How all of a sudden are we causing "global warming"?

Question

Throughout the history of earth it has cooled, heated and froze over.

How did the earth have such extreme climate changes when there was no human interference?

All the liberals brainwash people into believing we are the cause of "global warming". They speak as if it is a proven theory when in reality there is absolutly no proof.

Answer 1

Well first of all the idea of global warming was not and is not affiliated with any sort of political beliefs. And while it is true that the earth has warmed and cooled throughout history it hasn't heated and cooled at such a rapid pace and there has never been as much atmospheric CO2 in the air at any time in history. It basically comes down to this...CO2, water vapor, and methane are the most potent greenhouse gasses, and all of these are released into the atmosphere mostly via human alterations to the environement or industrial process as well as other actions. The more carbon compounds that we alter (ex. burning fuels, cutting down trees, ect..) the more greenhouse compounds are released into the environment. Any scientist liberal or democrat must agree with this because it is a fact not just an idea. The only valid argument one can possily make is to what degree are we (humans) contributing (or speeding up) the overall process. Trust science not politics (liberal or conservative)....global warming is a real phenomenum  

Answer 2

You are correct that the earth has seen other periods of extreme warmth and periods of extreme cold. It is believed that it is was caused by greenhouse gases and solar output fluctuations over long periods. For most of the time between 50 million years ago (mya) to 600mya, the earth was much warmer than it is today. Most of the greenhouse gases came from the higher levels of volcanism, Imagine areas as large as Siberia with volcanoes spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere for millions of years.

But that isn't happening today. We have been living though a period of relative quiet volcanic activity, but yet the CO2 levels have spiked off the charts. We know where this CO2 is coming from. http://whyfiles.org/218glo_warm/images/v...

You may say, but the earth has seen periods of global warming in the past, what is the big deal? Human beings and life on earth today evolved to benefit from the relatively cool/cold climate of the past 5 million years. The big deal is that a lot of life will go extinct while some will evolve to thrive in a warmer planet.

Answer 3

Climate change can be triggered by a number of different things solar variability, long term cycles in the Earths orbit, Super volcanoes or even large asteroid impacts the last two are fairly sudden things but have happed in the past a number of times, the last Super Volcano was thought to be around 75,000 years ago.

The current climate change is happening very quickly compared to the other long term climate change events which usually take thousands of years for instance the end of the last ice age ~12,000 years it took ~4,000 years for the temp and sea level to rise to what we call normal today.

In the past natural warming has taken many hundreds of year to raise temps enough to start oceans releasing co2 which add further to the warming, today we are releasing the co2 via millions of machines directly into the atmosphere which is why the warming we are causing is smaller than most of the natural climate changes of the past, like during the time of the Dinosaur when northern Canada was sub tropical, today we are only looking at a temp rise of a few degree's which will raise the ocean 24in may be a little more, over the next century.

In the time of Dinosaurs it was over 100m higher.

From your closing comment you seem to think "liberals brainwash people" from my point of view with 20 years working in a science research environment I look at the comments on this area and see many people with not a great deal of understanding of science desperate to find any excuse to either say this isn't happening or we are not to blame and they are being helped in that belief by blogs beyond count and web sites payed for by exxon.

The fact is if you go to just about any climate, climate related or even general science site you will see little doubt AGW is happening. Yes there are a small number of scientists who doubt this just as there are a limited number who think extraterrestrials cross interstellar space to mutilate cows and play hide & seek with us and test devices that make  photos blurry.

Answer 4

its just another business that many wealthy companies will make zillions of $ from, the biggest con since nigerian scams

Answer 5

All of a sudden?

These people have studied global warming well before the extreme partisanship in the US and have come to conclusions close to what the overwhelming majority of scientists agree on nowadays:

1896: Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish chemist, advances the theory that carbon dioxide emissions from combustion of coal would enhance Earth's greenhouse effect and lead to global warming.

1924: Based on 1920 coal use, Alfred Lotka, a U.S. physicist, speculates that industrial activity will double atmospheric CO2 in 500 years.

