With all the conflicting evidence surrounding global warming, who should we believe?
in scotland when the romans were there they apparently been able to grow grapes in vine yards.
a prof from some uneversity is now saying that the ice in greenland is not melting anymore than it did 2000 years ago when the temp was 5 degrees hotter than it is now.
so we do we believe about global warming?
Answer:
Whover you want to.
Global warming is happening.wether it is natural or man made is the question...personally I go with the natural causes
It's all politically motivated I think - humans haven't even touched on the pollution or CO2 that could come out of a volcano for example... I'm pretty sure the inhabitants of earth in 1000 years will look back on this and laugh at how stupid we all were for believing it! My money's on a natural cycle with the climate.
use your common sense, and follow not the potato man
Believe whom ever you want to believe. All I know is I am getting tired looking at all this CR@P in the air.
Don't believe the media. It's all propoganda. The Earth is going through a natural cycle and is heating up in the process. Global warming is an industry worth a lot of money and it is in the a lot of peoples interests to keep the world believing that our carbon emissions are the cause if this.
It's a load of pish!
believe the scientists, 90% of whom agree that the climate has always changed but is doing so at a much greater rate than has ever occured under similar conditions in the past. Yes the climate was warmer in the past but when it changes slowly it gives animals, plants etc time to adapt to the changing conditions however if it happens very quickly you end up with mass extinction
Not Al Gore, as he clearly doesn't believe himself.
His life-style makes him a complete hypocrite.
Global warming is happening, sure.But we should listen to no one but the weather.
The planet always goes through periods of warming and of cooling, we happen to be in a warming stage and people just want to start turning into activists.
Its nothing to worry about.
Is that all the evidence you're considering?
1) What exactly is your hail example supposed to be evidence of?
One isolated day of weather in one isolated location on the planet has absolutely nothing to do with global warming, which is a steady increase in the average global temperature, as you can see here:
http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warmin...
2) Yes there was a small Midieval Warm Period about 1000 years ago. It warmed about half as much in about twice the time as our current global warming, as you can see here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/image:2000_...
3) You must have misunderstood that professor, because as you can see from the graph linked above, the average global temperature was about 1°C colder 2000 years ago.
You should believe the scientific consensus that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming, based on the scientific evidence to that effect:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/image:clima...
i think that we should believe that were all going to go with a bang..either naturally or by mans hand...sort of how we came to be here..ironic..or just bad politics..you decide...if yr still here that is!
Does it really matter?
Life is not about worrying what the planet is going to do in 10 or 20 years time.
Live your life in balance, do your little bit for the planet but don't make a big deal out of it.
You never know, next year could be even worse, we could have a super volcano go off and we could all die!
it's certainly a lot warmer at the north pole if thisguy can now swim there -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/londo...
Sea levels are alreadyreported as rising, ice shelves dissappearing and glaciers retreating.
Just look how late the ski season was in europe this year with many of the lower runs not open!
What's the weather going to do Friday? Sunshine? Rain?
Do they get it right? Did they manage to predict what was going to happen in Yorkshire? Ermmm.. no lol
If they cant say what the weathers gonna be like next week then how can they predict anything else accurately? They can only go off past readings and draw a few lines on a graph to guess it. (who's 'they' anyway i ask myself? lol)
I believe James Whale.Hail the Whale. ;-)
I am currently reading a book called 'the chilling stars-a new theory on climate change' written by two scientists which basically says that, cosmic rays (from blown up stars far away in space) create clouds in our atmosphere. When the sun is active with solar storms it prevents most of the cosmic rays from reaching our atmosphere, so we don't have very much cloud and the suns rays come straight in warming us up. When the sun is calm and has no solar storms, the cosmic rays come straight to us and create large cloud coverage. The big low clouds are dark on the bottom, but bright white on top which reflects the suns heat back into space., hence our cool june. Somewhere around 2010-2012 the sum will reach a solar maximum, so we will still be warm. After the solar maximum the sun should calm down for a while, thats when we will cool down again.
I also saw a time team documentary about doggerland, which was land between UK and Europe. Doggerland went under water very quickly after the temp rose 7oC in 15 years, no Man made Co" around then.
I'm a roofer in the sun day after day week after week month after month year after year and believe me its frigging hot out there . Its great roofing in the winter time now we only had to shovel snow off the roof once last year and most of the winter we worked in our tee shirts and I'm in Michigan . Something going on man made or cycles one of the two or maybe the 2 are ganging up on us
I think we should all be doing our part to keep our planet safe, but on the other hand, we shouldn't be going overboard and freaking out about this issue.
As you said, there is conflicting evidence everywhere about this issue.
Just do your best to be a responsible, safe and clean human being and leave the rest to mother nature.
Global warming is happening and the speed is far beyond any natural cycle . It's human activities that heat the earth up , freak incidents don't prove anything , hailstones can happen at any time , anyway . That guy going for a swim on the North Pole shows us all how much temperature has already gone up . Time to wake up and ignore the flat earthers .
Ask yourself this.
If the scientists that say global warming is happening are right then not doing anything will kill thousands, if not millions. So that's the stake in this bet, on this side.
If the scientists that say it's not happening are right, what do we gain by not doing anything? This green tech is supporting new, high paying jobs. It's making the air more breathable, and the water more drinkable.
Green tech brings the tech savvy countries, like the U.S. an opportunity to re-invent the industrial age, with us as the leaders, again.
We live better, we have new opportunities, and oh, by the way, we just might be saving the world.
I don't know who is right, but I know that I've installed solar panels on two houses, and both have easily paid for themselves. Going to a renewable lifestyle is better in the long run, even if we have nothing to do with warming.
