Any Facts/Opinions on for Global Warming ( need help with speech)?

Question

doing speech and documentary for school on global warming i need a summarization of topics and stuff, need some more opinions of people as well as facts etc. thanks a lot if you post!

Answer 1

Global warming happens but not manmade global warming. Use facts from (the inconvinient truth). That is al gore's movie he says many lies in this movie. Here is a source that will help with lies from the movie

http://www.newparty.co.uk/articles/inacc...

Answer 2

Climate change is real, very real. But no one can say for sure if humans have caused it.

A lot of people say that it is a government cover up of sorts, but that makes no sense at all, because since when does conservation and all that fit into the governments plan? If the government had fabricated the story of global warming, then wouldn't they be doing something to stop it?

In my mind, its safe to say that humans have sped up global warming, if not caused it. Science points to the fact that we have made it worse and you can't deny what Co2 does in the atmosphere.

When looking for facts on global warming, almost all you will find is biased opinions, so try to looking in between them to find the most credible information.

Answer 3

o my goodness....their teaching kids about something that isn't even real..makes me sick...

Answer 4

Global warming is natural, not man made, but we (man) are accelerating a fragile process very rapidly. Also the increasing rate of increased heat is increasing. It does sound like Monty python, admittedly, but that is it.

We are making something that normally takes millenia (the ice age for example) take a few decades, maybe a century. So it is natural, but we are unnaturally speeding it up, and possibly altering it in the process.

Answer 5

There are no facts for Global Warming because it does not exist.  However, it is a fact that anyone who believes in Global Warming is a  liberal idiot.  Maybe you could use that.  Good luck with your speech!

Answer 6

Here is a paper I wrote a few years ago, it should help you out... I added a few links as well...

With all of the political posturing in the media, the statements and 'documentaries' that claim to be based on actual science, and the opinions of high profile people, what we can agree on is the at least the issue of Global Warming is heating up. Unfortunately, most of the people speaking out on the subject are completely uneducated in the facts. To add to it, the scientific community itself is divided, arguing positions that seem to be selected by the media for content based on who is speaking, not on merit or science.

With this in mind, we have to look first at the source of the information, and the basis for what is being called theory. Most of the information being fed to us by the mainstream media seems to be based on scientists using short-term temperature trends and statistical methods that are not proper for climatology, to make analytical and anecdotal projections that blame man-made influences. This is not theory, and it is hard to even qualify it as postulation because it makes an argument based on... Well, based on nothing.

As you know, there have been multiple reports that the last century is the warmest in a millennium, the news media has had a field day reporting this and promoting people like Al Gore. What seems strange to me is that this information is based on surface temperatures, and we have orbiting satellite data for the same time period that is not only precise, but contrary to what we are being told. I live in Florida, and was terrified by the prediction that we were going to have the worst hurricane season in history in 2006. This was based on nothing but the trend in the last few years, and we had one rough day that actually became a hard rain. Without the proper application of science we are ruled by the misinformation selected by the media.

Dr. Patric Michaels calls the surface temperature readings biased due to an effect called the 'Urban Heat Island Effect.' In its most simple terms, if you cover large sections of earth with concrete, the surrounding temperature of the earth increases by virtue of insulation. The concrete acts like a blanket, keeping the surface warmer by a degree or two. This is not Global Warming.

Man-made pollution cannot take the blame for Global Warming just due to the fact that the warmest period in history, called the Holocene Maximum occurred between 7,500 and 4,000 years ago. There was no industry to blame then, it was just part of the natural cycle. The fact is that the earth has been getting warmer and increasing in CO2 level for the last 18,000 years. The measurements taken to back this up are Ice Core Samples taken in Antarctica by the Soviet Vostok Station. The core samples, much like the rings of a tree can be dated with relative ease, and the air bubbles trapped in the samples can be analyzed. The idea that the last 200 years of industrialization is causing a runaway greenhouse effect is ludicrous.

Lets have a little closer look at the actual facts. Anthropogenic or man-made CO2 accounts for 0.117%, while other greenhouse gases that are man-made represent 0.163%. This makes the total effect of the industrialization of man on greenhouse gases about 0.28%, or a little more than one quarter of one percent. Again, we'll rationalize this, 99.72% of greenhouse gases are a natural ongoing process that we cannot control. So if we were to completely eliminate human activity from the equation, there would be almost no effect whatsoever on the global climate. It is interesting to find that variations in the solar activity seem to mirror both atmospheric temperature and CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

One reminder to all of the people fighting Global Warming, the earth is a cold and brutal planet that can barely sustain life. This warming trend is the exception, not the rule. We are in a 'Minor Interglacial Period' that will be ending once global warming ends. The last warming trend was 125,000 years ago, (the Eemian Interglacial Period,) which was much shorter that this one. You may want to enjoy the earth when it is actually warm, because the natural state of this planet is a frozen waste, with miles of ice covering the continents.

In summary, I'll quote Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, the leading climate and atmospheric science expert from MIT said, "In the long run, the replacement of the precise and disciplined language of science by the misleading language of litigation and advocacy may be one of the more important sources of damage to society incurred in the current debate over global warming."

Answer 7

How about saying something like if it is a problem why not fix it by removing the cause? You need to identify the cause and figure out how to remove it. No one is doing this so maybe its just not real-no one knows. It couls be a new mutation of the old "the sky is falling" theme. If CO2 is the problem then removing CO2 would help-would it not? So, why no do that?