Scientific information on global warming/ climate change?

Question

Im writing an essay on global warming mainly about the rise in sea level and the melting of polar ice caps and also what can be done to prevent global warming and what will happen in the future if global warming increases? 35% of the essay needs to be scientific content and this is what im struggling with does anybody have any suggestions? Thanks

Answer 1

If you go to the Sierra Club website you'll find a ton of stuff.  If you go to the NYTimes or the BBC website, you will also find a ton of stuff. My favorite place to check out the newest in thought is TED.com (check out the Global Issues section) Also, Google it.    Good for you for wanting to check out the subject for yourself.  So many just get angry and try to pretend its not a real issue.  The beauty of the Internet is that you can get as much information as you want to look for.  Also, beware of who has paid the writer of the info.  For me, if the research is from most universities you know there is a better shot of it being true science.  If its from the Exxon Corp, or Pfitzer, the FDA or the EPA, you have a pretty good idea that the research is tainted in order to try to sell you/us something, or confuse you/us into complacency.  Good Luck.

Answer 2

Global Warming is a scam and some are making billions.

Answer 3

Blame Clinton, greens for high gas prices

Posted: April 26, 2008

1:00 am Eastern

© 2008

With gas prices now yon-side of $3.50 per gallon, wouldn't it be great to have an extra million barrels of domestic oil flowing daily into the American pipeline? Blame William Jefferson Clinton, who vetoed a bill in 1995 that would have opened the Alaska reserves that could have been producing much-needed domestic energy today.

Blame the green environmental extremists who block every effort to expand domestic energy supply, whether in offshore oil reserves, expansion of clean coal production, or the construction of new nuclear energy facilities. It's just plain dumb to allow the shortage of readily available energy to drive prices so high that the entire economy and food supply are in jeopardy.

The fear-mongering extremists bring up the "global warming" hobgoblin every time a new initiative is introduced to increase the energy supply. Atmospheric carbon dioxide from human activity makes little or no difference to the climate.

The one thing on which scientists agree is that atmospheric carbon dioxide is currently about 375 parts-per-million. Eighty percent of this carbon is naturally occurring and would be in the atmosphere had oil never been discovered. The remaining 20 percent, or about 75 ppm, is generally attributed to all the smokestacks and automobiles and lawnmowers humans have created.

(Column continues below)

Could all carbon dioxide produced by humans be eliminated from the atmosphere, the difference would be undetectable. Visualize an Olympic-size swimming pool containing the standard 660,253.9 gallons of water. The average depth would be 7.48 feet. Remove the percentage of water equal to manmade carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, and the new average depth of the pool would be 7.452 feet. Undetectable!

A reduction of 75 ppm of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would make no difference on any thermometer. And it would take total elimination of all manmade carbon dioxide to achieve this number. The Kyoto Protocol, had it been fully implemented, would have reduced carbon dioxide by only about 1 ppm.

These results are simply not worth banning the use of fossil fuels.

Environmental extremists prefer to mandate the expanded use of ethanol, rather than using abundant oil supplies. This alternative produces less energy per gallon of fuel than gasoline, while driving the price of food upward, causing riots and forcing the cultivation of more land where wildlife can no longer flourish.

Environmental extremists wring their hands and cry crocodile tears at the thought of "ruining" the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge by using only 2,000 of the 18 million acres for oil production. But they seem to have no problems with the idea of covering millions of acres in the southwest with solar panels.

Environmental extremists celebrate their victory in banning DDT to save birds. But they have no problem with miles and miles of wind turbines that slaughter millions of birds every year. Nor do they seem to have any sympathy for the millions of people who have died from malaria as a direct result of the ban on DDT.

Big oil is not to blame for the high price of gasoline; the blame must fall squarely in the lap of the environmental extremists who use propaganda and fear-mongering to block the increases in the production of readily available fossil fuels. There are sufficient reserves of coal to last about 200 years. Despite Jimmy Carter's 1970s declaration that the world would be out of oil by 2000, and considering the anticipated increase in demand, there are enough known oil reserves to last at least 60 years. This energy should be available now.

Of course, research should continue to find abundant, affordable energy supplies for the future. But forcing technology to advance by arbitrarily and unnecessarily prohibiting the use of currently available energy supplies makes no sense. The price of both existing supplies and alternative technology is artificially increased. To write this foolishness into law is even worse.

