Origins view and opinion on global warming

[picnic]

I was just wondering if there is a link between what you believe about the origin of the earth and whether you think global warming is something to be worried about.

Picnic

 

[HSetterfield]

We can worry about global warming all we want, but there is not a thing we can do about it! The sun itself has been measured as warming for the last 100-150 years. This is heating up the equatorial waters, which not only releases more carbon dioxide from them, but increases the temperature differential between those currents and the currents coming up/down from the poles. This is a major factor for the increase in ferocity of some of the typhoons and hurricanes in the last years.

Is this a natural cycle of the sun? It may be. Is it, instead, a sign of the end times? I would not be surprised. However there is no way I personally am going to claim one or the other. The sun has definitely had its cycles, witness the mini ice age in Europe in the Middle Ages.

 

[busterdog]

Unfortunately, lots of the public discussion has debated man's role in global warming as if that would change something. Strangley, lots of people seemed to get confused into thinking that if man isn't causing it, then is nothing to worry about or even prepare for. Lots and lots and lots of people are in harm's way. I worry for them. The majority of population centers are very close to sea level, as is much of the world's rice production. It is very sad.

 

[Willtor]

There's a consensus that the Earth is warming. The question is whether humans have been (at least partially) responsible. I suspect so, but either way, I'd hate to take the chance and do nothing.

 

[RichardE]

To not claim responcibility and take action would be like sinning and not working to make right that sin. We are all to blame, every single one of us, its is worrying but if we use more energy efficent stuff, use less energy and lets say, walk or cycle to work, one or two days every week, well we will be on the right step.

 

[HSetterfield]

Pollution and global warming are two different things. We are responsible for pollution and doing what we can, in every instance, to stop it, is to be applauded.

However global warming is a different issue. There is nothing we can do to stop the sun in its way of going!

 

[Servant222]

Climate warming is a reality- the evidence is overwhelming; if nothing else, the Vostak ice core studies show conclusively that we have a serious problem. What is not so clear is how much tempertures will increase over the next century, what the effects of warming really will be, and what we can realistically do to solve the problem.

Currently, there seems to be a major disconnect between realizing that there is a problem, and doing something about it. I think most people in North America recognize that climate warming is a problem- but how many of them are actually making a personal sacrifice and doing something significant about it?

Here are five suggestions:

1. Replace all your incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent ones. This is one of the easiest ways to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gases. It is also a good way to check to see how serious a person or enterprise is about being energy efficient.

2. Junk your gas guzzling car (don't just sell it for someone else to use!) and buy an energy efficient one. Minimize the number of cars per household.

3. Use public transit whenever possible, or at least carpool or, even better, use a bicycle or walk.

4. Minimize non-essential travel, especially air travel that burns a disproportionate amount of fuel and spews gases directly into the atmosphere. Instead of flying to a vacation destination, or driving long distances, seek out local vacation sites that you can bus to.

5. Give up your snowmobile, motor boat, dirt bike, and other non-essential or recreational, gas-using vehicle.

Nothing will happen until we stop talking about the problem and start actually making a significant sacrifice by doing something about it.

 

[gluadys]

Pollution and global warming are two different things. We are responsible for pollution and doing what we can, in every instance, to stop it, is to be applauded.

However global warming is a different issue. There is nothing we can do to stop the sun in its way of going!

Yes, we can do something about global warming. This is because, as others have stated, there are two aspects to it.

One is the natural cycle. We are likely in a natural cycle of warming. That we can do nothing about, but we can prepare for it.

The other is the contribution of human activity to global warming. This contribution has been measured and it is clear that human activity is contributing significantly to the warming cycle. The natural cycle is being speeded up and made more extreme by human activity--primarily the burning of fossil fuels.

And that we can do something about. We can use less energy. We can use energy more efficiently. And we can use alternatives to carbon-based energy.

Decreasing the human component of global warming won't stop the natural cycle, but it will slow it down to a natural pace and keep it manageable.

 

[laptoppop]

The other is the contribution of human activity to global warming. This contribution has been measured and it is clear that human activity is contributing significantly to the warming cycle.

It has? When? Where? Last I heard it had been estimated, modeled, guessed at, but not measured.

Also, the "natural cycle" has included ice ages and other extreme times.

