Prove to me global warming is caused by humans.?

Question

Prove to me global warming is caused by humans.?

Answer 1

how bout you go looking for the proof.. it really shouldnt be that hard because it is a SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT that global warming is indirectly caused by humans

Answer 2

I am cow, hear me moo

I weigh twice as much as you

And I look good on the barbecue

Yogurt, curd, cream cheese and butters

Made from liquid from my udders

I am cow, I am cow, hear me moo (moo)

I am cow, eating grass

Methane gas comes out my ***

And out my muzzle when I belch

Oh, the ozone layer is thinner

From the outcome of my dinner

I am cow, I am cow, Ive got gas

I am cow, here I stand

Far and wide upon this land

And I am living everywhere

From b.c. to newfoundland

You can squeeze my teats by hand

I am cow, I am cow, I am cow

I am cow, I am cow, I am cow!

Cows contribute too ... =P

Answer 3

well since global warming is b.s.  it cannot be proven, oh and that poem was absolutly funny !!!!!!!!!!

Answer 4

I agree with Bob. It's just too bad a lot of people don't like science. Science is cool. And science is the closest thing to truth that we can find...

Answer 5

This is science and what counts is the data, not people's intuition.

"I wasn’t convinced by a person or any interest group—it was the data that got me. I was utterly convinced of this connection between the burning of fossil fuels and climate change. And I was convinced that if we didn’t do something about this, we would be in deep trouble.”

Vice Admiral Richard H. Truly, USN (Ret.)

Former NASA Administrator, Shuttle Astronaut

Here are two summaries of the mountain of peer reviewed data that convinced Admiral Truly and the vast majority of the scientific community, short and long.

http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Ima...

http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/wg1-report....

summarized at:

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report...

There's a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/a...

And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_...

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/fu...

EVERY major scientific organization has issued an official statement that this is real, and mostly caused by us.  The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

Good websites for more info:

http://www.nrdc.org/globalWarming/f101.a...

http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/sci...

http://www.realclimate.org

"climate science from climate scientists"

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

Answer 6

http://www.mng.org.uk/gh/threat/threat6....

Okay what is the proof that u r not an animal???

Uhmm forget that!! Cars polluting our environment, No trees, cutting down the trees... The ozone layer wich was there before but reducing day by day....

It is also mentioned in quran...

The strongest evidence yet that global warming has been triggered by human activity has emerged from a major study of rising temperatures in the world’s oceans.

The present trend of warmer sea temperatures, which have risen by an average of half a degree Celsius (0.9F) over the past 40 years, can be explained only if greenhouse gas emissions are responsible, new research has revealed.

The results are so compelling that they should end controversy about the causes of climate change, one of the scientists who led the study said yesterday.

"The debate about whether there is a global warming signal now is over, at least for rational people," said Tim Barnett, of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla, California. "The models got it right. If a politician stands up and says the uncertainty is too great to believe these models, that is no longer tenable."

In the study, Dr Barnett’s team examined more than seven million observations of temperature, salinity and other variables in the world’s oceans, collected by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and compared the patterns with those that are predicted by computer models of various potential causes of climate change.

It found that natural variation in the Earth’s climate, or changes in solar activity or volcanic eruptions, which have been suggested as alternative explanations for rising temperatures, could not explain the data collected in the real world. Models based on man-made emissions of greenhouse gases, however, matched the observations almost precisely.

"What absolutely nailed it was the greenhouse model," Dr Barnett told the American Association for the Advancement of Science conference in Washington. Two models, one designed in Britain and one here in the US, got it almost exactly. We were stunned. They did it so well it was almost unbelieveable."

Climate change has affected the seas in different ways in different parts of the world: in the Atlantic, for example, rising temperatures can be observed up to 700 metres below the surface, while in the Pacific the warming is seen only up to 100m down.

Only the greenhouse models replicated the changes that have been observed in practice. "The fact that this has gone on in different ways gives us the chance to figure out who did it," Dr Barnett said.

"All the potential culprits have been ruled out except one.

"This is perhaps the most compelling evidence yet that global warming is happening right now, and it shows that we can successfully simulate its past and its likely future evolution. The statistical significance of these results is far too strong to be merely dismissed and should wipe out much of the uncertainty about the reality of global warming."

Dr Barnett said the results, which are about to be submitted for publication in a major peer-reviewed journal, should put further pressure on the Bush Administration to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol, which came into force on Wednesday. "It is now time for nations that are not part of Kyoto to reevaluate and see if it would be to their advantage to join," he said.

"We have got a serious problem ahead of us. The debate is not have we got a clear global warming signal, the debate is what we are going to do about it."

In a separate study, also presented to the conference, a team led by Ruth Curry of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Connecticut has established that 20,000 square kilometres of freshwater ice melted in the Arctic between 1965 and 1995.

Further melting on this scale could be sufficient to turn off the ocean currents that drive the Gulf Stream, which keeps Britain up to 6C warmer than it would otherwise be. "It is taking the first steps, the system is moving in that direction," Dr Curry said.