If you look at the sheer quantity of international scientific organisations that have written scientifically proven articles on global warming ( eg. NOAA, National Geographic and many others...) I think most intelligent people would agree there is a real problem and we, individually and collectively, can help to reduce its impact. Those of you who would continue to deny it please check out the following links for starters... Don't deny what you don't at least try to understand! The link to oneworld will answer many points raised in the original question...
Believe those who have nothing to gain by their stand on global warming. In other words, the ones who aren't working for research grant money.
And in rebuttal to so many similar, yet opposite examples I read, about 10 years ago on the Fourth of July, we went to cook breakfast near Echo Lake at the base of Mount Evans in Colorado. The lake sits at 10,600 feet, which is not particularly high by Colorado standards. That morning we enjoyed a fresh dusting of snow. By some standards - not necessarily mine - this is evidence of global cooling.
And we just had snow in Buenos Aires!!
Whom to believe? Well, we can easily knock out whom NOT to believe.
1. Those whose data does not include history. Such as those who endorse the "hockey stick" model that ignores and suppresses recent and ancient global temperature history. And others, too, who want to change history to agree with them.
2. Anybody whose career is dependent on a particular slant on the subject. Where would Al Gore be now if he could not orate on GW, and sell movies and carbon credits for egg money?
3. Anyone who resorts to personal smear tactics, to try to put down opposition. Thinking of those scientists who have been branded by allegations they are paid by tobacco companies and so their research is incorrect. And those whose papers have been rejected by name science magazines and journals because of such things as religious ties, not errors in their work or results.
4. Anyone who says having computer printout is complete proof that they are right, particularly in fields where computer programs are still being worked out and depend on much tweaking to get the expected and desired results. If the idea is to support a theory by saying a tweaked computer program proves it by getting the desired results, I think some caution is advised.
5. Anyone who has science and politics intertwined, where especially the science supports the politics lockstep all the way.no matter what. And no "real" science can differ from the political position.
6. And be wary of any specific science that is tied to Big business, Big politics, Big government, etc. What about the global warming science that leads to poor people being deprived of their homes since it supports big companies' profits.
I suggest you believe in generally provable events. Like there are pictures and stories proving the LIA really happened, and the Maunder minimum in sunspots really happened.
There is proof melting out of the truth of the MWP in terms of people living in areas not open to people since then until now.
I would say if a computer program comes long that will accurately reconstruct what history shows, without having the figures programmed inside (!), results of such are more likely to be credible, and the people who use them more credible, than those that use figures that ignore history, and have to have many factors "smoothed" out to make their predictions.
And I would be terribly afraid of materials from the one kid I saw quoted recently about an older scientist, to the effect don't listen to the old geezer, he doesn't know anything, we got something newer and need to move now before things change.
Believe whom you will, but be aware of political connections, social connections, financial connections, prestige connections. What is in it that would make a scientist buck the flow of money and status, to say this is NOT right..slow down, consider this data, and how it changes the equations.
I think good science is Conservtive, checking and rechecking, looking at all data, not in a hurry. Politics, business, and folks out to make a name will say hurry, do this now without so much checking, everybody to the left in locksteps,1 and-a 2 and-a 3, Liberal.
I choose to believe that as science which is carefully done and checked, subjected to even hostile scrutiny, and agrees with reality and is willing to incorporate new findings, over that which is hurried, and doesn't worry about history then or reality now. And glorifies a person or a group: political, not scientific.
Ultimately, I suggest you look at the real goals when there is such a vociferous dissent, on each side. Which is political seeking prestige and control and money, and whom is scientifically objective and making sure the all the data is examined and fitted into place before issuing pronouncements and suggesting courses of action if needed.
The ice in Greenland is something that can be verified, and the temperatures then and now, and if this is substantiated by independent researches, there is a strong reason to go work on the predictive programs more before starting anything, or running a propaganda blitz. And it appears tht there is also strong rason not to push ahead on irreversable actions before the data is in.
It is like stopped at a blind railroad crossing where the gate is up but the warning lights are flashing wildly, and one of your passengers says to get out, check up and down the tracks around the bends, and make sure whether the warning is real or not, and the other urges, we gotta go now, right now, or we will never get where we are going. Ignore your slow, stodgy conservative friend, go, Go GO! And tries to reach a foot over and stomp the gas pedal!
From the history of rail accidents and folks who tried to beat trains, my money like with making sure of what is happening before moving into a situation where you find you have made a bad mistake, and are too far committed to get away.
I would say the scientists talking about the science. The great majority of scientists believe its happening and can supports mounds of evidence to it. Lets not believe the politicians who try to talk science (exception being al gore who knew the science down to a T).
The following is from a report on the BBC web site about a new study published in Royal Society's journal Proceedings
"A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun's output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.
It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun's output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.
It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun's effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed".
See the link below to read the full article.
I think you have two choices really...
Option 1. Jump on the moralistic CO2 bandwagon led by Gore/UN/EU like most other people, because then you won't have to think about it anymore and can feel cosy about doing the 'right' thing with your head buried in the sand.
Option 2. Investigate the questions and the answers you're given - that's not so hard and you already clearly have an enquiring mind. The evidence is online if you choose to look for it. You're not dumb so weigh it up for yourself and decide which 'camp' you feel is most logical.
There are so many arguing voices and contradictions. The truth will out within the next ten years. The main thing is not to panic the way the media and Gore want us to. The next main thing to do is ADAPT, because we're idiots to sit waiting to see what's going to happen without making changes NOW in our homes, lives, work to prepare for more flooding, gales, etc, etc. We need to be doing that as a priority to protect ourselves.
The answers post by the user, for information only, FunQA.com does not guarantee the right.
More Questions and Answers: