Good old global warming! What is the actual truth as opposed to what we are told is the truth?

Question

I would never deny that global warming is happening, but dont believe we are told the truthabout its causes. What are your opinions and the proof to back it up?

I read in the Sunday Times (UK) today that global temperatures on Mars have increased by 0.5c since 1970. EXACTLY the same rise as that on planet earth. There were some fluffy thoughts as to what could be the cause, but nothing with any evidence. Is it not rather likely, with mars being so close to ourselves, that whatever has caused the rise in temperature there is causing the rise in temperature here?

I could go on for hours, but what are your thoughts?

Answer 1

I feel the media is spinning us a web of lies by suggesting that humans are to blame for global warming. It's going to happen but not because of us. We may be contributing towards it but we're not the cause.

Answer 2

I read an article linked in another question here and in it they said the same thing. But the article also said that changes on Mars are though to be due to orbital and axial tilt changes of Mars, not to changes in the Sun. That questioner seemed to have missed that part in his own link.

About Earthly warming. Earth has warmed in the past. There have been times millions of years ago when there was no ice at the poles. It did not harm life at all. In fact, it was good for life. So I see no reason to fear warming now, even if it IS being caused by people. If you listed to people on this forum, you might think the sea will be boiling in our lifetime. In reality, predictions call for a small temperature rise, maybe 5 degrees, and some polar ice melting, but not all. That is nothing to fear! Sure, we can limit pollution, but not to the point of crippling our economy or giving up modern conveniences. People just need to be reasonable. But environmental extremists are not usually reasonable types.

Answer 3

Hey man, we are causing Global Warming , just trust me I know what I'm talking about I have spend a lot of time gathering information about it :P

Answer 4

Hard to tell what the truth really is.  In the long run, it probably won't be as bad as they say, for humans at least.  I'm sure a lot of animals will go extinct, but unlike them, we can adapt to our environment as it changes.  Doomsayers like to say it will be the end of the world, but it won't.  It might not be easy, but we'll adapt.  Here in America, from what I see and hear every day, most people really don't care to do anything to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  In my state, every family seems to have at least two cars, and more often than not, they're big SUV's with a V-8 engine that gets 12 mpg.  What a waste.

Answer 5

Did you see that programme called something like "The Great Global Warming Swindle" on Channel 4 the other week?  There were quite a few eminent scientists on there who had the "nerve" to differ from what seems to be an almost religiously held view about global warming being manmade and something we have to do our bit to prevent....

What was really scary was that one scientist had done some research that failed to prove that global warming was manmade, and yet the United Nations still included his name on the list of "their" scientists who agreed with the accepted view of global warming.....also there seemed to be money involved here in an unhealthy way......I think that programme is now available on DVD.  

The fact that there has been quite an outcry against this programme (even from the pulpit in my local church!) maybe proves that there are quite a few vested interests around that have been challenged by this programme.

Answer 6

The Earth has many problems because of man

this is undeniable ,how much we are responsible for Global warming is debateble ,But there is a definate change in Global temperatures that is affecting nature in a bad way.

this text only covers some aspects of Climate change ,mainly agriculture i.e.effects of deforestation and subsequent man made desertification

water and air polution such as caused by

industrial contamination ,the contaminating effects of the cities(the internal combustion engine) ,are other stories,

and all of these are also man made ,such as the high industrial chimneys pumping contamination into the clouds and the burning of tires,some of this polution has been found in the ice in the polar regions

there are natural cycles in the planets life

but a lot is influenced by mans existance ,and this is increasing with overpopulation,putting strains on Natural resources and increasing contaminations as well as destructions of essential componants the ensure living conditions for all life forms

climate change is caused in great parts by desertification ,and most desertification is caused by man

the thinner ozone layer helps to speed this up.and this is caused mainly by air polution ,also as a result of mans actions

in North Africa,India,Mexico ,millions of people are effected by land loss and desertification and some have died as a result,

And now many animals are becoming sick because of changes in temperature ,

vital links in the food chains are disapearing affecting other species further along in the chain

90% of the feral (wild) bee population in the United States has died out.

In the Netherlands bee diversity is down 80 percent in the sites researched, and that "bee species are declining or have become extinct in Britain."

wildflowers that depend on pollination have dropped by 70 percent

we are witness to a mass exstinction ,for the first time since the dinosaurs, of the earth's estimated 10 million species, 300,000 have vanished in the past 50 years. each years, 3,000 to 30,000 species become extinct.

everything is happening so fast it is not possible to monitor things any more.

,the Sahara is growing by 7 kilometers a year

and most of the desserts we know are a results of mans actions ,and they are increasing ,not getting less ,in the dinosaurs days ,there were few desserts.

collectively this planet is drying up ,

each degree rise in temperature means 10%crop loss

and there is less and less water (because of deforestation),to irrigate this production ,

and there are less and less farmers to do it..

Arable lands and their farms are lost all over the globe. Many farmers sons abandon farming and head for the cities.