"The new ocean study, taken together with the numberous validations of the same models in the atmosphere, portends far broader changes. Other parts of the world will face similar problems to those expected, and being observed now, in the western US.

"The skill demonstrated by the climate models in handling the changing planetary heat budget suggests that these scenarios have a high enough probability of actually happening that they need to be taken seriously by decision-makers."

SAVE THE GLACIERS!!!!

:)

Answer 7

Sorry, I can't... neither can anyone else.  Bu I can show you over 30,000 scientists who don't believe it is.

31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Theory to be Named Monday

By Noel Sheppard | May 18, 2008 - 17:12 ET

The names of over 31,000 American scientists that reject the theory of anthropogenic global warming are to be revealed on Monday.

Although this will occur at the National Press Club in Washington, DC., it seems a metaphysical certitude media will completely ignore the event.

Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?

As announced Thursday by PR Newswire via StreetInsider.com:

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)

Who: Dr. Arthur Robinson of the OISM

What: release of names in OISM "Petition Project"

When: 10 AM, Monday May 19

Where: Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington, DC

Why: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.

It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not "skeptics."

Folks should recall that this petition was first circulated in 1999 garnering more than 19,000 signatures. The alarmists discounted its significance because there were some duplicate names, and some of the signatories apparently weren't scientists -- or so the story goes.

With over 31,000 now on the list, all with degrees in science -- including 9,000 PhDs! -- what might this do to the nonsensical premise of there being a consensus concerning this issue?

Probably not much, because apart from conservative websites, talk radio hosts, and Fox News, nobody is going to report it.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.

Answer 8

Obviously GW is a very complex issue but I'll stick to just one aspect - CO2 levels:

1 - It is easily proven (and should be easy to understand) that anything that traps the suns energy in the atmosphere will warm the planet (proven in the laboratory, in greenhouses, in cities, on Venus, etc)

2 - It is easily proven that CO2 traps the suns energy

3 - CO2 levels are easily measured. American scientists stated on May 12 of this year that CO2 is now at 387 ppm, the highest it has been in 650,000 years.

4 - Yes, CO2 levels have been this high before - but it is the rate of increase that counts not just the absolute amount and this is the point that most GW sceptics ignore

5 - The rate of accumulation is the fastest it has ever been (again easily proven through ice core samples, rock samples and many other techniques) - it is now increasing at 2.14 ppm/year

6 - CO2 levels increased over hundreds of thousands of years to 270 ppm. Then, in the space of 150 years, it went to the current 387 - this is a phenomenal change in the rate - and the effects can take decades to be felt

7 - We know all the different sources of atmospheric CO2 (volcanoes, plant/animal respiration ratios, etc) and there is nothing that has changed drastically enough to explain this rapid increase in the rate of CO2 accumulation except... human activity

8 - CO2 generating human activity (mainly burning of fossil fuels) is so closely correlated to the rise in atmospheric CO2 as to be statistically undeniable

9 - Human activities now release 130 times as much CO2 as volcanoes - natural processes are now insignificant compared to ours

10 - Since the industrial revolution, humans have burnt 500 billion metric tons of carbon, sufficient to raise atmospheric levels to 500ppm. That it is only 380 shows that the oceans et al have absorbed some but again, the correlation is too close to be coincidence

11 - To verify this, analysis of isotopic ratios of atmospheric CO2 show that it is coming from burining of fossil fuels and not from natural sources

12 - The rate at which humans burn fossil fuels is accelerating; the rate at which atmospheric CO2 accumulates is accelerating; the rate at which glaciers are melting is accelerating; the rate at which heat records are broken is accelerating... this is not a coincidence

Anyway, there you go - a proof according to sound logic, based on independently verified facts and peer reviewed and accepted by the vast majority of those who measure these things...

...but I bet you're still going to disagree with me and I bet I still get a bunch of thumbs down!!

Answer 9

DMac : while your poem is funny it lacks a little in the science area

Unless cows start farting hair spray or refrigerant they have no effect on the ozone layer.

Cows in the wild virtually don't exist, all are farmed for consumption by us or to produce milk and we have spent several thousand years breeding them to be larger fatter or make more milk and as a byproduct make more gas.

Any contribution by cows to GW is by default human caused, pass the quarter pounder?

Answer 10

If humans didn't who did? was there this many problems before people? I think not.

Answer 11

who invented things that causing global warming

Answer 12

"how bout you go looking for the proof.. it really shouldnt be that hard because it is a SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN FACT that global warming is indirectly caused by humans"

This is sad. Go learn what science really is.

Answer 13

It can't be proved that global warming is being caused by humans because:

1.  The earth has a 1500 year cycle;

2.  The sun has a direct affect on the earth's temperature;

3.  There are hundreds if not thousands of scientist that DISAGREE that man is responsible for global warming including MIT professors.  

But if you want to see man causing global warming, watch Al Gore's movie for the scene where he is talking to the camera while the jet in the background is running.