Why are we so worried about a few degree's temperature increase?

Question

For millions of years, the Earth has experienced thousands of massive volcanic explosions, giant meteors hitting the earth, drifting continents, and great biomass changes that were all naturally occurring events. The Earth is still here. Is it possible the Earth is just doing what it does and no matter what we do we can't stop it? No one can predict the future. No one can say with any honest certainty that in ten years we are going to have a cataclism on the Earth. No one can predict what the temperature will be, or that said temperature will be bad for the Earth. It's all a bit ridiculous when people say the debate is over. Science is all about skeptics. Scientists are supposed to be skeptics. The ones making fantastical claims are supposed to be the one's who prove it - not the other way around. There are plenty of qualified scientists who don't agree with all the hype? Why do they have to be castigated as "denyers", and "flat earthers"?

Answer 1

As you and others have stated many times, there have been natural fluctuations in the past.  Most of whatever species were around when an ice age has occured easily survived a drop of 10 degrees, which is about average for an ice age.  Modern humans probably evolved during the last one.  In between Ice ages it usually never gets much warmer than it is now, or in your grandfather's time.  So most of the time it is cooler than now, usually MUCH cooler.

On the other hand, on a few occasions the temperature has risen 4 degrees or more above what it is now, or in your Grandfather's time.  On those occasions all the higher forms of life on land became extinct, and most in the oceans.  They never returned, new ones evolved following each of these events.

If we look at where we are in relation to the natural cycle, we have been on the plateau between coolings for several hundred years.  Going by the duration of past cycles we should be just starting the next cool down, starting with the last decade or two.  Instead, we're getting warmer.  I know you'll see posts that will say "ONO! We are getting colder."  Actually we are not.  The years of the last decade have been among the warmest on record, even though they can truthfully be called "cold" or "unchanged" relative to one another.  Since the temperature rise is real then and as predicted a hundred years ago, the other important factor is the rate of change.  In the past it has taken thousands of volcanoes erupting together around 10,000 years for the temperature to rise 4 degrees.  The CO2 and other Greenhouse Gases humans have produced raised the earth's temperature 1 degree in about a century.  Most of the world had no industrial activity during most of that century.  Today pretty much the whole world is industrialized.  The temperature can be expected to rise much faster than it did in the last century.

I included a good set of links about the myths.  The one about the Sun doing some unusual gymnastics and giving us reason to believe the rest of what we know is false has been resuscitated recently and is making the rounds.  I've looked and I sure can't find anything that supports that.  I'm an amateur astronomer and get some Astronomy Magazines.  There hasn't been mention of the sun doing anything it hasn't been doing all  my life.  You would think if the sun was doing something significant enough to create a worldwide controversy involving billions of dollars and billions of people the Astronomy Magazines would at least mention it, wouldn't you? Anyway, it's on the myths list and seems to be the current front runner so I included it.

Several others have mentioned it so I will too:  the concern is not that something bad is going to happen to the earth.  The concern is that something bad is going to happen to us.

I don't know why people have to insult one another.  I've not heard "flat earther".  I'm called names all the time.  "Believer" and "alarmist" are offensive, but I don't even report those.  I'm not sure what is best about the denier thing.  Some people make a big deal out of the skeptic/denier distinction.  It seems illogical to me.  If I am skeptical of something it would seem to mean to me I don't believe it, which would appear to me to make me a denier.  Perhaps you could enlighten me further.  I certainly support good manners.  If I have offended you in that way I certainly apologize.

Answer 2

Here's what I don't understand, this question, or close variants of it, gets asked here at least 5 times a day.  Every time somebody provides a link to a report from the U.S. National Academy of Science, or the American Geophysical Union, or the IPCC, or the American Meteorological Society explaining in great detail why everything you've said above is either logically flawed, scientifically inaccurate, or a drastic misinterpretation of what is known to be correct in terms of the basic physics.  Clearly none of you skeptics read those reports, or if you do read them, you don't understand what you are reading in terms of your questions, or more likely you reject what they are saying as biased simply because it smacks of someone telling you what to do.  

