Isn't global warming part of a natural process?

Question

Sure we are affecting the earth with our contamination habits but the co2 created by human resources doesn't compare with the co2 emited by natural resources, I´ve even heard of a 90% is emited by natural resources. If this is true, then we didn´t create global, it was going to happen anyway.

Answer 1

thats true but nature was always able to keep it equal. we trough it off balance, and we are worsening it. when the industrial revolution came around, there was a sudden spike in co2 emmisions in the atmosphere

Answer 2

Yes It is.Global warming is a natural process.But Humans are forcing the environment to increase the temperature bcoz people are  creating more CO2

Answer 3

Do you think the tjillions or quadrillions tons of c**p in the air that we throwed in dont have an effect?

do you think it doesnt throw out the nature out of balance?

Answer 4

Some global warming is "natural," some isn't.

Which is a different question from whether CO2 emissions are natural or not.  Again, some are, and some aren't.

What we're really talking about when we talk about CO2 and climate change is whether the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere is rising.  

When the CO2 level IN THE ATMOSPHERE increases, it adds to the "greenhouse" effect that keeps low-frequency infrared radiation from the earth -- aka heat waves -- from penetrating the atmosphere and escaping to outer space.  When more infrared energy aka heat waves are retained in the atmosphere, we get "global warming."

What's important about human generated CO2 emissions from fossil fuels is that they're basically removing carbon from underneath the surface of the earth, where said carbon has been "sequestered" for millions of years -- and thus kept apart from the natural carbon cycle in the environment.

When we did up this long-buried, long-sequestered carbon and burn it -- as oil, coal, natural gas or peat -- we restore the long-buried carbon to the natural carbon cycle, which among other things cycles CO2 through the atmosphere.  

Therefore our fossil fuel use has the effect of increasing the total concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere -- producing "global warming."

OTOH, there are large volumes of CO2 that circulate "naturally" through the global carbon cycle all the time, without any necessary human intervention.  At one point in the cycle, carbon is present as CO2 in the atmosphere.  At another point, it supports photosynthesis by plants and is added to the biomass of the plants.

At still another point in the natural cycle, plants and animals that eat the plants engage in respiration, and convert carbon back into CO2 that is emitted back into the atmosphere.  At yet another point, decay organisms break down dead plants and animals and emit -- in some cases CO2, in some cases the even more powerful "greenhouse" gas, methane.

"Natural" carbon also hides in minerals and rocks, and huge volumes of carbon dioxide are normally disssolved in ocean water.

But under "natural" conditions, where they exist, the different forms of carbon stored in different parts of the environment are kept in rough equilibrium with each other.

When a tree dies or is burned, yielding back CO2 to the atmosphere, that's generally counter-acted by atmospheric CO2 being taken up by green plants somewhere else in the global system.   It doesn't change the overall CO2 level in the atmosphere.

It's our digging up of the buried carbon that we burn in the form of coal, oil, natural gas and peat that adds to the atmospheric burden and increases the effect of the "greenhouse effect" to potentially dangerous levels.

BTW - the buried carbon we've been burning obviously was stored underground through "natural" processes, when you think about it.  

Millions of years ago when the climate was warmer and richer in CO2 than today, CO2 supported photosynthesis by plants, and thanks to geological activity large volumes of those plants got buried under mud or under deep sediments in the ocean.  

Therefore CO2 that had been "naturally" present in the air, back before the dinosaurs went extinct, was buried or sequestered underground for millions of years -- one factor among others that produced a cooling effect.

Another point worth remembering:  volcanic action is another "natural" source of CO2, and unlike the respiration of plants and animals and decay organisms, volcanic action can tap carbon that is not normally part of the carbon cycle, but instead carbon that has been buried deep in the earth.  

Therefore big volcanic eruptions are believed to have the capacity to add to the CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere through "natural" means, just as human use of fossil fuels adds to atmospheric CO2 concentrations through "anthropogenic" means.

