Global warming: Man made, or nature?

First:

Global warming is man-made. Here's the scientific evidence supporting AGW.

A. CO2 emissions are increasing. In 1870 the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere was about 290 ppm. As of 2010, the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen to 388 ppm. As explained below, very carefully calibrated measurements have confirmed that humans activities are the primary cause of this increase.

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/co2_data_...

http://www.grida.no/publications/vg/climate/page/3...

Since the industrial revolution, we've been burning fossil fuels and clearing/burning forests at an unprecedented rate. Through the measurements of specific carbon isotopes, we know these activities are the primary cause of increasing atmospheric CO2.

There are 3 different carbon isotopes: 14C, 13C and 12C. CO2 produced from burring fossil fuels and clearing/burning forests has a unique isotopic composition. This is because plants prefer lighter isotopes, that is they prefer 12C vs. 13C. Thus, plants have lower 13C/12C ratios. Fossil fuels are derived form ancient plants; thus, they also have a lower 13C/12C ratio. When fossil fuels are burned, CO2 from these ancient plants is released into, and mixes with, the atmosphere, thus lowering the average 13C/12C ratio of the atmosphere. Scientists have documented lower 13C/12C ratios in tree rings, ice cores and ocean samples; a result of the decreasing atmospheric 13C/12C ratio:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004...

B. CO2 is greenhouse gas. Increased CO2 will, in theory, lead to an increase in the greenhouse effect. Satellites have measured a decrease in outgoing longwave radiation and ground stations have measured an increase in downgoing longwave radiation, proving there has been an increase in the greenhouse effect. Studies have also shown a direct correlation between anthropogenic greenhouse gasses and the observed increase in the greenhouse effect.

http://landshape.org/enm/wp-content/uploads/2009/0...

http://ams.confex.com/ams/Annual2006/techprogram/p...

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009JD011800...

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BA...

C. In theory, an increase in the greenhouse effect would lead to an increase in global temperatures. Many studies show this.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

D.In theory, an increase in the greenhouse effect would lead to stratospheric cooling. As the lower atmosphere warms due to an enhanced greenhouse effect, the upper atmosphere is expected to cool as a consequence. The simple way to think about this is that greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the lower atmosphere. Since less heat is released into the upper atmosphere (starting with the stratosphere), it cools. Many studies show the stratosphere is cooling.

http://www.geog.ox.ac.uk/~mnew/teaching/Online_Art...

E. In theory, global warming would lead to an increase in the tropopause height. The tropopause is the atmospheric boundary between the troposphere and the stratosphere. In reality, the tropopause height has increased several hundred meters over the past 3 decades. Because the troposphere has warmed and the stratosphere has cooled, the tropopause has risen.

http://www.math.nyu.edu/~gerber/pages/documents/sa...

F. Arctic sea ice is declining. In the last 50 years Arctic sea ice extent has been declining at a average rate of about 30,000 square kilometers per year.

G. Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world — including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa..

H. Sea level is rising. (Sea level rise is caused by the thermal expansion of sea water due to climate warming and widespread melting of land ice.)

I. Ocean heat content is increasing. The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.

Second:

"Why research something like mars, when we have a planet that could be our very future selves? Should we study Venus more in depth, and possibly see whats in store for us, if our planet was ever to get like Venus, or is it more probable that human CO2 emissions is the greatest contributor?"

Interesting thought. Due to its harsh surface conditions, little of the planet has been explored. However, that doesn't mean it HASN'T been explored.The Venus Express spacecraft is now in orbit around the planet, probing deeper into the atmosphere using infrared imaging spectroscopy in the 1–5 µm spectral range.

(continued under sources)

It is Man-made alrite and dont let anyone tell you that It's mothernature and that the Sun is getting closer and that we have to adapt, thats a bunch of bullsh it! We, humans did this

In 2006, the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) had estimated that raising animals for meat and dairy was responsible for 18% of global warming; more than all the world’s transportation put together.

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?ne%E2%80%A6 However, it is becoming increasingly clear to scientists that the livestock industry is playing a more significant role. Meat Consumption is the number 1 cause of all the pollution and Global Warming. Animal Consumption cause 80% of global warming. Turning into a Meat Free person is the Number 1 way to help stop pollution and stop global warming. And also to learn more on what meat does to you and the world go to suprememastertv.com And watch this video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DK-C2ZS4e%E2%80%A6

And also take the time to watch this 1 min. video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svMBwVsTq%E2%80%A6

Thank You!

And it also helps if you ride your bike more, turn off the light or tv or computar when you are not using it. Take the bus or carpools. But remember, your already reducing your carbon footprint and saving the planet a whole bunch if you do one thing... Have a Meat Free Life

I would say nature but the truth is Global Warming is a lie, a fake, an excuse made by Al Gore to become rich off of environmentally friendly cars, and one of the biggest ways he gets money is from factories. They can't dump the waste in any rivers or oceans because of "Global Warming" so they pay money just to dump the stuff, climate changes are because of the sun.