Every time government sticks its nose into the marketplace and attempts to manage it, government makes a mess. The ethanol mandate, for example, inevitably results in price increases for food – for everyone. The arbitrary increase in fuel efficiency standards inevitably results in smaller, lighter automobiles – and more crash-related deaths. The much touted cap-and-trade program for carbon emissions will inevitably result in taking money out of the pockets of wage-earners and transfer it to the pockets of people like Al Gore, who created the "hot-air" store and sells his goods only because government forces people to buy them.

Every time a person fills up at the pump, he should visualize the billions of barrels of oil that are waiting in Alaska, and the billions of barrels of oil that are waiting in the Dakotas and Montana, and the billions of barrels of oil that are waiting just off shore – and curse the environmental extremists who are forcing him to pay far more for his transportation than is necessary.

Answer 4

Before you start your research on Global Warming, you must first realize that due to the corrupt manipulation of the research community, that finding one school of scientific theory on this issue is near impossible.

This is directly the fault of the universities that allow themselves to be controlled by the corporate elites by way of research grants. Over the last 20 years this problems has grown to such a level, that foremost Scientist have been basically forced to come up with evidence that would be favorable to the company that are funding the school or research.

Other words, lets say the corporate elites have invested $100 million in product A. The corporation is nice enough to donate huge research grants to the top 3 Universities in the world. Scientists that are dependent on these grants to fund their research.

One of the Universities accidentally discovers that product A cause’s cancer every time it is given to rats. Product A is already in thousands of other products and the sales generates Billions of $$'s for many other big companies that also fund and donate grants to even more colleges and Universities.

These companies will not stand to lose Billions, and all due to the grants they are donating. They demand the Scientist stop the rat research, either destroy the findings or the corporate elites will pull all their research grants $$, effectively bankrupting the schools.

The schools are forced to either fire the scientist or demand that another favorable test be "discovered" that proves the first cancer findings inconclusive.    

Back to Global Warming. Any scientific evidence that finds MAN is the problem behind Global Warming is a DIRECT threat to the corporate elites and big business.

The biggest companies in the world are ENERY companies.

These corporations have more money than most small countries and employ millions of people.

They (big business) also directly and indirectly fund the largest and best schools in the world.

These corporate mega companies can not afford any scientist or research finding global warming is MANS FAULT because the energy companies are the ones dumping trillions of tons of hydrocarbons into the air.

Scientific proof that "man is causing GW", would open the doors to the biggest law suites in history and destroy the company’s huge profits.

So these giant energy companies make sure they now own most of the research, schools, and now employ "House" scientists. Shameful.

When ever a small independent scientific report comes out that points to MAN being the cause behind Global warming, the companies just pay their lap dog "house" scientists to come up with an even bigger report that states the other scientists are wrong.

Research yourself.

Ask yourself who stands to lose more?

Why are governments declaring some GW reports "classified?"

My last words, Never buy into "Carbon tax" or donate to "Carbon donation" were you give money that you are told helps to counter your personal carbon foot print, it is just smoke and mirrors, "feel good"  BS. It is truly funding the corporate elite’s war chest and helping to mess up this planet even more.

Answer 5

Rise in sea level:

http://sealevel.colorado.edu/

Melting ice caps:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jh...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200...

What will happen if we do nothing:

http://www.reuters.com/article/scienceNe...

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg2.h...

How we can avoid the above:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/worl...

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg3.h...

Good general websites for science.  Don't miss the last one:

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...

Or you could just believe somebody here and their unsupported word that all this science is wrong.  Easy choice for me.

Answer 6

Good Luck!  You will not find any scientific support for global warming at all.  Just fear mongers creating these false consensuses and altered graphs.

Answer 7

IN MY OPINION= SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION ON CLIMATE CHANGE IS ALOT OF BUNK. CLICK ON THIS  http://www.socyberty.com/Activism/First-...  ITS VITALLY IMPORTANT THAT NATURE RETURNS TO NORMAL NATURALLY, OTHERWISE HUMANITY MAY BECOME EXTINCT. TRY THE EXPERIMENT OUT, IT'LL STOP OUR OCEANS FROM RISING + http://inventube/ooojay/  THIS IS MY URL IT WILL HELP YOU TO UNDERSTAND.

Answer 8

maybe also go watch the inconvenient truth gives alot of info

Answer 9

global warming :

the s*x of the egg of the turtle in the oceans is determined by the temperature.warm water means all eggs are female.

migratory birds have changed their path due to change in the temperature.

Planktons are dying which form the major part of the food chain in the oceans.