally, but why continue to compound the problem?

Ranger47: Venus has the hottest surface temperature in the solar system; even hotter than Mercury which is the closest planet. And Venus does not lack a magnetsphere it is just not as strong as Earth's. Nonetheless Venus receives less solar energy than Mercury it is much hotter due to greenhouse gasses. You can deny this all you want. And to say that since we are causing warming means we could just as easily cause cooling is a novel idea I hope you have some suggestions on how we can do this.

Jacob: As you know, the temperature in the upper atmosphere is much cooler because there isn't as much air up there to hold that heat. This article explains how temperatures in upper layers will actually cool off with global warming since the air will become even less dense.

http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Irony+on+high:+global+warming+cools,+thins+upper+atmosphere-a0157195430

Rofe: The density decrease is due to an increase in kinetic energy in molecules as they absorb the radiation. In the upper atmosphere there is less chance the molecules will collide, so they tend to radiate photons into space.

I have read a few comments also saying people who believe global warming is happening just believe everything they hear in the news. This is not the case. I am currently an engineering student and have to take a lot of science classes. Many classes that I have taken have given mention to global warming. I am not calling myself an expert by any means, but all the information I get comes from the very controversial source; a science book.

Answer 1

some people are just too selfish, they live in a denial. They think they're gonna die in a few years, so why should they care about the future of the earth...they never think about the future generation. If they openly deny global warming, they really do have problems....the Greenhouse Effects are getting more and more obvious, even my 6 year old cousin knows about it.

Answer 2

I understand how CO2 works as a "greenhouse gas" and that is exactly why I do not believe it has anything to do with the temperatures on the surface of earth or Venus. Here is why.

The sun does not warm the air. (this is fact not conjecture). Solar radiation passes right through the atmosphere without warming it. Solar radiation does warm the land and the sea. The heat radiated from the land and the sea warms the air. This is very important to know.

The theory is, CO2 in the atmosphere is preventing the heat radiated back from the planet from escaping into space, thus causing the temperatures to increase. Here is the problem. The temperatures at altitude are not increasing. If CO2 were, indeed trapping enough heat to cause the surface temperature to increase, the temperature of the atmosphere where the CO2 resides should also increase. If you ever enter a green house you will find the temperatures up near the roof are far higher than near the floor. (hot air rises)

On the other hand, if solar radiation increases, well, then certainly the temperatures at the surface would increase. It would have no effect on the temperatures at altitude but it would very much affect the temperature of the surface. Again, this is proof of the solar radiation theory not the CO2 greenhouse theory.

By the way, Venus is receives far more radiation from the sun than we do. They are only the second planet from the sun while we are third. I really do not see any reason to suspect that CO2 makes much difference on Venus. However, the surface temperature on Mars is increasing, too. Again, solar radiation.

Merry Christmas!

EDIT-

Thank you for the information,but once again it misses the point. Air density is also a component of temperature. I was discussing the temperature at true altitude not density altitude. You cannot have a "greenhouse" effect without finding warmer air aloft trapped in the greenhouse. It just is not possible. By the way, the air in the upper atmosphere is colder because it is farther away from the surface, not because it is less dense. Warm air is less dense than cold air. The atmosphere actually rises and falls thus creating density altitude. When I discuss temperatures at altitude, I am discussing temperatures at a specific height above the ground.

I am encouraged that you at least read my answer. Keep reading them, you may change your mind about us skeptics. We are not just some nuts that like to be contrary. We are seekers of truth.

JW

.
.

Answer 3

The Sun is the Primary Heat Source for Earth - However almost everyone ignores the Earth itself as a heat source.
The primary 'greenhouse gas' is H2O - moisture in the air as well as the most effective of all 'Clouds'. CO2 is negligible = way down the list and can not be found at higher atmospheres in any appreciable amounts.
The oceans hold the majority of CO2 and usually acts as a CO2 'sink' to absorb CO2 - however when the oceans are heated CO2 will not absorb back in and indeed emit massive CO2 like we are experiencing for the last 100+ years.
http://www.rgp.ufl.edu/publications/explore/v02n1/geology.html
"Understanding how the ocean circulated in the past can tell us a lot about the climate because the ocean helps redistribute heat,'' Martin says. ``In addition, the ocean is one of the largest reservoirs of CO2 on Earth. Therefore, there likely is a link between changes in ocean circulation and levels of atmospheric CO2.''

The Sun's magnetic emissions (sunspot related) have a definite effect on the Lithosphere (thin crust of the earth) which if enough openings are created by magnetic influences from the Sun = the heat in the Earth's mantel will begin to heat areas of the ocean which can release CO2 as well as melting sea ice at both poles. Sea Ice being 90% underwater will NOT displace any oceans - so sea levels WILL NOT RISE!

View the 'Hot Spots' in the Earth's Oceans - note the higher temperatures in the Western Pacific - up to 18 degrees warmer than other parts of the ocean at the Same Latitude.
http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/key_sst_50km_field.html
So the Sun's activity over the last 100 years could have effected the Earth's crust to release enough heat in the oceans to create what we are experiencing today = minor rise in air temperatures but slowly melting sea ice.