Science writer Mark Lynas, in his rather scary book "Six Degrees," about what we can expect if the climate experiences the maximum warming that the IPCc thinks possible by 2100, spends some time discussing a "natural" surge in CO2 and methane levels that occurred an estimated 251 million years ago, at the tail end of the Permian period.

At the end of the Permian and the start of the Triassic period, Lynas writes, massive eruptions of underseas volcanoes caused large volumes of CO2 and methane to be belched into the air.  

According to Lynas, who is citing recent research on this stuff, t\The result of the late Permian volcanic activity was a sharp spike in global temperatures and in CO2 levels in the oceans (which affect ocean acidity).  

This produced "climate change" that triggered the greatest wave of extinctions ever to occur on earth.  As the climate on land got warmer, and as the seas warmed and became more acidic, an estimated 95 percent of all plant and animal species on earth went extinct over an extended period of perhaps 10,000 - 100,000 years

Answer 5

Completely natural. If you look at the following graph, you will see how in the last 450,000 years, the earth has consistently warmed then cooled 5 times just like now. The only difference was the previous 4 times was warmer than today's.

As for Wildfire, Gore has been shown in  a court of law to have lied in the movie. And those were the easy challenges. he actually misstated or lied about 35 times. Scientist agree that CO2 follows temp, not the other way around.

Answer 6

The film your refer to is "the great global warming swindle" which was originally called "Apocalypse my ****". Its a great documentary and I recommend people on both sides of the argument watch it.

you can watch it here:

http://www.moviesfoundonline.com/great_g...

co2 makes up around 0.054% of the greenhouse layer and is only a mild greenhouse gas. Of the co2 produced by the earth ive seen figures as low as 0.02% for the man made contribution and figure as high as 3%.

Using the higher figures, man made co2 makes up for 0.00162% of the greenhouse layer. You can see how some people find the IPCC statement that "most of the warming over the centuary can be attributed to man made co2" is hard to swallow. It may have a very small impact, but it would easilly masked by all the other much stronger greenhouse gasses and climate systems.

95% of the greenhouse layer is water vapour which comes from the sea, the sea is warmed by the sun which releases more water vapour and with it more co2

The IPCC work this backwards by reversing the natural cycle and argue that the extra man made co2 causes warming a small warming effect that heats the sea and in turn releases more water vapour causing amplified warming or "feedback", this is an un proven assumption used to make their man made co2 warming theory work in the models, because without the models onlypredict very slight warming. Their models ignore cloud cover and solar activity which are both strong drivers of the climate system, they justify this because they do not fully understand the process so its ok to leave them out and say the model projections are "highly likely"

Theories and model projections are simply that, theories and projections and cannot currently be proven (not until 2050 at least), they are not fact. We only need to look at historic data to see it was warming before co2 production really took of and the rate has continued pretty much that same with the extra co2. We know it has been warmer in the past and the sea didnt swallow the earth and man and the polar bears survived without any problems. That whats important.

The sea controls co2 levels, and the sea is warmed by the suns energy, the sea has a delayed response to warm periods so the rising co2 we are seing now could be driven by a previous warm period for all we know.

The troposphere has not warmed faster than the earths surface so the signature of global warming isnt there, and the model projections are already off, so isnt it time the IPCC considered some of the other theories and reviwed the current theory instead of outright insisting they are 100% right? Well they wont, because their job is specfically to find a link between man made co2 and climate change, if they cant, than they are no longer required and they would lose their funding and glory. Dont 100% trust any group that was set up by politicians to make nuclear more attractive and that has to justify its existance in order to secure its funding.

sure it will get warmer, it will get colder as well, we will try and understand it as we are human and thats what we do, but fact is its predominantly a natural effect which we have little impact on.

Answer 7

You have to remember that the carbon we've been digging up and burning off, has been buried undisturbed (ie has been outside of the long term carbon cycle) for up to 300 million years (in the case of coal). So there's no way that releasing this extra carbon would NOT affect the atmospheric retention of heat.

