Writing a paper on global warming!?

Question

Does anyone know any good resources i can use. My paper will be on global warming and the going green movement. Anyone know any good newspaper articles or resources i can use?

Answer 1

There are a lot of brainwash resources out there to create panic about the global warming.

It is a scam created by the government to provoke panic in societies.

My 2 cents.

Answer 2

Be sure to read the questions at the end!!

>

>  

>

>  

> -----

>  

>  

> Into the wild green yonder

>

>

> May 11, 2008

>

> By Walter E. Williams - Now that another Earth Day has come and gone,

> let's look at some environmentalists' predictions they would prefer we

> forget.

>

> At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel

> Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside

> nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for

> mankind." C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said,

> "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and

consistent enough

> that it will not soon be reversed."

>

> In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich, former Vice President Al Gore's hero

> and mentor, predicted a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the

> 1970s... hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death."

> Mr. Ehrlich forecast 65 million Americans would die of starvation

> between 1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have

> declined to 22.6 million. Mr. Ehrlich's predictions about England were

> gloomier: "If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England

> will not exist in the year 2000."

>

> In 1972, a report for the Club of Rome warned the world would run out

> of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and

> petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992.

>

> Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said

Americans

> were using 50 percent of the world's resources and "by 2000 they

> [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them."

>

> In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The

> World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000."

>

> Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "civilization

> will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken

> against problems facing mankind." That was the same year Sen. Gaylord

> Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 "somewhere between 75

> and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."

>

> It's not just latter-day doomsayers who have been wrong; doomsayers

> have always been wrong. In 1885, the U.S. Geological Survey announced

> there was "little or no chance" of oil being discovered in California,

>

and a few years later they said the same about Kansas and Texas. In

> 1939, the U.S. Interior Department said American oil supplies would

> last only another 13 years. In 1949, the interior secretary said the

> end of U.S. oil supplies was in sight.

>

> Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous claims, in 1974 the

> U.S. Geological Survey advised us that the U.S. had only a 10-year

> supply of natural gas. In fact,, according to the American Gas

> Association, there's a 1,000- to 2,500-year supply.

>

> Here are my questions: In 1970, when environmentalists were making

> predictions of manmade global cooling and the threat of an ice age and

> millions of Americans starving to death, what kind of government

> policy should we have undertaken to prevent such a calamity?

>

> When Mr. Ehrlich predicted England would not exist in the

year 2000,

> what steps should the British Parliament have taken in 1970 to prevent

> such a dire outcome? In 1939, when the Interior Department warned we

> only had oil supplies for another 13 years, what actions should

> President Roosevelt have taken? Finally, what makes us think

> environmental alarmism is any more correct now the tune has been

> switched to manmade global warming?

>

> Here are a few facts: More than 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is

> the result of water vapor in Earth's atmosphere. Without the

> greenhouse effect, Earth's average temperature would be zero degrees

> Fahrenheit. Most climate change is due to the orbital eccentricities

> of Earth and variations in the sun's output. On top of that, natural

> wetlands produce more greenhouse gas contributions annually than all

> human sources combined.

>

> Walter

E. Williams is a nationally syndicated columnist and a

> professor of economics at George Mason University.

>

Answer 3

The average global air temperature near the Earth's surface increased 0.74 ± 0.18 °C (1.33 ± 0.32 °F) during the hundred years ending in 2005.  The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concludes "most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-twentieth century is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse gas concentrations" via the greenhouse effect. Natural phenomena such as solar variation combined with volcanoes probably had a small warming effect from pre-industrial times to 1950 and a small cooling effect from 1950 onward. These basic conclusions have been endorsed by at least thirty scientific societies and academies of science, including all of the national academies of science of the major industrialized countries. While individual scientists have voiced disagreement with some findings of the IPCC, the overwhelming majority of scientists working on climate change agree with the IPCC's main conclusions.

Climate model projections summarized by the IPCC indicate that average global surface temperature will likely rise a further 1.1 to 6.4 °C (2.0 to 11.5 °F) during the twenty-first century. The range of values results from the use of differing scenarios of future greenhouse gas emissions as well as models with differing climate sensitivity. Although most studies focus on the period up to 2100, warming and sea level rise are expected to continue for more than a thousand years even if greenhouse gas levels are stabilized. The delay in reaching equilibrium is a result of the large heat capacity of the oceans.

