Global Warming? ehhhhhh?

Question

Why isn't common sense more prevalent among some scientists? I guess they are suffering from global warming. But now they may get relief since it has unexpectably taken a break for 10 or 15 years. In other words, they don't know what will happen.

Carbon is the basic building block of life and its reactivity makes life possible. It instantly combines and the relatively small amount produced by man is readily absorbed by water and plant life. Temperature dictates the percentage of CO2 that remains in the atmosphere and this is proven by ice cores from the antarctic which show increases in mean temperatures during the past 2000 years closely followed by increases in the CO2 level, not the other way around.

There were much warmer temperatures during the middle ages when England was wine growing country. People in Scotland grew taller then because they were able to grow fresh vegetables. Yet you don't read about flooding of coastal areas during that time due to a rise in sea level.

Answer 1

No offense, but climate scientists know *a lot* more about the global climate than you do.  For example:

1) Global warming has not "taken a break."  Global temperatures continue to rise:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs...

2) Temperature does not dictate atmospheric CO2 levels.  Global temperature can trigger feedbacks which can cause natural factors to release more CO2 into the atmosphere, but that's not necessarily the case.  For example, by burning fossil fuels we're putting more CO2 into the atmosphere.  Please see the section on 'Carbon Dioxide Feedbacks' here:

http://greenhome.huddler.com/wiki/global...

3) In the past 2000 years temperatures have not led CO2 levels.  The opposite is true:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Co2-t...

4) The Midieval Warm Period was colder than today on a global scale:

http://globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Image:2...

The problem with common sense is that it doesn't work until you know the facts.  The scientists know the facts.  The reason you think they don't have common sense is because you don't know the facts.

Answer 2

BIG BIAS IN YOUR REASONING:

"Temperature dictates the percentage of CO2 that remains in the atmosphere and this is proven by ice cores from the antarctic which show increases in mean temperatures during the past 2000 years closely followed by increases in the CO2 level, not the other way around."

THIS HOLDS AS LONG AS YOU DO NOT BURN FOSSIL FUELS WHICH HAVE BEEN EMPRISONNED IN GEOLOGIC LAYERS FOR MILLIONS OF YEARS.

Wake up, we have created a direct leak from the long carbon cycle (geologic) to the short one (biosphere carbon cycle).

You can also hide your head in the sand. Is that the "common sense" you were talking about?

Answer 3

Global warming is a multi billion dollar business.  To speak up against "global warming" is to create many enemies.

Scientist who speak up are quickly attacked, discredited, lose their jobs and reputations.

Global warming is a science by thugery.

Answer 4

YES YES YES thank you for your concern and not going "globle warming doesn't exict"

Answer 5

I love it when someone thinks for themselves.  You are on the right track. Now if you want to know why the so called scientists are pushing this global warming bunk, FOLLOW THE MONEY!!! It is a great scam and most people are so freaking stupid they will just take things at face value and believe it. I guess that is what we get for letting the federal government control the school systems.  Nice work, good thinking, keep it up!

Answer 6

Here is something I got while doing a paper on global warming. It was from one of the sites (We were only allowed to use two sites for references, and I actually got dinnged off points for using a site outside of those two...hows that for indoctination at the college leve!!! Research paper? I don't think so.)

From one of the links:

"We have interviewed leading climate change scientists, conducted additional research, and

reviewed several iterations of the scenario with these experts. The scientists support this

project, but caution that the scenario depicted is extreme in two fundamental ways. First,

they suggest the occurrences we outline would most likely happen in a few regions, rather

than on globally. Second, they say the magnitude of the event may be considerably smaller.

We have created a climate change scenario that although not the most likely, is plausible, and

would challenge United States national security in ways that should be considered

immediately."

The rest of the paper is full of "could"s "may"s and "might"s...But the mainstream media and politicians have obviosly changed them to, "will"s and "without a doubt"s.

Answer 7

This is a topic for debate and not as cut and dry as supporters of global warming would have you think.  There are so many natural earth-related events going on,  that that in itself can account for almost all the change.  Things like earthquakes,  volcanoes, and shifting jet stream patterns.

Answer 8

Thought it was a question xD good good

Answer 9

Again someone who is an expert in fantasy video games, fashion , and popular music , but not science asks a, wait was there a question? Oh yes it's there. Common sense is more prevalent among scientists than any other group in our society as evidenced by YOU.