Id like some more info on Global Warming?

Question

I asked a similar question on a Boortz comment a few days ago and received very useful information

Thank you

However, there is very little on the topic of G.W. is NOT happening, which is crucial to my paper.

I would really appreciate it if any of you had 'negative' G.W. websites, especially those ending in .org or .edu

.com looks very bad on a paper of this importance.

I owe you

Answer 1

Here are 26 reasons why global warming is NOT happening.

And the scientific proof that shows they're wrong.

http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...

Answer 2

Global warming is a natural phase of Earth, caused by some Solar Activities by Sun. We human don't have to bother about it. Some of the environmentalist says that this is because of the CO2 we are emitting into the environment, but the reality is that we are just contributing towards 1% to 10% of actual global warming.

If the actual cause of Global Warming is CO2 emitted by the humans then why Global Warming occures on other planets. Just Google for "Global Warming on other planets" and see the results, there are no humans on other planets.

Having too little CO2 in the environment will cause for the plants to die more early, more over it also cools down the temperature on earth.

Having too much CO2 (obiviously, not caused by humans. Mostly generated in the Sea/Oceans) will lead to Green House effect and will lead in increasing the temperature on Earth.

So, the best is to plant more trees so that there would be a balance for the consumption of CO2 on the planet.

I personally think that instead of thinking on this baseless issue try to think on what if Nuclear War broke out in the world, it will destroy Earth more rapidly.

So, next time whenever somebody says you about global warming, just ignore it.

You can follow the following links (But study them fully before using):

http://www.discovery.org/v/30

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/ezrak...

Answer 3

It is important to note it is not that global warming is not happening, but rather that man is not the primary driver of late 20th century warming.

Here is a paper by Roy Spencer.  He has been performing NASA-sponsored research for the last twenty-two years. Prior to his current position as a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, he was Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. He is also the U.S. Science Team Leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer-E flying on NASA’s Earth-observation satellite Aqua.

http://oversight.house.gov/documents/200...

Here is a paper by some Professors from Harvard

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images...

A copy of a speech given by a Geology professor at the University of Ottawa.   He explains how the sun is the primary driver of climate.  It is a .com but he is a university professor so it is reputable.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Refere...

If you want the technical details in which he based his speech on:

http://www.sciencebits.com/files/article...

It is important to also remember what the AGW hypothesis is.  It is not that the earth is warming, but human lead co2 emissions will cause a significant warming  that will be catastrophic.  In their attempt to build up this catastrophic prediction they have to feed certain parameters into their computer models.  One of these parameters is that co2 is the sole cause of late 20th century warming.  

Warmers discount the sun because they say the earth has warmed and there has been a slight decrease in sun activity.  But there is a difference between levels and trends.  If your house is heated by a furnace and you turn you thermostat down a bit and the temperature still rises, the trend has been down, but the level is still high.  What warmers do is dismiss the role of the furnace (sun) and conclude that since temperature still rose there has to be an external factor and that is the only factor.  We know that the sun is at an 8000 year high.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/su...

Another factor the warmers say will cause catastrophic results is that co2 is a positive feedback, or that co2 will be amplified to get an even greater warming.  But the studies coming out from newly deployed satellite data is that either water vapour is less than what the models are projecting

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

or they are acting as a negative feedback.  More heat leads to more water evaporation, which leads to more clouds, which block the sun.  The increase in rainfall, falls into the oceans which decrease the temperatures of the oceans.

http://blog.acton.org/uploads/Spencer_07...

Less water vapour also affects the parameters of climate models, which means less warming.

Answer 4

Public Release Of "Skeptic's Guide To Debunking Global Warming": http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep...

Global Warming Facts: http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/

Climate and Global Warming Resources: http://capnbob.us/blog/features/climate-...

The Truth About Climate Change: http://tinyurl.com/3xeokp

Global Warming Hysteria Debunked - Scientists Ignored: http://tinyurl.com/366dbf

An Inconvenient Truth or Convenient Fiction? Part II: http://tinyurl.com/63cfq2

Answer 5

I have access to my University's online library and I can search every scholarly peer reviewed article ever written, and I can tell you that the word hoax and "global warming" never apppeared in the same article ever. Global warming and skeptical only appeared 8 times in a peer reviewed article. 7 of those were tongue in cheek. The eighth was a book recommendation which follows.

Wow!!! You just convinced me that Global warming is real.

Economic, Social, and Environmental; Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming.

Richard N. Cooper. Foreign Affairs. New York: Jan/Feb 2008. Vol. 87, Iss. 1; pg. 177

Abstract (Summary)

Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming by Bjorn Lomborg is reviewed. The title of this highly readable book has a double meaning: steps should be taken against global warming, but unsupported claims that climate change will lead to global catastrophe and human calamity should be avoided. The book is a plea for a rational discussion of social priorities, persistently invoking cost-benefit comparisons.

»  Jump to indexing (document details)

Full Text (239  words)

(Copyright 2008 by the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming. By Bjorn Lomborg. Knopf, 2007, 272 pp. $21.00.

