Global warming: In your opinion, do you think we are being told the truth?
Is it as bad as some people say? Is it worse than some people think? Or, is it just not true at all as some people believe?
Please can you tell me what you personally believe and why?
If you have good links, please add them too.
Thanks :-)
2008-09-03T04:06:22Z
The majority of you who have answered, seem to live in America. Over here in the UK, it seems the government and local councils have conveniently used global warming as an excuse to raise millions of pounds in extra tax on things we have to buy, or have to use. Sadly, only a small amount of this money is actually used to help the environment. I think recycling products, using renewable and clean energy is a great idea and I will continue to be "environmentaly friendly", just because I want to respect the earth we live in. However, I agree with many of you that research shows that the climate change we are seeing is simply part of the earth's natural cycle. It seems to me, that there some people in "higher places" who have an awful lot to gain by causing great fear and worry amongst the masses worldwide.Their real motive is to have to have more money, power and control over us. Conversely, I realise there are some genuine environmentalists who are completely sincere in their beliefs
2008-09-03T04:42:29Z
Although I am very dubious of some of the scientific findings which say that we are going to destroy the earth, I shall continue to be environmentally friendly, as I realise that it will be a cleaner, more healthy and better place to live. I also hope that worldwide we can continue to aim for a more environmentally caring and friendly earth. However, I simply don't believe the motive of many of those in political or financial power is genuine. The proof of this is that they NEVER practice what they preach. Also, for many years they have ruthlessly continued to allow many dubious practices (such as cutting down the rain forest) . If being environmentally friendly is profitable, then that is the only reason they will support it.
There have been some great answers on both sides of the argument. I have found it very difficult to find the best answer, so on this occasion I would like you to decide. Thank you to everyone who took the time to answer
NoFlox2008-08-30T15:46:52Z
Favorite Answer
Not really. When many people speak of Global Warming, they are actually talking about AGW - Anthropogenic Global Warming, which recognizes global climate changes as being human induced (man-made greenhouse gas emissions including CO2). The AGW hypothesis states that human activities are the main cause of the increase in the average measured temperature of the Earth's near-surface air and oceans, thus increasing the intensity of extreme weather events. The same hypothesis uses forecast models based on assumptions to predict dramatic increases in average world temperatures over the next 92 years and serious harm as a result of it.
We can choose to be responsible by caring about our own finances (consuming less gas, for example), we can also choose to be responsible by caring about the environment (by recycling and promoting the use of environmentally preferable products), but it is foolish to do it in the name of "stopping global warming".
To implement public policies being proposed at international, national and state levels in the name of “stopping global warming”, governments must raise energy costs directly, with taxes, or indirectly, with mandates and subsidies. Worst of all: the results would show little or no impact on the weather, a major effect on our freedoms and our pocketbooks in the coming years!
What gets me on so many of the comments made so far is the huge amount of very bad information so many people seem to have on this subject. First it was hotter in the 1930s than it is now and there is no current sign it is going to get even close to previous optimums during the current interglacial. Because solar cycles can vary from 11 years to 50 years we can have huge normal climate shifts when several solar and earth cycles come together inconveniently. Point being the little ice age where there were 4 solar minimums, two of them extreme over a period of 500 years that led to a much colder than average climate through that period.
Then we have the Skandic/MWP warm cycle where for over 600 years it was a much warmer climate average noticeably higher than the two short peaks we have experienced during the current warming cycle. These two peaks lasted only about 10 years instead of the normal 50 or more! So all climates need to be evaluated not just against recent 30-year spans, but also against previous spans. For instance for the last two years here in Los Angeles they have had to go back to the 1920s to find equivalent low temperature records. In the 90s they had to go back to the 30s to find equivalent highs.
So the 30 year cycle is not a good comparison point for climate average and because of earthquakes and other geological events natural climate conditions can change radically. An example is the enhanced southwest monsoon in the spring and summer months has radically changed the general climate of southern California over the last 60 years from dry near desert to muggy sub tropical because of geologic changes in a ocean ridge extending from Baja California almost to Panama off the west coast. This ridge as it grows from earthquake activity and coral reef growth is altering some minor ocean currents altering the climate of large parts of North America!
There is currently no evidence that man has made any significant contribution to climate change.
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.php/2008/02/11/a-2000-year-global-temperature-record/
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 18,000 years, since the last major glacier time period. During this time frame, the glaciers have been melting at a fairly consistent rate. Also, for most of the last 1 billion years, the earth had NO glaciers or ice coverage. http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/index.html
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/2008/01/25/warming-trend-pdo-and-solar-correlate-better-than-co2/ http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5693
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. The original picture of 2 bears on a floating ice block was a complete scam. The photographer explained that the bears were in no danger and close to shore. The picture was lifted from a public PC by another passenger and sent around the world.
8. Many glaciers are expanding. Even Antarctica is growing on 98% of is land mass. Only 2% is melting. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1577399/Christopher-Booker%27s-Notebook.html
9. There is no consensus on AGW. This was a lie that has been propagated by the media. http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton_papers/consensus_what_consensus_among_climate_scientists_the_debate_is_not_over/page-2.html
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/greenhouse_data.html
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/SB120778860618203531.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries
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-sheppard/2008/02/21/noaa-global-warming-not-causing-more-destructive-hurricanes... http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=ae9b984d-4a1c-45c0-af24-031a1380121a&k=0
I believe Global warming is caused by both Man and the earth naturally doing it itself. We have proof of both theories, extreme climate change like the ice age could be classed as proof that the earths climate can randomly change. Also thought proof that man is making global warming is when the industrial revolution was brought in the amount of CO2 increased in the air. Also man created the whole in the Ozone layer with Chlorofluorocarbons, the whole was letting more and more heat in adding to global warming, deforestation also adds to global warming due to photosynthesis. Therefor i believe that it is both Man and Nature.
I believe global warming is real and natural. I do not believe humans are the cause. If you look back through history it is evident that what we are experiencing now in terms of weather changes is cyclical and normal. However, global warming is a lucrative business and many scientists put the "global warming" spin on their research in order to gain more grant money in a timely manner. But I do think it is a good idea for humans to be conscious about the way we treat the environment so I let the big wigs use their farce of "global warming" to promote positive change.