1949: Guy S. Callendar, a British scientist, speculatively links the estimated 10% increase of atmospheric CO2 between 1850 and 1940 with the observed warming of northern Europe and North America which began in the 1880's.

1954: G. Evelyn Hutchinson, a Yale biologist, first suggests that deforestation will increase atmospheric CO2.

1957: Roger Revelle and Hans Seuss, scientists with the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, report for the first time that much of the CO2 emitted to the atmosphere is not absorbed by the oceans (as some had argued), leaving significant amounts in the atmosphere which could eventually warm the Earth. They call carbon dioxide emissions "a large-scale geophysical experiment" with Earth's climate.

1958: C.D. Keeling, a scientist with the Scripps Institute, begins the first reliable and continuous measurements of atmospheric carbon dioxide at Hawaii's Mauna Loa Observatory. Keeling finds CO2 concentrations to be 315 parts per million and rising.

1967: The first reliable computer simulation calculates that global average temperature may increase by more than 4 degrees Fahrenheit when the atmospheric CO2 level doubles that of pre-industrial times.

1971: Some scientists argue that cooling of the atmosphere by particulates from coal burning could be more significant than warming by greenhouse gases. Uncertainties are too large to be sure which effect will dominate.

1976: Scientists at several research institutions identify chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), methane, and nitrous oxide as greenhouse gases.

U.S. and Swedish scientists estimate that cooling by particulates from coal burning is a relatively small effect on a global average basis.

1979: The report of a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) panel on climate change advises that "A wait-and-see policy may mean waiting until it is too late" to avoid significant climate changes.

1983: An NAS report confirms that a doubling of CO2 levels eventually would warm the Earth by 3 to 8 degrees Fahrenheit. The same year a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study called Can We Delay A Greenhouse Warming? states that as a result of warming, "agricultural conditions will be significantly altered, environmental and economic systems potentially disrupted, and political institutions stressed."

1985: A conference sponsored by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), and the International Council of Scientific Unions forges a consensus of the international scientific community on the issue of climate change. The conference report warns that some future warming appears inevitable due to past emissions regardless of future actions and recommends consideration of a global treaty to address climatic change. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations recorded at Mauna Loa Observatory show steady increase averaging more than 1 ppm/year since Keeling's measurements began.

1987: An ice core from Antarctica analyzed by French and Russian scientists reveals an extremely close correlation between CO2 and temperature going back more than 100,000 years.

1988: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), made up of leading climate scientists from around the world, is established by UNEP and WMO to assess the scientific and economic basis of climate change policy in preparation for the 1992 Rio Earth Summit.

1990: An appeal signed by 49 Nobel prize winners and 700 members of the NAS states, "There is broad agreement within the scientific community that amplification of the Earth's natural greenhouse effect by the buildup of various gases introduced by human activity has the potential to produce dramatic changes in climate ... Only by taking action now can we insure that future generations will not be put at risk."

Another way to break through partisanship is to look at the climate science debate outside the anglo-saxon world... and there again, Indian, Japanese, German and Chinese scientists all agree.

Answer 6

It's an interesting but unproven theory.    You're right, there is no proof of human causation of the 20th century warming.

Repeating that it's proven, and re-writing the climate history to eliminate or downplay past non-anthropogenic warm periods, and constantly changing the story about what exactly global warming is, doesn't fool many people, rather it creates and emboldens the skeptics.

And I don't know where charity gets the idea that the 20th century warming - or present warmth - is significant relative to the earth's, or even recorded, history.    Neither is true.   It's warmed as fast as it did in the 20th century, it's cooled faster than that, and it's not the warmest it's been in recorded history.

Where charity gets her ideas I don't know - the mountain I guess.

Answer 7

I am so sick of people saying "Throughout the history of earth it has cooled, heated and froze over".

That is all true.  But there is an enormous INCREASE in global temperatures, far greater than anything recorded in history.  If things go up and down, up and down, on a normal pattern, and suddenly shoots WAY UP, it is not considered normal.  Therefore, GW is real.

