What would you think if it turns out that global warming is NOT the result of humanity but a natural process?

Question

While few people deny that global warning is occurring, there is credible evidence that humanity's influence is negligible and that what we are experiencing is a natural cycle of the earth.

Whether or not you believe that is beside the point for this question.

There is nothing wrong with going green and seeking cleaner forms of energy. There can only be a benefit, if you can get past the economic issues.

But.....

What would you think if it turned out that global warming was out of our hands?

Answer 1

The answer I always see is something like "well then-- all those scientist must be wrong!" -- skeptics believe that the temperature goes UP and the temperature goes DOWN-- its the WHY we disagree about-- and might I remind you that as little as 100 years ago the consensus among Astronomers was that the universe consisted of the Milky Way and "nebula" beyond ---------

Answer 2

Well, if it is, it is still a very large effect and we'll have to learn to mitigate it. If the same temperature changes occur to the climate then we may be dealing with the same issues--except that we won't be able to make a difference as far as stopping it.  A natural global warming would still result in massive changes to our infrastructure: we'd need to change our water supply and distribution systems, move our croplands, retreat from rising seas, deal with possibly more or stronger hurricanes.

Answer 3

isint that wat it is already?  it is a natural proccess

Answer 4

I wouldn't be at all surprised.

Answer 5

1) 99.5% of the climate scientists in the world were wrong? Amazing!

2) All the Physics text books from the past 50 years were in error.

3) That's a huge relief

4) Now we can focus on replacing our fossil fuel energy system with clean renewable sources without being concerned about global warming.  But it still needs to be done.

Edit:

bob326 - OK, maybe it's "only" 98.5%.   But since this entire question is based on a fantasy, I think either of my estimates are more than sufficient.

Answer 6

The truth doesn't matter to people who believe in man being the cause of global warming.  You should never accept something as true, until it has been proven.  Look at all these religious cults in the western part of the United States.  The leader of one compound made several predictions about the end of the world and some other things which were supposed to happen between 1995 and 2000 but none of the predictions came true.  The cult still exists to this day.  They have just explained their way around the evidence which shows their religion to be false.  You have to realize that many people who support man as being the cause of global warming, do so not because of scientific reasons, but be cause it is an issue which they are emotionally invested in.  Opinions based on emotion are hard to change, because we can't decide what we feel.  Environmentalist will go on believing that man is a parasite and that his destruction of the earth should be limited.  They will just move on to another issue.

Answer 7

I already knew that we weren't the cause of GW. It's just people are just........stupid. Yeah, that's it.

Answer 8

It is out of our hands to a certain extent. There are two things happening:

Natural global warming: we have been a warming mode since the end of the last ice age approx 10,000 years ago, except for a couple of minor cooling periods.  Warming/cooling are cyclical and have been happening since the beginning of the planet.

Pollution by humans: This most certainly can be stopped or at least contained, but it will not stop global warming or climate change. It may slow it down somewhat, and pollution needs to be controlled, but as I wrote, it will not stop climate change/global warming.

Answer 9

I already think global warming is both natural and out of our hands.  And I'm not paying any carbon credits or other guilt tax for being human to prove it.

Answer 10

It is ironic that the things being done to combat this alleged threat will make the people of this planet less capable of dealing with a naturally warming climate. The alarmists should be ashamed, but I suspect they are neither ashamed now, or will be in the future. They've accomplished nothing with their propaganda other then making clear-minded people a little more cynical.

Answer 11

Well I wouldn't be surprised at all. Then I'd just point at every AGE alarmist and laugh.....

I'm all for going greener, for conservation, for reducing pollution etc... after all I live here too. I just don't need the AGW n***s pretending to know more about the subject that I do.

Answer 12

It is a natural cycle !!!

Answer 13

Global warming IS a natural, cyclical process that evolves over tens of thousands of years. But man's industrial revolution of these past 150 years has escalated the cycle without allowing time for most animals and plants to adapt to the climatic changes.

