How can people “not believe” humans accelerate global warming?
Query by Thor bless the USA: How can people “not believe” humans accelerate worldwide warming?
I don’t understand how this is nonetheless a controversy. I thought it was currently settled. Apparently people are using the reality that the earth has cyclical warm intervals to”disprove” (in the loosest perception of the word) that people accelerate international warming.
Let’s see if I can distinct this up:
The earth has cyclical durations of large and reduced amounts of CO2. High ranges of CO2 warm the earth, low ranges neat the earth, by way of the greenhouse impact.
Humans, by burning fossil fuels, are releasing ranges of CO2 that would not typically be introduced, as a result rising the temperature previous wherever it generally would.
What component of this really don’t you concur with, and why? Are you conscious that 97% of folks who review this for a residing, each day of their lives, disagree with you? (as opposed to only 58% of the basic population)
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_ultimate.pdf
What, then, provides you the authority to say they are incorrect? It looks to me that, when climatologists and the general public disagree with some thing involving the environment, I would visualize the climatologists would be appropriate, because we all know how effectively-knowledgeable the general public is today.
Oh, and yes I am mindful that worldwide temperatures have “dropped” over the last handful of many years, but if you bother to compare that drop to the rise over the last 100, you will see it is insignificant, as the temperature rises and drops often, even however the general pattern is nonetheless going larger.
(Here’s a totally unofficial graph from Wikipedia, but it shows what I’m speaking about. Youc an see the small insignificant blip at the end that folks claim “proves” people aren’t accountable
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f4/Instrumental_Temperature_File.png
So in which is the controversy right here? Is this just another conspiracy concept, like Obama’s birth certificate or the WTC attacks, billowing out in an uninformed populace? Is there any genuine scientific proof to display that humans are not at minimum partly responsible for the latest increase in worldwide temperatures?
(P.S. In circumstance anyone desires to know, I as well once disbelieved that people were responsible, but then after doing my investigation, I recognized the arguments versus it have been quite weak. For instance, someone sent me a website link with “fifty,000 researchers disagree with human caused world-wide warming”. When I go through into it, they have been all civil engineers and astrologists and the like, no one particular who in fact studied local weather adjust)QA
PPS: Here’s a graph of the final 2000 many years of global temperatures
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2000_Yr_Temperature_Comparison.png
discover how significantly higher it is now than in the medieval warm period. Man’s CO2 emissions have caused a usually large cycle to skyrocket.
Best answer:
Reply by Chewy Ivan
For some individuals, what they feel to be correct is a lot more important than what actually is accurate.
Give your remedy to this question under!
| Print article | This entry was posted by internet4u on May 1, 2011 at 11:04 pm, and is filed under SSL Certificates. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 1 year ago
Where did we ever get temperatures every year for the last 2000 years? Something wrong with that statement.
about 1 year ago
It is credible because tons of waste are admitted to the atmosphere
about 1 year ago
Lets say you are right. Will sending hundreds of billions of dollars to Washington change that?
about 1 year ago
The earth has a natural cycle, this has happened over and over in our history whether is was fear of the next ice age or overheating the planet. It’s still happening whether we are emmitting the pollution or not, how much money do you think enivornmentally friendly products has made in the past decade? LOTS and LOTS so why that we have all that stuff now it’s not making on dent in the rising temperature?!
about 1 year ago
Hey comrade….Lets bring down these capitalist pigs good one keep up the good work….. Stalin would be proud
about 1 year ago
The myth that there is no global climate change is driven by think tanks and astroturfers. They are so relentless and clever in their arguments that a lot of people have been fooled, and no amount of real evidence to the contrary will change their minds.
about 1 year ago
Doesn’t your average volcano release more CO2 than humans could produce in any normal time frame well well! You global warming nuts amaze me!
about 1 year ago
Its a myth made up by that stupid Al (the bore) Gore.
about 1 year ago
They can’t accurately get data on global temperatures over the past 2000 years let alone the past 100 years. They really can’t. I am open to believe that it is possible but they haven’t sold me on this farce-science that they are throwing down our throats.
about 1 year ago
when i worked at a golf course (in college, paying for tuituion) i worked with this guy named jim smith.
he had an saying that i still remember:
“never lose your ignorance, you can never get it back…”
that one sentence sums up the thinking ability of the right these days.
if there is one day that is unseasonably cool or hot, you can bet that some right wing shill talking head will come out and say ‘so much for global warming.’
when i was talking to a friend about the dissappearance of the glaciers from mt kilamanjaro he said that i was looking at ‘seasonal’ photos and that the glacier came back ever winter.
you just can’t figure ignorance to that degree, but that’s what we’re dealing with.
people who are so dumb and ill-informed that they will simply believe anything that has snazy packaging.
conservatives and republicans defend a corporations right to send millions of tons of garbage into OUR air – as if it’s somehow unamerican to suggest that these disgusting pigs stand accountable for the nightmare they are creating – as if these corporate pigs care in the slightest for them…
think about it, the righties out here – every one of them – voted for bush twice…
about 1 year ago
the 5 year cooling trend we are in helps prove al gores global warming was nothing more than a political stunt.
just as the uk court system proved it was.
about 1 year ago
When China, India and Mexico (the three biggest polluters in the world) are held to the same standards as the US, I will believe that it is real. Obviously those governments themselves don’t even believe their own rhetoric. Or why don’t THEY take it seriously.
about 1 year ago
Plant a tree. Problem solved.
about 1 year ago
So what happened to that “Global Cooling” theory 20+ years ago?
about 1 year ago
GW is a myth. Scientists were certain that we were about to have an ice age in the 1970s – oops, what happened?