It is NOT brainwash.  Seriously, do you really think a bunch of people one day sat around and said, "Let's pretend there's something called global warming and tell everyone about it.  Let's see how many people can believe us!"  And then hundreds of scientists said, "Wow!  That sounds like a great idea!  Let me go do some 'reasearch' to make it look like it's real, and all 1,000 of us can get in on the hoax.  Hee hee!!!"

So you're right.  It's just a huge consipiracy, just to make us all mad.  After all, there's NO way our rapid population growth, suburban sprawl, removing trees to make room for houses, millions of cars on the road, houses that spew CO2, billions of cows, pigs and chickens into production which pollute like crazy, manufacturing of countless consumer products, and all that jazz contributes to our environmental destruction.

Keep telling yourself it's a hoax, and it will be!  (rolls eyes)

Answer 8

You're obviously not well informed.  Liberals have not brainwashed anyone into believing that humans are the CAUSE of global warming.  There is a natural warming trend with the Earth, but it is being GREATLY ACCELERATED by the things that human beings are putting into the atmosphere at alarming rates.  

Tell me, what is wrong with trying to do something right for once, whether you believe we're going to bring an end to this world or not.  Is it not in our best interests to clean up our habits so our children can live in a cleaner world?  Conservatives have a short-sighted focus.  They see what monetary gain there is to bring to themselves, and they do their best to erase scientific data so that big industries can make the extra bucks.  And it's at the expense of those who are, in your own words, "brainwashed" into thinking that scientists are all liars.  

Answer 9

interesting that you think there isn't a problem.

because all of these real science organizations think that there is.

does your politics override your science?

NAS, NOAA, NSF, NASA, EPA, MIT, UCLA all agree. AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) is a serious problem.

http://www.nasonline.org/site/PageServer

"May 19, 2008: The National Academies have released the 2008 edition of "Understanding and Responding to Climate Change," a free booklet designed to give the public a comprehensive and easy-to-read analysis of findings and recommendations from our reports on climate change."

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim...  <== here's a good description.

http://www.funnyweather.org/  <== this is a more lighthearted link.

http://lwf.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/glob...

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwar...

http://www.exploratorium.edu/climate/  <== not regulated by the government.

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cn...

http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cn...

http://www.international.ucla.edu/articl...

http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2007/clima...

http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/global_war...

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news...

<<"Barring a large volcanic eruption, a record global temperature clearly exceeding that of 2005 can be expected within the next few years, at the time of the next El Nino, because of the background warming trend attributable to continuing increases of greenhouse gases."  The eight warmest years in the GISS record have all occurred since 1998, and the 14 warmest years in the record have all occurred since 1990.>>

http://yosemite.epa.gov/OAR/globalwarmin...

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...

http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?... <== thanks Richard.  very good.

Answer 10

id have to say you are very smart whomen  i love when whomen are down to earth and know the facts on real issues

there isnt a l**k of evidence to support global warming as far as man kind being the direct cause of the problem.  there are statistics and studys i could tell you about. global warming is another way for liberals to make money and hide behind a good cause for the enviornment.THERE IS NO DiRECT LINK TO US AND GLOBAL WARMING.  such sneaky little b******s

im glad there are smart whomen such as yourself out there seems like you dont listen to the media as a main source

But dont belave all of the c**p answears youl find on here i get down to the bottom of things while most people my age are partying i try and meet with specalist and scientist to determine things of this nature its amazing how the scientist that are for the cause are being funded in unbelavable amounts  while the scientist who werent standing for this got shut down offices closed funding was taken away for further research yet there names were put on a ballot of scientist who are for the cause just because they researched it  so the list is pretty big but most people dont know that 48% of the list are scientist who do not want to be on the survey     pretty carzy huh since its such a fact. lol   to many people are influenced by the media and the he said she said LOL very funny



As to the guy below yes there has been such an amount of co2 in the atmosphere before and the pattern has not changed if seen the scale in person myself and the half mile long ice from antartica that proves it!  look for the study that was done in antarctica its pretty amazing what real science tells you

The Graph of earths history is The same the Pattern is not off the charts emmisions may cause the earth to warm but all the emmisons weve dumped into it the last 100 years has not changed the scale an ounce its a fact.    