Northern China is drying up, what once were millions of food producing people, are now hungry refugees ,running for their lives from the all consuming dust storms.

This will have a great effect on world food prices when they start buying at what ever cost, to feed their people.

The farmers that are left have to feed some 70 million more people than the year before but with less topsoil.

Over the last half century,

Population growth & rising incomes have tripled world grain demand from 640 million tons to 1,855 million

In the near future the global farming community will not be able to feed every body ,food prices will continue to rise. .

RISING SEAS

The northpole is melting ,and we will know it without ice in our life times.

this does not affect the sea level because it is ice that is already in the water.but the melting ice from Green land and the south pole ,are another matter

Global warming could be slowed down to some extent,but it will mean global co operation between all countries ,and taking into account human nature and the world politics ,it is unlikely that this will happen,

At least not untill we are all in the middle of planetary disastres and it becomes a battle for the survival of humanity every where,instead of just some third world countries Source(s) here are a 100 ways to help

http://www.eco-gaia.net/forum-pt/index.p...

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/natur... Source

Answer 7

Mars is also getting warmer conclusion as man can not be changing Marsian climate it is a natural cycle/ Media hype to tax people more all lies it is the sun that determines temp you dummies. Watch the global warming swindle never be a moronic sheep that bleats out silly things because it was told they are true, instead think and look at evidence

Answer 8

Sometimes the proof you want is not as simple and clear cut as you would like it to be.

Sometimes its a combination of many separate but related matters that tips the balance of probability one way or the other.

Remember the scientific process does not prove things are so, but only that things are not something else. Theories are proposed to explain obvservations made. Theories have credibility and are accepted when increasing observations independant and from different areas of knowledge support them. But if a single observation is confirmed that goes against the theory, well then the theory is wrong. It then has to be modified, limited to certain conditions or thrown out. Eg Newton made some observations in regard to motion. He proposed a theory of notion which for 400 odd years was supported by all the available evidence. Then in the late 19th century some evidence started to appear that did not agree with Newton's theory. Eventually Einstein came up with his theory of motion. Which agrees not only with all of the evidence that supported Newton's Theory but also all the new evidence. This is not proof that Einstein is right, but there is proof that Newton was wrong. Well actually, that Newton's theory of motion only works for moderately sized objects at moderate speeds. So there is no difference between the two theories for objects bigger than molecules and smaller than giant stars. (even works pretty well for whole galaxies), as long as they travel at speeds less than around 80% the speed of light.

This was the same with the evidence that smoking causes-contributes to lung cancer. The Tobacco industry tried very hard to convince people that there was no link. By clever publicity, shoddy science, misused statistics etc they were able to prolong the debate well past the time when the balance of evidence was clear to most. The evidence for the link was laboratory results confirming the links between cigarette produced chemicals and disease combined with epidemiology studies linking smoking and passive smoking with the same diseases in the community. Now epidemiologic studies are not ever proof positive, but they do provide a healthy dose of evidence. Even the tobacco industry has now accepted that they were lying all along.

Remember the scientific process does not prove things are so, but only that things are not something else. Theories are proposed to explain obvservations made. Theories have credibility and are accepted when increasing observations independant and from different areas of knowledge support them. But if a single observation is confirmed that goes against the theory, well then the theory is wrong. It then has to be modified, limited to certain conditions or thrown out. Eg Newton made some observations in regard to motion. He proposed a theory of notion which for 400 odd years was supported by all the available evidence. Then in the late 19th century some evidence started to appear that did not agree with Newton's theory. Eventually Einstein came up with his theory of motion. Which agrees not only with all of the evidence that supported Newton's Theory but also all the new evidence. This is not proof that Einstein is right, but there is proof that Newton was wrong. Well actually, that Newton's theory of motion only works for moderately sized objects at moderate speeds. So there is no difference between the two theories for objects bigger than molecules and smaller than giant stars. (even works pretty well for whole galaxies), as long as they travel at speeds less than around 80% the speed of light.

So with global warming there are certain well established properties of gases that are not in dispute. Such as the green house effect of carbon dioxide, methane etc. These are measurable in any laboratory and in the field. Same for the effects of water droplets in the air, dust in the air etc.

There are also basic chemical properties such as the fact that CO2 is a product of combustion from fossil fuels. That carbon is used by plants during photosynthesis, that marine organisms under the right conditions can remove dissolved CO2 into carbonate shell (limestone). And a whole host of other relevant established and not disputed matters.

Then on top of that there are:

The measured level of CO2 in the atmosphere over time.

The Carbon Cycle— the process whereby carbon is recycled in the biosphere and its links with the wider environment. Not all of this cycle is 100% known, but it is a well understood cycle and all the main factors are well understood and you would need some pretty solid evidence to dispute the validity of this cycle.

The record of fossil fuel use by humanity.

The past record of climate change.

The past record of sea levels.

The recorded regular variations in sola activity and a variety of regular effects due to the complex motion of the earth in its orbit around the sun.