We don’t have that much power and besides, anything we did would have little impact except for eliminating ALL technology and going back to horse & buggies.
The Global Warming tax will only make our energy costs skyrocket.
about 1 year ago
Nice graph. One wonders who exactly was reading the thermometers and carefully recording the temperatures before the thermometer was invented. The temperatures on the graph in recent decades do not correspond with accurate satellite telemetry.
about 1 year ago
The graph you show is called the hockey stick graph and has been shown to be inaccurate. That is the graph Al Gore was duped by too. Don’t feel bad. (by MIT)
about 1 year ago
People who “study this for a living” ? I think you answered your own question. People who study this for a living are motivated by grants. I wouldn’t use wkipedia or wikimedia as a source for obvious reasons. Nothing you have presented here shows any evidence that there is any such thing as man made global warming or climate change. Just give me ONE piece of indisputable evidence and I will be a convert.
about 1 year ago
Even if there was like a 20 degree spike in the tempurature, those people probably wouldn’t feel it because they’d be too busy enjoying the a/c in their ugly box-like hummers of theirs…
about 1 year ago
Considering they’ve had “thermometers” since the 11th century, and we had some incredibly intelligent people using them (Gallileo)
I’ll still take science over hobbyists any day…
And I noticed how you presented this, we ARE affecting temperature cycles. Nobody knows to what degree, but we are affecting the climate. Willfull ignorance is killing this country.
about 1 year ago
2000 years? Is that ALL? I mean ok, fair enough the records speaks for themselves but the Earth has existed for millions and millions of years…2000 years is hardly a dent in that, is it?
I noticed that you used the term “global warming”. Global warming was just a phrase in order for people to fork out more money in green taxes, silly really. The term is now called “Climate Change” because they just don’t have sufficient evidence that the Earth is heating up. Climate change has come about with irregular weather patterns on Earth. Back in 2004, I visited an observatory in the Czech Republic where I got to see the sun in great detail through the telescope. The astronomer explained that irregular solar activity was causing the dramatic weather changes in our Earth and he showed me the huge sun spots and a solar flare or two with great excitement. It is not our doing, it is out of our control.
I would have a word with the manufacturers and factories who produce the crap in our atmosphere, it’s bad for the environment, I agree but it is out of the normal every day persons hands.
about 1 year ago
So,will destroying the US Economy,and sending even more work to countries like China solve this problem? They will simply replace any CO2 reductions we make,in fact with such lax Environmental Rules they may exceed our CO2 Emissions.
And why,if CO2 is such a harmful thing,do so many oppose one of the most effective ways we could lower our emissions,Nuclear Power? seems to work quite well for others,but somehow here it’s a no-go. Could it be that a lot of this has much more to do with Politics than Science?
As for the Scientists,I guess they couldn’t possibly be manipulating the data,to reach the conclusion those who pay them want.After all,we know Scientists never do anything unethical for money,Right? Other than creating Nuclear Weapons,Or Chemical Weapons,or Biological Weapons of course.But other than that they never do anything unethical for money.
And lastly,Are these the same types of Scientists who cannot seem to give me an accurate Weather Forecast beyond about 5 days,yet somehow they have figured out the long term Climate Conditions to come over the next Century?
RWE
about 1 year ago
Your graph shows a temperature variant of .6 degrees and is skewed to show a result that the graph creator wanted. What is the range of error in a graph going back 2000 years? Aren’t actual temperatures from hundreds or thousands of years ago problematic?
about 1 year ago
The amount of CO2 emitted by humans is insignificant. You gloom and doomers never fail to give me a chuckle.
about 1 year ago
The right wing makes money off of others problems so they spread whatever is going to bring destruction.
about 1 year ago
There are several problems.
1) Looking at the temperature of the earth over the past 10,000 years, the change in temperature is NOT STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT. It’s less than 1 degree, where the climate generally changes by +/- 5 degrees C over long periods of time,
2) So-called “scientists” who have a political agenda have destroyed the credibility of this argument. One of the first documents describing global warming intentionally mis-stated the result of a survey of thousands of credible scientists. There are numerous examples of intentional mis-reporting of information on this issue,
3) The question is not whether we COULD change the temperature, but whether we ARE doing so to a significant degree. This certainly hasn’t happened YET, but could it? Maybe. Is it worth paying attention to? Yes! Is it worth bankrupting our country over? Well, I’ll let you answer that one…
about 1 year ago
The fact is, they put the blame onto the normal working person. It is our governments that cater for us, they give us our energy sources. We do not ask for fossil fuels, especially when the technology has been there for years in the way of solar, tidal, wave, wind and geothermal which effectively could power the world forever but the powers that be, the corporations who use oil as a tool for leverage and power cannot survive without using fossil fuels or without causing serious pollution. They do not want or are ever going to finance such clean, sustainable energy sources but yet it is us who are being punished through crippling taxes for ”climate change”. Of course the climate is going to change if it is perpetually polluted at the rate it is just now. Taxing us is not going to change anything and until people wake up and notice this then nothing will ever change and climate pollution will continue to get worse.