Answer 4

AGW is not definitively proved but a lack of understanding behind ecological processes shouldn't prevent us from acting. Its like saying we should keep overfishing the ocean because the science and scientific models are not 100% for sure right and therefore we should not stop because it will cost us millions to stop fishing.

We know that the earth has warmed relatively fast in the last 30 years and that its likely that increased greenhouse gas concentrations are causing it. Why not adopt the precautionary approach and make at leased some attempt at reducing emissions because at leased then we have time to develop clean technologies that can be rolled out if the science is able to fully confirm the theory. If we don't act and find out later that we are the cause then it may be too late for us to develop the technology that may help reduce the impact of global warming.

Answer 5

The case for or against man made global warming I leave to the scientists.

The politics of Kyoto seems racist as it unfairly targets mostly White nations while giving Black and Asian nations a free pass.

I and most conservatives agree that we need stricter environmental laws, but for all nations equally. This way way we can still be equal trading partners.

There is no reason to believe that this 10,000-year-old cycle of solar-induced warming and cooling will change. Dr. Sallie Baliunas, an astrophysicist with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and one of the nation's leading experts on global climate change, believes that we may be nearing the end of a solar warming cycle. Since the last minimum ended in 1715, Baliunas says there is a strong possibility that the Earth will start cooling off in the early part of the 21st Century.

Liberal "Kyoto Treaty types" always give the communist Chinese a free pass. China has spent hundreds of billions of dollars on their military and offensive space-based weapons but cannot afford Kyoto? I wonder if having the worlds largest army has anything to do with it?

Answer 6

It would be relatively simple to prove that the earth is heating due to man's activity. However, you do not see the information necessary to prove that presented in a simple, logical manor with supporting data. Instead, the topic of global warming is presented emotionally and is driven by political organizations. The likes of Al Gore and the UN expect us to simply believe in what their "scientist" say while other "scientist" disagree. Who stamps the word "scientist" on their foreheads anyway?

If somebody showed me data that indicated that solar output has not increased and that the temperature of other planetary bodies had not increased along with hard evidence of an increase of earth's average temperature - then I would conclude that the problem is unique to the earth and quite possibly related to human activity. If atmospheric CO2 levels correlate to that temperature rise. then you have it. However, I have read that the temperature of Mars and Pluto has increased ( what about the others?) making me very skeptical of this apparently political agenda.

Where's the beef? I've seen enough smoke screen.

Answer 7

It so humors me that people who don't have a lick of scientific training, absolutely no understanding of statistics and a desire to condemn human kind for it ills are so pedantically outspoken on such a controversial subject. Regurgitating what you hear on the news does not prove a point.

The earth is 4.5 billion years old. Homo sapiens have been on the planet for ~200,000 years. If you were to liken the history of the planet to a 24 hour day, humans would appear 23 hours 59 minutes and 57 seconds into that day. In the time of this planet prior to humans the earth has experienced massive volcanic eruptions, asteroid collisions, continental drift, CO2 levels many times higher than current day levels, multiple extinctions, and numerous cold period/warm period cycles. Only humans are arrogant enough, and think in a short enough time span to think that we are so important to doom an entire planet.

The whole global warming religion needs to change it's mantra from "save the planet" to "save the humans." I'm pretty sure the earth can take care of it's self, after all it has for a long long time.

Answer 8

MUTANTALBINO - Here you go:

"Recent oppositely directed trends in solar
climate forcings and the global mean surface
air temperature", Lockwood and Frolich (2007), Proc. R. Soc. A
doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1880

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/proceedings_a/rspa20071880.pdf

News article at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.stm

Temperatures. Note how individual years jump around, but the trend is crystal clear.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.A2.lrg.gif

CO2.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr_Rev_png

Putting it all together per:

Meehl, G.A., W.M. Washington, C.A. Ammann, J.M. Arblaster, T.M.L. Wigleym and C. Tebaldi (2004). "Combinations of Natural and Anthropogenic Forcings in Twentieth-Century Climate". Journal of Climate 17: 3721-3727

summarized at:

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution_png
(not a wikipedia article, just hosted)

The warming on Mars is due to giant dust storms unique to Mars:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/research/2007/marswarming.html

Pluto is uncertain, but most of the solar system isn't warming. See solar data above.

OK? Good websites for more info:

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

ROFE - The piece of science you're missing is that thermal motion in the atmosphere keeps it pretty much well mixed.

Answer 9

This is the kind of mistaken data that causes us skeptics to disregard global warming.

your last added comments
1. Carbon Dioxide is roughly 150% the density of the Oxygen-Nitrogen mix of the atmosphere so increased CO2 raises the density of the atmosphere.
2. Cold air is denser than warm air.

Answer 10

Hey slick, I do believe that the close proximity of Venus to the sun, as well as it's lack of a magnetosphere (a thing the earth has that deflects the solar wind) have something to do with the temperature there.

If you must believe that man is so influential on the climate of this planet, then why worry. We can just snap our fingers and do whatever it takes to cause an ice age, nullifying the warming. Not a problem.