Also, as the permafrost melts, it will vomit huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere, which is going to accelerate things even more. Once this happens, there's no going back, not for 10,000 years.

Answer 8

Yes, I too have seen both movies "An Inconvenient Truth" and "The Great Global Warming Swindle" I have them both on DVD in fact.

Climate Change is part of a natural process, there is far too much evidence that exists now showing CO2 has little or no effect on climate - which means that climate change MUST be caused by something else. However, it seems that Global Warming believers continue to change their story, attack those with another scientific theory or continue to use the dis-proved "hokey stick graph" creating alarmist reactions in the community. I suspect someone is getting very rich from this climate change "scare campaign" because the science simply doesn't add up.

The climate is constantly changing on it's own through solar activity, cloud cover and water vapour, CO2 doesn't even rate a mention. Human involvement in climate change is minimal (almost non existent) and I fear that any unproven knee-jerk changes to what little emissions we DO create could bring disastrous effects (worse than those in Al Gore's movie).

Incidentally, the High Court in the UK has determined that before any screening of the Al Gore movie in schools there, a disclaimer must be issued. The movie was found to contain exaggerated claims, unreasonable scare tactics and incorrect data according to the IPCC.

Answer 9

I'm afraid you've heard wrong. there are so many climate change critics who seem to scared to face the reality. Climatologists have been able to measure temperatures and co2 levels throughout the last few million years, by drilling through arctic ice and measuring the levels which where trapped in the air bubbles at different levels through the ice. this is just one of the many many studies done. it is true that there is a cyclical pattern of warm periods and ice ages. but the link between co2 emmissions and temperaturere is a stark one which has ridramaticallyicly since the industrial revolution. there are many sceptic, but i recommend you watch An Inconvenient Truth to answer in more detail. my family are all involved in climate change and it's effect on environment and biodiversity, there are too many coincidences and the levels escalating super fast. scary stuff!  

Answer 10

Global warming is really the wrong phrase, I prefer climate change or climate chaos! It is natural for our climate to change in cycles, but mans practises fueled by greed certainly aggravates and makes the problem worse. However, while we are all aware that our climate is changing, very little is being done to safegard  not only our citizens but the planet as a whole, too much time is being spent on bickering like kids in a playground over the cause... loads of noise and no action! Every little action helps, but many politicians environmentalists and scientists seem to feel that arguing over the cause of something that we are all aware is happening is the way to solve it!  

Answer 11

Isn't global warming part of a natural process?

Yes!

Answer 12

It has been going on through out time.  The liberals just needed something to scare you with, to get you on their side.  We can not affect enough global warming to ever amount to anything, don't worry, be happy.

Answer 13

All the studies have shown CO2 rising directly with the expansion of humans dramatically linked to the timing of the industrial revolution... the CO2 rising since the industrial revolution has been a greater CO2 rise and increase than we have ever seen in something like 100,000 years of atmospheric records taken from ice cores.

The cycle of warming and cooling is natural... we are just magnifying the effects of the warming with our increasing impact on our world.

Also Natural does not mean humans will like it... forest fires... bacteria... tornadoes ... are all natural... and Humans dislike them.

Answer 14

NO, it's a scam brought on and pushed by Al Gore, who failed to win his presidency.  That was his plan B.  The Bible says that God created the heavens and the earth and I think he will also take of it.  We can our part but ultimately it's up to him!

Answer 15

True, but as the smart creatures man kind should do somethings to help.  Animals passing gas creates a tremendous amount.  I've read articles about when a large volcanic eruption occurs that the pollution is equivalent to many years of human pollution.

Humans certainly didn't create the last ice age and it is supposed to part of the global cycle.  I guess if we make it to another ice age we will be the cause of it too.

Answer 16

no its not global warming is from all the green house gases disintegrating the ozone layer

Answer 17

yes and yes

even other planets go threw the same cycle changes. not only earth.

  there far more extreme tho.