We have polluted the air with vehicle emissions and smoke-belching factories; poisoned our water with oil spills and toxic chemicals; over-fished our oceans to the point of exhaustion; decimated our landscape through strip mining and natural gas explorations; destroyed countless species of animals and plants in our quest for oil; neglected the balance of nature as we've focused on making our own human lives more profitable, comfortable or convenient; asphalted over meadows and wetlands s vital to the survival of the planet; ripped up the rain forests to make way for grazing land just so we can eat cheap Big Macs; practically eliminated the ugly, lowly horse shoe crab*; killed off mangrove forests so vital to our beaches and oceanfronts; disrupted migration patterns of animals and sea life; disturbed the balance of nature so important to remote Eskimo tribes, polar bears and penguins, and caused giant glaciers to melt which will only bring horrendous hurricanes, flooding and tornadoes to both coasts of both major oceans.

I don't see how it CANNOT be the result of humanity. We certainly have contributed to the escalation of a natural process.   -RKO-  06/19/08

Answer 14

It's about time to sue Al Gore for creating hysteria and pushing his carbon credit scheme.

Answer 15

It'd be more or less like an election poll with a margin of error of +/-3% where the results fell within the margin of error.  A surprise, but within the range of statistical probability.  On a much bigger scale of 'I told ya so's' though by the people who voted for the winning candidate.

To me, AGW is just one of the issues that require environmental action, and when I say 'require,'  from everything I have read there is a high enough risk of AGW tipping the balance to justify taking action.  But that action is the same thing we need to do to wean ourselves off a finite supply of fossil fuels, minimize the effect over six billion people have on the environment, and conserve our remaining resources anyway.  The other comment I would make in this regard is that global warming is a natural process and the issue that is being researched is whether or not humankind's activities are affecting it enough to accelerate the process from one of centuries to one of decades.  There are people who believe that is already happening, others that believe it will if we don't cut our CO2 output, and yet others who don't think it matters one way or the other...some think the changes will be rapid and catastrophic, others think more gradual.  And some are totally convinced of what will happen one way or the other, when scientific research cannot say with 100% certainty...they can only couch it in terms of statistical probability, and that probability, I feel, is enough to take action.

But I basically don't have a dog in the fight other than being in favor of more environmental activism for all the reasons I already mentioned.  I think if it turned out that AGW was not a factor, the 'I told ya sos' would run roughshod over the believers and pass legislation that would more or less require ring kissing, go on a consumption binge for a few decades to celebrate and basically trash the joint, build even bigger houses, buy Hummers and throw their Happy Meal bags all over the place, so I wouldn't especially want to be around for that.  You know how people act after their third rate football team wins...

Answer 16

I wouldn't be surprised, because that's my contention all along. I'm all for alternative energy sources, since we do need to cut our dependence on oil. And I'm all for polution control that's why I'm frustrated that China is building power plants without polution controls on them.

(I've even bought resuable grocery bags, just because I thought it was a good idea.)

Answer 17

it is a natural process, but unfortunately, we are a catalyst to the situation.

Answer 18

First off, I'd admit I was wrong.

But I don't think it'd matter much. Why? Because the mitigation strategy consists mainly of searching for alternative fuels. And no point scrapping any carbon caps, either. It's good to keep pollution down.

Answer 19

global warming is out of our hands, but it isn't actually warming anymore anyway

Answer 20

It is a scam to make money and U fall for that. The greenhouse gas that is the cause of GW is not there. Go measure it ...

Answer 21

It would be a amazing to see because GB is just now becoming profitable enough to interest money guys a bit. It is a well known fact to geologists that climate changes occur a lot more than is generally known. The real problem is not GW but polution. Polution is no yet profitable so no one wants to do anything that would eliminate polution.

Answer 22

Ken said:

"1) 99.5% of the climate scientists in the world were wrong? Amazing!"

Do you have an reference for the 99.5% figure? I didn't think so. Come on Ken.

Answer 23

Lets wait and find out.

Answer 24

I'm already there.

Answer 25

I believe it is out of our hands. I also think that there has been natural disasters from the beginning of time. And, I dont believe they had anything to do with globes warming.