The title of this highly readable book has a double meaning: steps should be taken against global warming, but unsupported claims that climate change will lead to global catastrophe and human calamity should be avoided. The book is a plea for a rational discussion of social priorities, persistently invoking cost-benefit comparisons. The Danish statistician Lomborg finds the Kyoto Protocol far too costly for the modest benefits it can bring, even as only a first step. A big concern in the increasingly global dialogue on climate change is that the poorest countries, with the least adaptive capacities, will be the most damaged. Thus issues of equity play a large role in the discussion. Lomborg argues that greatly slowing down climate change is a terribly inefficient way to help poor people, now or in the distant future. Payoffs per dollar spent can be increased many hundredfold by instead seriously attacking HIV/AIDS and malaria, providing safe drinking water and sanitation, and distributing micronutrients. Lomborg also debunks some of the more spectacular claims about climate change -- for example, that it is depleting the global population of polar bears. To mitigate climate change, he suggests taxing emissions of carbon dioxide -- initially at a modest rate of $2 a ton -- and greatly increasing research-and-development expenditures for nonemitting technologies that can provide adequate energy to all.

WAIT I FOUND A LINK.  NOW GIVE ME THE TEN POINTS. Gale group is a .com but it is just a search engine for other publications. And they give the name of the publication.

Post your paper later so that we can help you with it.

Answer 6

There is no man made global warming. All this talk of global warming is just to sell you products designed to save energy and separate you from your money. Don't believe any of this hippy c**p.

Answer 7

The is alot of misinformation regarding global warming. Here are other things to consider:

1. The earth was warmer when donosaurs were around than it is now.

2. The climate is cyclic. The earth has been through at least six ice ages. You have to look at the climate over centuries, not decades.

3. A glacier in South America has been shrinking since records were started in 1896. There is no proof that it was not shrinking before then. That is long before cars and computers.

4. Look at military maps over the past few decades, You will notice a shift in magnetic deviation. Humans cannot cause this. Summers are lasting later, but so are the winters. On Easter 2007, it snowed & sleeted in the Conroe, TX, area. This used to be short-sleeved weather. Today (April 14, 2008), it was 38 degrees in Houston. That is much colder than the traditional mid-60s to mid-70s. These are characteristic of the earth shifting on its axis, NOT global warming.

6. Some records indicate the earth was warmer at the time of Jesus than it is now.

7. Studies announced last week indicate that smog near the coast cause an INCREASE in ozone production. Previous studies indicated that pollution destroyed ozone, causing an increase in warming. The scientist are contradicting each other.

SUMMARY:  Global warming is greaty exagerrated by people looking for a purpose in their own life. Global warming is going to happen with or without humans. It's the natural course of the planet. It's already happened several times before humans were around.

Answer 8

I would suggest you

reading the State of Fear by Michael Crichton. He the

author of other books like Jurassic Park, Congo, the

Lost World, and was the creator of the TV show E.R. It

is fiction but all his data is cited and has a 30 page

bibliography where he shows where his research came

from. Also research the cycles of the sun and their

effect on global temps. There have been a lot of

interesting studies in that field lately. Also, have

you ever heard of the heat island effect? Basically

this means that cities are warmer because they trap

heat in things like concrete and asphalt. That makes

them warmer then surrounding areas. As our cities have

expanded to areas that were once countryside and now

city, the data maybe skewed by local temp rises, not

global. For example if you took temp reading around

what is now metro Atlanta 50 or 100 hundred years ago

in what then was country and compared them to today,

how can you differentiate increases by global warming

and the heat island effect. Also how well do you trust

thermometers from 100 years ago? Think about it most

people back then didn’t have indoor plumbing and drove

around in horse and carriage. But supposedly they had

accurate thermometers. How can you explain the fact in

the last year there was record cold reported over many

areas of the globe? Furthermore the warmest year on

record was ten years ago in 1998. Since then there

have been no new records in global average

temperatures. Do not forget that in the 1970's global

cooling was all the rage.

Answer 9

wooglet.voot said:

"I have access to my University's online library and I can search every scholarly peer reviewed article ever written, and I can tell you that the word hoax and "global warming" never apppeared in the same article ever. Global warming and skeptical only appeared 8 times in a peer reviewed article. 7 of those were tongue in cheek...."

I have to say, it is a good thing you did not find the word "hoax" in your search. "Hoax" is a serious accusation of intentional misinformation and fraudulent practice that has no place in the professional scientific arena. If you do see the word "hoax," I would suggest further examination and possibly that you report it as scientific misconduct.

The word "skeptical" also has little use in scientific literature--but if you do see it, it is likely just word choice on the part of the author (It sounds effective in certain situations).

The fact that you did not find widespread use of the words "hoax" and "skeptical" in the scientific literature should come as no surprise--I wouldn't take any meaningful conclusions from such a result.

Oh, and tongue-in-cheekiness is inappropriate in scientific literature. I would love to see the studies that include the word "skeptical" in a tongue-in-cheek manner.

Answer 10

I thought it was real!

Answer 11

You'll have a relatively hard time finding .edu URLs containing evidence against global warming, since the balance of scientists, especially those in the field, have long since accepted it as well-established fact. However, there are a number of right-wing think-tanks that are committed towards anti-global warming propaganda. Prominent amongst them is the Competitive Enterprise Institute; you might have luck on their website:

http://cei.org/

Check the publications section.

Answer 12

http://www.GlobalClimateScam.com

Answer 13

Try GlobalWarming.org / global warming in brief-Q&A / November 10, 2000

Source

consumer alert - The global warming debate

It goes both ways..