Global Warming isn't just man-made, Nature also does its role. It is true that man has been the greatest contributor to Global Warming, the CO2 emissions, the CFCs (Chlorofluorocarbons) and etc. have a great effect on global warming. It fastens global warming. Just as it fastens it, there is also nature-caused Global Warming. Like the CO2 that animals release, those help in trapping heat, it is just that it is great enough that it will cause an evident change in the temperature in a century. Actually, if there is no Nature-caused Global Warming, our world still might be freezing after millions of years. For short, Nature and Man both contribute to Global warming, the difference is just that Man-made global warming is great enough to cause a small rise (like 1 to 3 degrees Celsius) in the temperature in just a century.

<<I'm having a little issue in figuring out the facts about Global Warming. Many scientists seem to be divided on the issue, some say its man made, others say its just a natural cycle>>

It reminds me of the debate on whether men walked on the Moon. The scientific ciommunity is very divided on the issue, but the liberal media only shows us the side of the Moonists.

What I am asking for is only a fair debate--that the liberal fanatics who are so certain in their liberal minds that men walked on the Moon (even though those liberals admit they were not even there on the Moon at the time) debate people with cool British accents like Lord Moonkton.

One thing is for certain--Al Gore is becoming rich over his Moongate scam.

Venus is hard to explore because of the harsh atmospheric conditions, which are also almost certain to rule out any possibility of life there. Wheras Mars has a relatively mild, albeit a rather thin, atmosphere, and may actually have life of some sort, somewhere. So we explore Mars.

Yeah the prospect of a runaway greenhouse effect on earth is frightening, but I don't think we need to spend a whole lot of time landing on Venus to figure out the particulars.

“There is no convincing evidence that human release of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere or disruption of the Earth's climate.”

Oregon Petition, from the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, signed by over 17,000 international scientists including more than 2000 of the world's leading climatologists, meteorologists and planetary / atmospheric scientists.

“The attempts of environmentalists to bolster the myth of human-induced 'global warming' by the cynical, nay gleeful, exploitation of non-equilibrium climatic events is downright immoral.”

Philip Stott

Professor of Bi ogeography, University of London,

in a letter to The Times

November 2000

“All this concern with the effects of global warming is another manifestation of being politically correct”

Lord Young of Graffham, in a letter to The Times, 28th Nov 2000.

“Global warmers predict that global warming is coming, and our emissions are to blame. They do that to keep us worried about our role in the whole thing. If we aren't worried and guilty, we might not pay their salaries. It's that simple.”

Kary Mullis

Winner of the 1993 Nobel Prize in Chemistry

“The problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the scientists in them have sold their integrity. ”

Piers Corbyn

Weather Action bulletin

December 2000.

“ . . . Perhaps of even greater significance is the continuous and profound distrust of science and technology that the environmental movement displays. The environmental movement maintains that science and technology cannot be relied upon to build a safe atomic power plant, to produce a pesticide that is safe, or even bake a loaf of bread that is safe, if that loaf of bread contains chemical preservatives. When it comes to global warming, however, it turns out that there is one area in which the environmental movement displays the most breathtaking confidence in the reliability of science and technology, an area in which, until recently, no one — even the staunchest supporters of science and technology — had ever thought to assert very much confidence at all. The one thing, the environmental movement holds, that science and technology can do so well that we are entitled to have unlimited confidence in them, is FORECAST THE WEATHER! — for the next one hundred years...”

George Reisman

The Toxicity of Environmentalism.

“Global warming is indeed a scam, perpetrated by scientists with vested interests, but in need of crash courses in geology, logic and the philosophy of science.”

Dr Martin Keeley

Visiting Professor in Petroleum Geology, University College London

BBC

2004-12-06

“Global warming has taken the place of Communism as an absurdity that 'liberals' will defend to the death regardless of the evidence showing its folly.”

John Ray

Greenie Watch

2005

“The Earth's climate has always shown natural variatio n … There is nothing to suggest that any warming we are seeing now is not part of that natural cycle.”

“Every generation has had an apocalyptic myth.”

“The language of climate change is becoming … religious”

Professor Richard Lindzen

Sunday Times

We don't really need to worry too much about turning into another Venus, I don't think we have enough Carbon to cause such a thing happening. However we would be long dead with even a 20 degree increase in average temperature. No need to get as hot as Venus.

And it is almost entirely human caused-our current climate change. Human destruction of forests, human burning of fossil fuels and human raising of bovines. Those are the big causes. There really is no disagreement on this amongst climate scientists, the only deniers are those who have vested interests in the status qua and those who follow like sheep to the slaughter. We have seen this before, most recently in the tobacco industry's defense. But before by the flat earthers and others

I can't follow your question. Is it about Earth or Venus?

Mostly I reacted to your statement the "many scientists seem to be divided on" global warming. Who are these scientists? I believe you are absolutely incorrect: there is not one current active published climate scientist who does not believe man is warming the Earth environment. You are misinformed about any dispute. It is totally accepted among climate scientists. If you don't believe that AGW is absolutely accepted, simply link one published study from one current scientists that offers any other answer. hint: you won't find one.

You should take a look in this thread:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=A0WTZ...

some scientists say that evolution is false as well but that doesn't mean it is. The Earth will never be like Venus has it's atmosphere is not as dense. Mars consists of mostly CO2 as well yet Mar's atmosphere is much less dense than Earth's is and it doesn't have the capability of producing the same greenhouse effect as Earth does.