I'm a firm believer in being stewards of this earth. I'm also extremely skeptical of science based primarily on computer modeling of wildly complex systems without historical verification. The earth is an amazingly self-correcting complex creation. Sometimes it seems like we give ourselves too much credit.

Does this mean I don't think we should conserve or control pollution? No, not at all -- just in case. I'm just not worried.

 

[Servant222]

It has? When? Where? Last I heard it had been estimated, modeled, guessed at, but not measured.

Since 1958, atmospheric carbon dioxide has been measured at Mauna Kea Observatory in Hawaii; you can view a graph of the measurements here: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/graphics/mlo145e_thrudc04.pdf

Researchers believe that most of the increase is due to human activities that started with the Industrial Revolution.

I guess one could argue that this is not a direct measurement of how much human activity has contributed to global warming, but the results are still pretty startling.

What I find most sobering is that the analysis of gas bubbles trapped in ice layers that make up the Vostok ice cores suggest that carbon dioxide levels today are at unprecedentedly high levels- higher than they have ever been in a very long time. Specifically, previous CO2 levels through several ice ages have varied from a low of 180 to a high of 290 ppmv (parts per million by volume)- since the Industrial Revolution, they have climbed above 300 ppmv and are now at 378 ppmv and continue to rise; more information can be found here: http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.htm

Climatologists maintain that the Vostok ice cores represent about 400,000 years of time. Without getting into the young earth controversy, one can at least say that the Vostok ice cores indicate that carbon dioxide levels are at higher levels than they have ever been in a very long time.

We can chose to do nothing and hope the problem goes away- but as famed climate researcher V. Ramanathan has pointed out, by not taking steps to curb the output of greenhouse gases, we are doing this massive global experiment on ourselves, and if things don't quite work out as we had hoped, we can't simply pour out the test tube; see more at http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1988Sci...240..293R

 

[Silent Bob]

It has? When? Where? Last I heard it had been estimated, modeled, guessed at, but not measured.

There is no debate in the scientific community that adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere with no other changes will cause temperatures to rise. This is well documented with ice core samples that show a strong correlation between CO2 levels and temperature.

There is no person in his/her right mind that will doubt that we are adding greenhouse gasses at record rates. Not even volcanoes can compete with the rate we produce CO2.

We know that we release more than 20 billion metric tons of CO2 per year. We know that greenhouse gasses form a blanket trapping heat. We know that with smaller icy surface the Earth will absorb more energy from the Sun. We know that the climate is getting crazier every day. Yet there are those who think that all this is just a Sun flare that we can do nothing about.

We are just acting like the smoker who is told of the risks of lung cancer stroke and heart disease and never stops because what the hell do scientists know after all? Well some smokers get hit by a bus, but those who do not know their fate they just don't think about it and keep up what they do cause "it is too tough to quit." I know I used to smoke, and I knew the risks even before I started, I just hope to be one of the bus victims.

 

[HSetterfield]

Bob, here are some people who disagree with you:

http://www.intellicast.com/DrDewpoint/Library/1210/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/484868.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm

http://www.newstrolls.com/news/dev/heller/col1.html

http://www.reason.com/news/show/34753.html

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Corbella_Licia/2006/04/27/1552464.html

http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264777

this last one starts this way:
October 17, 2006
Washington DC - One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic. This latest defector from the global warming camp caps a year in which numerous scientific studies have bolstered the claims of climate skeptics. Scientific studies that debunk the dire predictions of human-caused global warming have continued to accumulate and many believe the new science is shattering the media-promoted scientific “consensus” on climate alarmism.

I strongly suggest you do not allow the global alarmists to get you to believe what they are inventing for purposes of their own.

 

[Servant222]

One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic.

So I wonder how many scientists have gone the other way? Judging by the fact that governments all over the world seem to taking the issue of climate warming much more seriously, I would think a large number.

I don't know quite what you're saying- do you believe that CO2 levels aren't rising, that the climate isn't warming, or that even if CO2 levels increase and the climate warms, there won't be any significant effects (like flooding in Bangladesh caused by a rise in sea level, which I think has the greatest potential for creating a human disaster)?

The most dramatic personal observation is the retreat of glaciers all over the world- some have gone back 2 km since I first visited them; none have advanced.

Once again, there will be a definitive answer to this question shortly- and probably within the next 100 years.