Increasing global temperature will cause sea level to rise, and is expected to increase the intensity of extreme weather events and to change the amount and pattern of precipitation. Other effects of global warming include changes in agricultural yields, trade routes, glacier retreat, species extinctions and increases in the ranges of disease vectors.

Remaining scientific uncertainties include the amount of warming expected in the future, and how warming and related changes will vary from region to region around the globe. Most national governments have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but there is ongoing political and public debate worldwide regarding what, if any, action should be taken to reduce or reverse future warming or to adapt to its expected consequences.

The greenhouse effect was discovered by Joseph Fourier in 1824 and was first investigated quantitatively by Svante Arrhenius in 1896. It is the process by which absorption and emission of infrared radiation by atmospheric gases warm a planet's lower atmosphere and surface.

Existence of the greenhouse effect as such is not disputed. Naturally occurring greenhouse gases have a mean warming effect of about 33 °C (59 °F), without which Earth would be uninhabitable. On Earth, the major greenhouse gases are water vapor, which causes about 36–70% of the greenhouse effect (not including clouds); carbon dioxide (CO2), which causes 9–26%; methane (CH4), which causes 4–9%; and ozone, which causes 3–7%. The issue is how the strength of the greenhouse effect changes when human activity increases the atmospheric concentrations of some greenhouse gases.

Human activity since the industrial revolution has increased the concentration of various greenhouse gases, leading to increased radioactive forcing from CO2, methane, troposphere ozone, CFCs and nitrous oxide. Molecule for molecule, methane is a more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, but its concentration is much smaller so that its total radioactive forcing is only about a fourth of that from carbon dioxide. Some other naturally occurring gases contribute very small fractions of the greenhouse effect; one of these, nitrous oxide (N2O), is increasing in concentration owing to human activity such as agriculture. The atmospheric concentrations of CO2 and CH4 have increased by 31% and 149% respectively since the beginning of the industrial revolution in the mid-1700s. These levels are considerably higher than at any time during the last 650,000 years, the period for which reliable data has been extracted from ice cores. From less direct geological evidence it is believed that CO2 values this high were last attained 20 million years ago. Fossil fuel burning has produced approximately three-quarters of the increase in CO2 from human activity over the past 20 years. Most of the rest is due to land-use change, in particular deforestation.

Recent increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2). The monthly CO2 measurements display small seasonal oscillations in an overall yearly uptrend; each year's maximum is reached during the Northern Hemisphere's late spring, and declines during the Northern Hemisphere growing season as plants remove some CO2 from the atmosphere.

The present atmospheric concentration of CO2 is about 385 parts per million (ppm) by volume. Future CO2 levels are expected to rise due to ongoing burning of fossil fuels and land-use change. The rate of rise will depend on uncertain economic, sociological, technological, and natural developments, but may be ultimately limited by the availability of fossil fuels. The IPCC Special Report on Emissions Scenarios gives a wide range of future CO2 scenarios, ranging from 541 to 970 ppm by the year 2100. Fossil fuel reserves are sufficient to reach this level and continue emissions past 2100, if coal, tar sands or methane castrates are extensively used. Research by NASA climate scientist James Hansen indicates the 0.75° rise in average global temperatures over the last 100 years has been driven mainly by greenhouse gases other than carbon dioxide.

Answer 4

...Please report it all, get many different viewpoints.  So many deny or are afraid to bring out all points of view on a subject.  

...To hear the liberal media tell it, global warming is an established fact, a done deal, but it is not a done deal.  The jury is still out on it.

Answer 5

At the very least,read through all the encyclopedias for the subjects of Greenhouse Effect, Ice age.

There is clear evidence in the China Sea that at one time this large continental shelf was an inhabited area. It is predictable that with the return of a major Ice age these continental shelves will again be dry land. But it is also predictable that a very warm period before that happens will raise the world's oceans a bit further as Antarctica largely melts off.