Now the theory of man made global warming brings all this and more information together and it fits. At this point in time there is no other theory that matches all the available data better. This does not prove that the theory is true, that is not possible in the scientific process.

However the fact that the theory was proposed some years ago and still is the best fit. A good test of any theory is that it should allow predictions to be made about it. These can then de tested. If the tests confirm the predictions then the theory is supported. If they do not confirm the predictions the theory is not right and needs modification or replacement.

The "Man induced global warming" theory made predictions which have been supported by subsequent tests. This is the reason it has such wide spread support, it continues to be verified at every test. So far there is nothing that challenges it. Non of the other theories to explain the evidence come close to doing so in a comprehensive manner. The solar radiation change theory fails to explain the specific changes in CO2 in the atmosphere over the last 200 years. The Natural cycle theory does not offer any details that can be subjected to tests. It does not even come close to explaining what's happening. (time scales are off by several factors of 10).

As to Mars warming by exactly the same amount, well there are a few issues here.  1 The measurement itself. 0.5C is a small number. Measuring the temperature of a planet is not a simple thing. What was the starting temperature? how accurately was it measured? Did we have the ability to measure the temperature of mars 40 or 30 years ago to within a tenth of a degree? Do we have it now? What is the error level of the latest measurement? When you find the difference between the two measurements how accurate is this? Are we talking about a rise in temperature of 0.5C plus or minus 2C for instance? That would mean we observed no verifiable change at all. (the math and stats are important in this, without them it is meaningless).

2 Mars is further away from the earth, is smaller, has a quite different atmosphere. Thus if it actually warmed exactly the same amount as earth in the same time not only would it be a huge coincidence but very would almost certainly prove that something different was causing it. A change in solar radiation would have very predictable results and it would produce a very different result on Mars than on earth. You would not expect it to produce the same temperature change.

3 The earths average temperature is proving not an easy thing to measure. 40 years ago, the measurements were not so good. But because there was concern, a big effort was made to get better climate data. That effort is beginning to pay off with ever more accurate and reliable data on all aspects of climate and our understanding of climate change, past and present.  So we are relatively certain that some warming has already occurred over recent decades, but I understand it is closer to 1C than 0.5C.

So can I prove that global warming is real and man made? No! Not possible, science simply doesn't work that way.

But if you want to disprove it then come up with hard evidence to show how it cannot be right. I haven't seen any yet. I have seen some very sloppy misinformation and misrepresented figures. Nothing that survives a close examination, nothing that is verifiable.

For my money the GW theory is still the only explanation that works. Should it be proven wrong at some point in the future, no problem. The costs of acting now to come to terms with what it predicts are really not so great. In fact they provide more opportunities to grow your economy than they close off. Those who delay will loose economically. And if its correct and we ignore it, then we will have a serious problem.

That really is the issue, wait till it is in your face obvious to even the head in the sand skeptics that man made global warming is real and happening and it is to late to do anything about it. Act now on fairly clear evidence that it is real and the cost is minimal and has longer term spin off benefits outside of the GW issue. For instance with renewables many more countries would become energy self sufficient, and varying oil prices would no longer have any effect. Energy supplies would become sustainable and energy shortages a non issue.

Answer 9

i think it is just nature and they are scaremongers co2 is not causing this its just an effect of it and they only do this to get more money out of people B A S T A R D S

Answer 10

You can't handle the truth.

Its Aliens

Answer 11

The simple truth is that the sun does seem to have a cycle of higher and lower energy output.  We can't do much about that, but we CAN affect how much of that energy the earth absorbs or reflects back out into space.  If we increase the amount of carbon dioxide and methane in the atmosphere, we can make the earth retain more of that energy.  If we reduce the levels of those "greenhouse gases", then we can get more of the sun's energy reflected.

It seems like a logical plan to try to lower the greenhouse gas levels during periods of high solar output, and to increase them during periods of low solar output.  Instead, we seem to be raising them during a high solar output phase.  That will probably have lots of nasty consequences.

Answer 12

Scientology is the answer. L Ron Hubbard revealed that long ago an alien spaceship crashed on the moon and released space ghosts. They in turn inhabit humans who pay ridiculous amounts of money to have them sucked out, thereby cleansing them of their bad thoughts.

What Hubbard didn't reveal is that those same aliens came from Mars, where their flashy SUVs, private jets and unregulated factories had set into motion a cyclic chain of global wamring.

Now that the ghosts inhabit such forward thinkers as Tom Cruise and Jon Travolta, they have started the cycle up again on earth!

We are doomed! Doomed, I tell you!!!

Answer 13

yes, I heard this guy on the radio - I think it was Virgin, saying the river Thames used to freeze up in winter and people had bonfires on it, until the middle ages, then  stopped and winters became less severe before the industrial revolution had started. ie the planet's warming up on its own. We are damaging it in many ways which we can stop. Global warming is a smoke screen.

I'm off for a spin in the merc.