None of the "expert" skeptics have anywhere near the scientific background in this to have anything beyond a layman's opinion on the subject.  There are probably 5 to 10 people here on Y!A/GW that have similar scientific credentials as a Ball or Patterson or Singer and, if they wanted some quick easy cash, could churn out "skeptic papers" for websites.  But like most of the skeptics, the Y!A folks have marginal credentials as true climate physicists and would get chewed apart in a true science forum should they come up against a real climate expert.  

Also, science is not about skepticism.  It is about objectivity.  I suggest you look up the dictionary definition of the word and go with that meaning.  Objectivity is not about rejection of inconvenient facts in favor of things that make you feel better, which is how you skeptics are applying "skepticism" in this particular instance.  

Finally, people are concerned about a few degree's because climate is exquisitely sensitive to a few degrees change in global mean temperature.  I could provide links, but they would be to things like IPCC reports, NAS documents, NOAA global climate websites and so forth but what's the point as far as you're concerned?  Keep reading JunkScience.com, they'll tell you what you want to hear.  Unfortunately, I won't.

Answer 3

We're not worried about the planet.  The planet will be fine.  We're worried about the species living on the planet.

The Earth only warmed 8°C from the coldest point in the last ice age to the present.  That should explain to you why we're worried about a few degrees temperature increase.

You ask why we don't listen to the few skeptical scientists.  Why don't you listen to the vast majority who are extremely concerned about global warming?  What makes you think the few who disagree are right?  And why are you talking about Al Gore?

Answer 4

becuase it could put us u a ice age or be to hot

Answer 5

There are not plenty of qualfied scientists who disagree.  

Apparently, as shown by the conference last month, there are about 2 dozen dedicated certified hacks vs thousands of real scientists.  

You bring only a political argument, the same tired old "socialism is evil therefore any solution which invokes it is bad and wrong".

  

We have 150 years of science that says the deniers are not just wrong, they are worse than wrong because they bring nothing to the debate.  They bring only objections, obfuscation and nitpicking, nitwit nonsense.

And so they get castigated and labeled as hacks, freaks and cranks, which is how it should be.

Answer 6

Because our modern society, with massive coastal development and intensive agriculture, is very sensitive to such a change.  It would cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, and kill a significant number of very poor people by starvation (because much of their farmland will be damaged).

We're no longer nomads who can fold our tents and move.

"We humans have built a remarkable socioeconomic system during perhaps the only time when it could be built, when climate was sufficiently stable to allow us to develop the agricultural infrastructure required to maintain an advanced society.

EDIT - Al who?  What's being stated here is the view of most all of the world's scientists.  You may be obsessed with Gore.  We're not.

Answer 7

because many sea creatures are delicately balanced as far as temperature is concerned. A few degree rise in temperature melts the polar ice caps and raises sea levels changing whole ecosystems. The earth will still be here but our way of life and perhaps our species will not. You have to consider the damage we have already done and the lack of land devoted to farming. We already have a food and water crisis.

Answer 8

It's not even that much!  The Earth's climate has only varied from average by a scant +/- 0.5 degrees!

That looks like a normal deviation to me.  I can't even keep my home at tolerances this tight, and it's computer controlled!

Answer 9

Heres why:

Global warming -- a gradual increase in planet-wide temperatures -- is now well documented and accepted by scientists as fact. A panel convened by the U.S National Research Council, the nation's premier science policy body, in June 2006 voiced a "high level of confidence" that Earth is the hottest it has been in at least 400 years, and possibly even the last 2,000 years. Studies indicate that the average global surface temperature has increased by approximately 0.5-1.0°F (0.3-0.6°C) over the last century. This is the largest increase in surface temperature in the last 1,000 years and scientists are predicting an even greater increase over this century. This warming is largely attributed to the increase of greenhouse gases (primarily carbon dioxide and methane) in the Earth's upper atmosphere caused by human burning of fossil fuels, industrial, farming, and deforestation activities.