 

[Silent Bob]

Bob, here are some people who disagree with you:

http://www.intellicast.com/DrDewpoint/Library/1210/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/484868.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2000/climate_change/1023334.stm

http://www.newstrolls.com/news/dev/heller/col1.html

http://www.reason.com/news/show/34753.html

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Corbella_Licia/2006/04/27/1552464.html

http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=264777

this last one starts this way:
October 17, 2006
Washington DC - One of the most decorated French geophysicists has converted from a believer in manmade catastrophic global warming to a climate skeptic. This latest defector from the global warming camp caps a year in which numerous scientific studies have bolstered the claims of climate skeptics. Scientific studies that debunk the dire predictions of human-caused global warming have continued to accumulate and many believe the new science is shattering the media-promoted scientific “consensus” on climate alarmism.

I strongly suggest you do not allow the global alarmists to get you to believe what they are inventing for purposes of their own.

Lovely now if you could find something outside non-science news sources.

Are you aware of a study conducted by Naomi Oreskes? It was published in Science magazine the full article is here.

From the Science article:

The scientific consensus is clearly expressed in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC's purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, primarily on the basis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature (3). In its most recent assessment, IPCC states unequivocally that the consensus of scientific opinion is that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities: "Human activities ... are modifying the concentration of atmospheric constituents ... that absorb or scatter radiant energy. ... [M]ost of the observed warming over the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations" [p. 21 in (4)].
IPCC is not alone in its conclusions. In recent years, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter have issued similar statements. For example, the National Academy of Sciences report, Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions, begins: "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities, causing surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures to rise" [p. 1 in (5)]. The report explicitly asks whether the IPCC assessment is a fair summary of professional scientific thinking, and answers yes: "The IPCC's conclusion that most of the observed warming of the last 50 years is likely to have been due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations accurately reflects the current thinking of the scientific community on this issue" [p. 3 in (5)].
Others agree. The American Meteorological Society (6), the American Geophysical Union (7), and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling (8).

Bolding mine to show who the alarmists are.

 

[Gwenyfur]

I'm YEC, and I'm not worried at all...even in the short years of the eath's existence there have been warm and cold cycles, ice ages and periods of warmth...no biggie...

There is no person in his/her right mind that will doubt that we are adding greenhouse gasses at record rates. Not even volcanoes can compete with the rate we produce CO2.

Okay then...all we have to do is get all 7 billion + people to quit breathing for 1 year adn CO2 levels will diminish....

 

[Gwenyfur]

So I wonder how many scientists have gone the other way? Judging by the fact that governments all over the world seem to taking the issue of climate warming much more seriously, I would think a large number.

Love your country...
Fear your government

 

[picnic]

I'm YEC, and I'm not worried at all...even in the short years of the eath's existence there have been warm and cold cycles, ice ages and periods of warmth...no biggie...

In your view is our industrialised lifestyle in anyway to blame for the current global warming that is happening? Do you think about whether your actions might be environmentally friendly or are you not bothered?

 

[Gwenyfur]

In your view is our industrialised lifestyle in anyway to blame for the current global warming that is happening? Do you think about whether your actions might be environmentally friendly or are you not bothered?

This world was cursed to be destroyed *long* before the industrial revolution loomed on the horizon, let alone came to pass.
Am I partly to blame...well...I breathe...I live in the burbs and work an odd shift, so I drive...

Am I bothered...NOPE!

I recycle what I can, and reuse my yard waste as composte in my flower gardens...

Much more than that...well...oh well...

Yeah...You can guess right...I'm not a tree hugging, "kill the people so the planet can live" kinda person

 

[Silent Bob]

Okay then...all we have to do is get all 7 billion + people to quit breathing for 1 year adn CO2 levels will diminish....

Not by a long shot. CO2 emmisions are approx: 24,126,416,000 metric tons not including natural emmisions[1]. The average person produces 0.98 tons of CO2 per year. For 7 billion people breathing a full year we get 6.860.000.000 metric tons. Nice try tho.

[1] From wikipedia.

 

[shernren]

Of course there's a correlation. To a true YEC, graphs like this:

simply don't exist or are completely useless "interpretations of data". A major part of the evidence of global warming is macro-trends like these; how do you put across the message that the Earth is warmer now than it's been in a million years to a person who thinks it's "thousands, not billions"?