Wim M asked:
I have seen both sides of the debate and I am really thinking that global warming is really hyped up, and that we are not causing it. I heard that like one volacano explosion causes more CO2 than we ever did. And that we only make like 5% of the earth’s CO2, and they are not really sure if CO2 causes it. Like I still believe in conserving and in green energy because it creates less smog and stuff, but I think that this global warming thing is really over-hyped by the politions and enviromentalists.
So what should I believe, that we are the cause, or that this is just how the earth cycles?
I have seen both sides of the debate and I am really thinking that global warming is really hyped up, and that we are not causing it. I heard that like one volacano explosion causes more CO2 than we ever did. And that we only make like 5% of the earth’s CO2, and they are not really sure if CO2 causes it. Like I still believe in conserving and in green energy because it creates less smog and stuff, but I think that this global warming thing is really over-hyped by the politions and enviromentalists.
So what should I believe, that we are the cause, or that this is just how the earth cycles?
The Fourth Assessment by the IPCC (released just this year) stated unequivocally that global climate change is happening and given the scientific evidence, there is a 90% chance that humans are responsible for it.
(See the source for the executive summary of the Scientific Basis part of the assessment.)
You need some time learning about this, and looking at the data. Instead of listening to crazy theories. So this is going to be a little long, and you need to actually look at the links.
First, let me get rid of volcanoes. What you “heard” is nonsense. They make way less than we do.
The fact that we make only a small part of the CO2 is not important. What’s important is that we make close to 100% of the EXCESS CO2.
There are a great many natural sources and sinks for carbon dioxide. There is a natural “carbon cycle” that recycles CO2. But it’s a delicate balance and we’re messing it up.
Look at this graph.
The little squiggles are nature doing its’ thing. CO2 falls a bit during summer when plants are active, and rises during the winter. The huge increase is us, burning fossil fuels. The scientists can actually show that the increased CO2 in the air comes from burning fossil fuels by using “isotopic ratios” to identify that CO2. The natural carbon cycle buried carbon in fossil fuels over a very long time, little bit by little bit. We dig them up and burn them, real fast. That’s a problem.
Finally, global warming.
“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 and the first Commander of the Naval Space Command
Here are two summaries of the mountain of data that convinced Admiral Truly, short and long.
It’s (mostly) not the sun:
And the first graph aboves shows that the sun is responsible for about 10% of it. When someone says it’s the sun they’re saying that thousands of climatologists are stupid and don’t look at the solar data. That’s ridiculous.
Science is quite good about exposing bad science or hoaxes:
There’s a large number of people who agree that it is real and mostly caused by us, who are not liberals, environmentalists, stupid, or conceivably part of a “conspiracy”. Just three examples of many:
“Global warming is real, now, and it must be addressed.”
Lee Scott, CEO, Wal-Mart
“Our nation has both an obligation and self-interest in facing head-on the serious environmental, economic and national security threat posed by global warming.”
Senator John McCain, Republican, Arizona
“DuPont believes that action is warranted, not further debate.”
Charles O. Holliday, Jr., CEO, DuPont
There’s a lot less controversy about this is the real world than there is on Yahoo answers:
=&id=&pnt=329&lb=hmpg1
And vastly less controversy in the scientific community than you might guess from the few skeptics talked about here:
and:
“There’s a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know - except maybe Newton’s second law of dynamics. Global warming is almost a no-brainer at this point,You really can’t find intelligent, quantitative arguments to make it go away.”
Jerry Mahlman, NOAA
Good websites for more info:
“climate science from climate scientists”
We can not be held responsible for something that does not exist.
Truth and Science Newsletter - The Facts About Global Warming
In the movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” by Al Gore, it states:
1. “The vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is real.”
Actually, over 19,000 scientists, including 72 Nobel Prize winners do not agree that we are experiencing global warning, and believe this is an extreme position on the environment.
2. the “Glaciers are melting, global sea levels could rise by more than 20 feet with the loss of shelf ice in Greenland and Antarctica, devastating coastal areas worldwide.”
The Greenland icecap is actually growing at the rate of 7.2 miles per year, not melting. The East Antarctic Ice Sheet gained about 45 billion tons of ice between 1992 and 2003. The ice sheets are several kilometers thick in places, and contain about 90% of the world’s ice. News articles have sighted glacier growth in Norway, Canada, Ecuador, Switzerland, Russia, New Zealand, the Himalayans, and 5 states in the USA.
Global average temperature has increased 0.8 degrees F in the last century. However, most of the temperature increase was before 1940, and most of the new carbon dioxide was added after 1960. So are we to believe the effect came before the cause? Actually, for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase, there was actually a slight decrease.
It’s possible the government knows we are actually in Global Cooling?
I agree with you. Look at the arguments people give to prove their case. These experts agree, so you should agree as well. No need to question the science. But that just shows how inconclusive the evidence is.
If I were to say something stupid like the sun revolves around the earth, nobody is going to use “all of the experts argument”. They are going to take me aside and show the errors in my ways. Any arguments I have, they will have counter arguments, not with theories, but with proof. If the evidence is overwhelming, as they say it is, they should be able to make counter arguments. Let me give you an example;
despite rising co2 levels, temperatures from fell from 1940-1975. A global warming blog I consulted stated that had to to with rising sulphates in the atmosphere that had a cooling effect by blocking the sun’s rays. The clean air act of 1975 eliminated the sulphates and temperatures started to rise again. The blog gave me a theory and wanted me to believe it with no proof. The real climate blog has no explanation. Is there a study that shows sulphates have a cooling effect? Is there a temperature reconstruction that shows the relationship between sulphates and temperature? Maybe there is. I have not found one.