At the end of the day my point is, we have a established system in place that relies on oil production. We are sold it by the established system but yet are punished for using it. Can anyone see the irony here?
about 1 year ago
Well, you may have done research but your research is flawed. (see below).
Even if levels of CO2 increase, they do not cause climate warming. Here are some facts. First, the Sun does not warm the air directly. The sun warms the sea and the ground which radiate the heat and warm the air. So, some use this to claim that increased CO2 has a “greenhouse” effect in that it hiders the radiation of heat back into space. True enough. However, that is not all increased CO2 levels do. They also increase cloud cover by raising humidity levels. Ever actually look at a greenhouse? See the condesation on the glass?
CO2 increases cloud cover which blocks the Sun’s radiation and also results in cooler temperatures. So you see, this whole ecosystem is self-correcting. The more Carbon Dioxide you emit, the better plants grow. Plants breathe in Carbon Dioxide and give off Oxygen. CO2 has a greenhouse effect in that it inhibits heat from escaping but it also produces cloud cover that inhibits heat from getting to the surface to warm the air in the first place. Back to balance.
This ecosystem we call Earth is not all that fragile. The only thing great enough to cause dramatic changes is global climate is the Sun. It does this on all the planets. More Solar activity, global warming. Less Solar activity global ice age. All this long before the first man even existed. It occurrs now and will occurr long after man has gone.
Nothing I have stated here is untrue. I defy anyone to prove it to be false.
*
about 1 year ago
Can you tell me what the scientists names are from 2000 years ago to present that these graph’s came from or do these graph’s come from
scientist that are speculating on what they thought the temps were or did they use a computer to do the research that they programmed to
fit their idea of what they thought temps were back then. I didn’t realize
that they kept temperature readings in medieval period. Or could it be that a lot of these scientist could not get grant funding for their projects
without say they believed in global warming. We all know that temps have cooled over the last 10 years because of global warming. The reason the liberal left changed from global warming to climate change
is because they can blame climate change how ever they see fit.
The world is getting cooler it’s climate change the world is getting warmer, it’s climate change, see how convenient that word climate change work for you liberals.
about 1 year ago
Here’s why.
First thing, CO2 comprises a remarkably small percentage of our atmosphere. Only 0.0387%. Other gases such as water vapor contribute much more to warming this planet than CO2.
I don’t care if 97% of people who study this stuff believe it. And quite frankly, you read that study wrong. Only 82% believed it was human caused. I know, 82% is still a big number.
Now look at the chart I link to. Sure, it’s gotten warmer in the last 150 years, because we were just getting out of the Little Ice Age. At least twice before, we’ve been significantly hotter than we are now, long before the invention of the SUV. And during that Mideval warm period, records show it was a positive thing. Areas that were generally uninhabitable became habitable. It became easier to grow crops. Oh, and my chart says the mideval period was warmer.
Another reason why I disbelieve is that 4 times in the last century, “experts” flipped positions and were warning us about the how the earth was headed for warming or another ice age. Every couple of generations gets a new cycle of hot or cooling spells, and proclaims a new disaster is upon us. Only the GW folks figured this out, and now they are using the term “Climate Change.” Now, any change in climate can be blamed on man, not just warming. They are setting themselves up for the long game regardless of which way the climate goes.
Another problem I have is that the big government types have latched on to Global Warming as their way of pushing higher taxes, lower standards of living and wealth transfer. Basically, the solutions fit their agenda anyway.
Another problem, and this one you won’t read much about, but I have investigated, is the unreliability of weather station data. Oh, the temperatures recorded are correct enough, but the surrounding areas have changed significantly over the last century. Many went from being out in the country or small towns and are now in major metropolitan areas near artificial heat sources like Air Conditioners or industrial equipment, or just acres of blacktop. There’s a web site that’s been investigating this. See my second link.
about 1 year ago
In addition to several points made on doubts about the science (who measured temperatures 200 years ago, what about global cooling…), I also have doubts about the scientific community. If you read “The Wisdom of Crowds”, the author generally says that decisions are best made by groups. But, in his chapter on science, he points out several biases regarding which scientific research gets attention and which doesn’t. Papers from well-known scientists that build on prior research from other well-known scientists get more attention (and grant money) than dissenting papers from less-known scientists. Therefore, as “global warming” became more popular, the scientific community became very biased toward producing research that confirms the hypothesis rather than denys it. These scientific theories build momentum, until they don’t. Then the scientists move on to the next thing.
Also, even if global warming were real, and was caused mostly by humans, there are far more cost-effective things we can do to help people than what’s being proposed about global warming (oops – I mean “climate change”)
about 1 year ago
Agreed.