Average global temperatures may increase by 1.4-5.8ºC (that's 2.5 - 10.4º F) by the end of the 21st century. Although the numbers sound small, they can trigger significant changes in climate. (The difference between global temperatures during an Ice Age and an ice-free period is only about 5ºC.) Besides resulting in more hot days, many scientists believe an increase in temperatures may lead to changes in precipitation and weather patterns. Warmer ocean water may result in more intense and frequent tropical storms and hurricanes. Sea levels are also expected to increase by 0.09 - 0.88 m. in the next century, mainly from melting glaciers and expanding seawater . Global warming may also affect wildlife and species that cannot survive in warmer environments may become extinct. Finally, human health is also at stake, as global warming may result in the spreading of certain diseases such as malaria, the flooding of major cities, a greater risk of heat stroke for individuals, and poor air quality.

Climate change is very likely having an impact now on our planet and its life, according to the latest installment of a report published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). And the future problems caused by rising seas, growing deserts, and more frequent droughts all look set to affect the developing world more than rich countries, they add. The report is the second chapter of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment -- the most comprehensive summary yet of research into the causes and effects of climate change. To read more, visit Effects of climate change tallied up.

Factors

Greenhouse Gases

The increase in greenhouse gases caused by human activity is often cited as one of the major causes of global warming. These greenhouse gases reabsorb heat reflected from the Earth's surface, thus trapping the heat in our atmosphere. This natural process is essential for life on Earth because it plays an important role in regulating the Earth's temperature. However, over the last several hundred years, humans have been artificially increasing the concentration of these gases, mainly carbon dioxide and methane in the Earth's atmosphere. These gases build up and prevent additional thermal radiation from leaving the Earth, thereby trapping excess heat.

Solar Variability & Global Warming

Some uncertainty remains about the role of natural variations in causing climate change. Solar variability certainly plays a minor role, but it looks like only a quarter of the recent variations can be attributed to the Sun. At most. During the initial discovery period of global warming, the magnitude of the influence of increased activity on the Sun was not well determined.

Solar irradiance changes have been measured reliably by satellites for only 30 years. These precise observations show changes of a few tenths of a percent that depend on the level of activity in the 11-year solar cycle. Changes over longer periods must be inferred from other sources. Estimates of earlier variations are important for calibrating the climate models. While a component of recent global warming may have been caused by the increased solar activity of the last solar cycle, that component was very small compared to the effects of additional greenhouse gases. According to a NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) press release, "...the solar increases do not have the ability to cause large global temperature increases...greenhouse gases are indeed playing the dominant role..." The Sun is once again less bright as we approach solar minimum, yet global warming continues.

GLOBAL WARMING HAS TO STOP BEFORE WE ALL DIE.

HUMANS MADE THIS MESS AND HUMANS ARE THE ONLY ONES WHO CAN CLEAN IT UP!

Answer 10

Past catastrophes in no ways makes the possibility of another one more tolerable.  Having one's species wiped out won't eliminate the planet, but it could sure mess up my retirement plans.

If you really look into the credentials of the people expressing skepticism to the basic points of the theory of AGW (CO2 is rising from human activity, the result will be a temperature sensitivity of 1.5 - 4 C, the lower end is not a huge concern, but the upper end would cause significant problems) there are only a few legitimate scientists (i.e. people with sufficient scientific training and research experience who are discussing their own field of expertise).  The notion of 100's is simply false.

The OISM petition was carried out fraudulently.  The Inhofe list of 400 "prominent scientists" was filled mostly with economists and TV weathermen (who have no significant scientific training).

Answer 11

to paraphrase the chap at the bali summit;

"if you are not willing to help, please get out of the way".