Whoever says global warming is not political needs to WAKE UP  yes it shouldnt be but thats not the world we live in  if they can scare us into a hole and liberals can make a profit off of america through a scare tactic and hide one side of the story and only let us hear the other thats false advertisement     like i said just check out how many scientist have had thier funding takin from them because they didnt beleave the earth was warming due to us and that its even warming faster at all   did you know in the 70s they were talking about the next ice age in a few hundred years and how they also experieced warmer temperatures then today  so No there is No Enormous boost in climate change lets here facts that didnt come from the internet or the media

Answer 11

Orbital and solar cycles historically controlled the heating and cooling of the planet. Mainly by burning fossil fuels, human beings have become another major factor. Some CO2 was removed from the carbon cycle and the earth-climate system over 100s of millions or billions of years and stored as fossil fuels.  We have pumped CO2 into the air form our cars and such since the industrial revolution 150 years ago from these fossil fuels  (20-30 billion tons annually). We have upset the carbon balance, the carbon-climate system, and have become one of the major factors accelerating global warming and causing rapid climate change.  The natural factors still apply, but we have accelerated the process through our activities.

He is some information to help you understand if you are interested.  The evidence of change is given on these sites.

From the US National Academies of Science

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim...

NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab

http://climate.jpl.nasa.gov/

EPA, USGS, NOAA all have information.  

You need some liberal brainwashing to clean the conservative con out of your head.  Even the conservative leaders recognize the problem now.  It is not hard to understand if you just read the information. The sources are highly credible.

Answer 12

im sorry but you are mistaken.. we aren't 'all of a sudden' causing global warming.. its been happening for quite a while, but was greatly accelerated by the industrial revolution. and there most definitely is proof. its happening at an even faster rate then it did previously, something must be fueling it.. in comes us!

Answer 13

Unfortunately your mind seems to be made up for political reasons, but the basic science isn't very complicated.

Yes, the planet's climate can change naturally, but that doesn't mean humans can't also cause it to change.

Similarly, forest fires can happen naturally.  They happened all the time before humans were around.  Does that mean that humans can't cause forest fires?  If so, Smokey the Bear is out of a job.

There are in fact many factors which can cause the planet to warm and cool.  One of these is greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, which humans are adding to the atmosphere by burning fossil fuels.

If you're interested in a summary of the science regarding the causes of climate change (both natural and human), see the link below.  If not, then please don't waste our time by asking these questions when you're not interested in the answer.

Answer 14

There were no "extreme climate changes" before human interference.  All changes took place over millions of years.  Go check the data.

Answer 15

This problem of global warming has been going on for.... decades!!. It is not a blue nor a red issue. It is now of great public interest because it has reached a point where denial of it is no longer useful or manageable.

first an idea is: ridiculed

then it is: ignored

finally: it is accepted

No one likes to hear that their methods of making big profits are causing destruction to our earth's atmosphere.

Answer 16

Yes they have pumped this garbage into our children. The teachers are part of the Left problem. Keep trying U are right....

Answer 17

because Carbon emissions have increased greenhouse gasses and trapped more sunlight in our atmosphere. CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING!

yes your first statement is true. BUt it's happening more rapidly now. Some of you republicans are idiots

oh and we can't make money off of it....so stop saying that

and you aren't amazingly gorgeous sorry...

Answer 18

Translation of "it is not political" = it is all about politics.

Translation of "you stupid reupblicans = it is all about politics.

Translation of "I am tired of hearing about it warming and cooling naturally = stop telling me the facts, I want to believe, I want to believe.

I too am an environmental consultant and I understand that much of what alarmists say is exaggeration of the potential consequences so they can push their agenda which is anti-American and anti-capitalists.  I am sure there are people and even some scientists that believe it but I would have serious reservations at someone who claimed to be an objective scientist and claimed to believe that our CO2 emissions is seriously threatening the world.   I think that particular scientist should reevaluate his or her objectivity or go back to school.  I wouldn't say that all people that believe humans are threatening the world by CO2 emissions are anti-American.  Most are simply ignorant of the science.  The left gets kind of funny.  They say it isn't about politics you stupid conservatives and they probably actually believe it.  That is what is scary.