'Is global warming happening?' Poll discussion/results

cuttersblade

The real question is not whether climate change is happening, everyone knows that it is and the planets climate id constantly changing. What we really need to know is why.

CO2 emmissions are pretty irrelevant, what percentage of the atmosphere is made of CO2? its actually 0.0383%, which is absolutely tiny.

Global climate change is caused by the sun, the number of sunspots and global temperature change correlate much better than CO2 emmissions and temperature change do.

Besides if greenhouse gases were causing climate change, surely the atmosphere would be increasing in temperature faster than the ground. However, the atmosphere is actually warming slower than the ground.

The reason why western governments are keen to back this idea of global warming is to stop the development of the 3rd world, we wouldnt want them using any of the oil would we. We tell 3rd world countries to use renewable energy sources when they are too expensive and inefficient for us to use, at the end of the day Global Warming is just a means to keep westerners on top.

westernpromise

feesh wrote: »

If anyone denies that climate change is happening, I have to question what their background is and how much they really understand about science, although I accept that the scientific community is partly to blame because it is so hard for the public to get access to published, peer-reviewed research.

The point is that lots of us agree that something is happening, but do not buy the solution. Gore and cynics like him are trying to package the whole thing - i.e. global warming is happening --> it's our fault --> we can fix it --> pay these taxes.

You are, I'm afraid, doing exactly the same thing as charlatans like Gore - you're conflating all shades of opinion that dissent from this model into one ("denies that climate change is happening"), apparently to make those who disagree with you sound extreme and wrong-headed. Gore himself is currently trying to characterise those who disagree with his solution as "deniers". Like "holocaust deniers". Nice. But good for his business selling carbon credits.

davetrousers

cuttersblade wrote: »

CO2 emmissions are pretty irrelevant, what percentage of the atmosphere is made of CO2? its actually 0.0383%, which is absolutely tiny.

I think you need to substantiate that a lot more! That really is a feeble argument

People will always have their own ideas and will therefore cling on to any 'evidence' that supports it and will immediately dismiss any that doesn't or opposes it!

cuttersblade

davetrousers wrote: »

I think you need to substantiate that a lot more! That really is a feeble argument

People will always have their own ideas and will therefore cling on to any 'evidence' that supports it and will immediately dismiss any that doesn't or opposes it!

Ok well lets look at this 0.0383%, it doesn't all come from Humans, in fact most of it comes from plants and animals. The % that comes from humans is around a quarter of that figure which means human CO2 emmissions make up around 80 parts per million in the atmosphere, CO2 is a byproduct of life, no one can deny that. The level of CO2 humans put into the atmosphere is less than the amount trees put into the atmosphere when they loose their leaves in autumn.

maybe the first step for Al Gore should be to plant evergreen trees.

wiganshale

I agree with your response but would like to add that the issue is a mis-direction. I've been drawn to the conclusion that this debate is a political vehicle for trying to wean us off fossil fuels, without properly addressing the need to seek alternative sources of energy ASAP. When the fossil fuels run out (ending the debate), we will return to an economy, which would be pre-industrial revolution, but with a much bigger population to feed, clothe and shelter.

ZTD

bobbybee2 wrote: »

We know from small scale tests that greenhouse gases trap the Sun's radiation, why would it not work on the large scale. You just have to extrapolate the results.

The tide has come in over half-a-metre in the past five minutes! We're all doomed!

You just have to extrapolate the results.

wiganshale

I've read the Science, over the last twenty years and the only main stream scientists, that are allegedly concerned, are the climatologists, whose research budgets rely on people thinking that this is "the big problem", encouraging politicians to award them research grants. Any climatologist, who bucks the trend, don't get funded.

nej

http://ultimateglobalwarmingchallenge.com/

Sponsored by JunkScience.com - which is well worth a read, by the way.

davetrousers

On balance trees produce far more oxygen than Carbon Dioxide

wiganshale

One problem with converting to biofuels is that the land needed to grow it, takes away from land needed for food production.