This is predictable regardless of the current causes of global warming. This is just assuming that we see an approximate repetition of previous cycles.

We may or may not be able to stop, slow or limit global warming. Removing a major cause of an effect is not a good guarantee that we can stop the effect. We know that the effect proceeded without our help in previous cycles and have no grounds to believe it will  not repeat.

Be aware that newspapers do not in general do in depth analysis of any science. The journal Science does. You have to work hard to understand what is being conveyed, however.

Answer 6

Here are some resources you can use if your teacher permits both sides to an argument that is not settled. Good  luck.

Answer 7

GLOBAL WARMING IS'NT CAUSED BY ANYTHING MAN MADE. ALL NON-SOLIDS DECIPATE   IN THE FRIDGID THINNED AIR ABOVE YOUR HEADS OUTSIDE.

Answer 8

Look at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Chang - they are made up of experts of all countries of the world (including the US) and are the authority everybody quotes (National Academy of Science, EPA, Department of Energy).  Link here :

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/assessmen...

Each report should have a summary that is pretty easy reading at the front and you may find more links to information at the website.  I don't really know anything about the green movement, newspapers aren't really very good sources, but if your teacher told you to use them  try to stick with science pages rather than opinion.

For global warming,   try the EPA and National Academy of Sciences too.

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/

  

The NAS just released a book designed to be easy to understand - from the top scientist in the country. Takes a while to load because of the graphics.

http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim...

This should get you started on the climate change part.  The green movement is a little bit large type thing that I know nothing about.

Department of energy:

http://www.doe.gov/environment/climatech...

Of course there is NASA NOAA, USGS - all have information and make it available.

The argument is settled.  Use scientific information, not propganda from fringe sites.  You're grade will be better.  The  true counter arguments are included on the scientific sites.  Ignorant c**p with no real basis in physics, biology or chemistry is not a counter-argument.

Answer 9

Some interesting facts.

1. During most of the past 2,000 years, the temp has been about the same or higher. Currently, we are barely over the average for the last 2,000 years.

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index....

2. During the medieval warm period (820 – 1040 AD), Greenland supported farming. Those areas previously farmed are now covered in glaciers. Obviously the melting and reformation of glaciers is a cyclical occurrence.

3. The earth experienced a little ice age which ended around the late 1860's or so. This is about the time man started recording temperatures. This would be like measuring a lake depth after a severe drought, then worrying about it flooding as it rose to normal levels.

4. The earth has been warming for the last 10,000 years, since the last major glacier time period. Also, for most of the last 1 billion years, the earth had NO glaciers or ice coverage.

http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/i...

5. The AGW theory states that CO2 is the primary driver of temperature. They arrived at this idea because they did not know of anything else which could cause it. But during the 70's and during the current decade, temperatures dropped while CO2 continued to rise. This means that natural occurrences are driving temp, not CO2.

6. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation and sun spots provides a much better correlation to earths' temperature than CO2 levels ever have.

http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/200...

7. Polar Bears are experiencing a population boom. Coke sales in the arctics are through the roof. Polar Bears have been around for thousands of years, and remember, we are only at the average for the last 2,000 years. They lived through all the previously warmer climates.

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/...

8. The glaciers have been melting now for over 10,000 years. the current rate of melting is similar to previous melting.

9. There is no consensus on AGW. This was a lie that has been propagated by the media.

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...

10. Yes we emit CO2 into the atmosphere and it is a greenhouse gas, but, we only contribute about .28% of all the greenhouse effect. Water vapor makes up about 95% of the greenhouse effect. CO2 and other trace gases round out the greenhouse gases at about 5% for all of them. Of that 5%, only 3% is CO2, and most of that is natural. Again, our contribution to the greenhouse effect is a paltry .28%

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenh...

11. The spread of disease is not attributed mainly to temperature. If this were the case, Florida would be a giant festering disease ridden cesspool. Economic standing is the primary determining factor in the spread of disease. Poor cultures can not fight the disease or eradicate the pests like more successful nations.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12077886...

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.h...

12. Natural climate disasters (hurricanes, cyclones, etc) have never been scientifically linked to global warming (whether natural or man made).

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppa...

http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?i...