Is Global Warming Real?

It's the stuff they put in our food. It's probably causing cancer, too.

Seriously though, maybe I'm an optimist, but I don't think we're getting less intelligent. It's just that as the population grows, there's such an increased variety in stupidity that it SEEMS more widespread, see.

there's so many 'points-of-entry' to this whole discussion, it's hard to pick just one to start with. and funny, there's already 'serenity pt. 2's out there , yet to get the public even moderately engaged in a scientific discussion over global-warming issues is like leadin' that horse to water... and i've seen 'em -not- drink. (i'm talking about -real- horses, btw...

for one, the atmosphere (what most people from the 80s/90s will associate with global warming, relatedly to ozone holes)... i once saw a demonstration (on tv of greenhouse gas effects upon ozone in a laboratory experiment, where a whole fishtank full of ozone was introduced with a minute, -minute- amount of greenhouse gas... the monitoring meter level dropped to -zero- within seconds, and i'm talkin' only -two-. greenhouse gases don't break down easily during the process - only ozone. the destructive gasses retain a -great- amount of their destructive power through the process, to go on an destroy much more ozone than their own quantity. they're 'industrial strength.'

in a related, atmostpheric anecdote (though i don't know that it's actually true/accurate, but it's one of those things that, in my heart, i know we shouldn't be -messing with-) - is the 'caeser's last breath' theory. i read about it in the semi-fictional treatment, 'chernobyl' - the theory goes, the number of molecules in a single lungful of air is, ratio-wise, similar to the amount of lungfuls of air contained in the whole of the earth's atmosphere. since, by now, caeser's dying breath should be well-mixed with all the air out there, in every single breath you take, you take in at least one molecule of air exhaled in 'caeser's last breath'.

so, taking that in, consider how many 'lungfuls' of radioactive pollution were 'exhaled' by chernobyl... or, for that matter, consider the (suicidal) tactic of breathing the exhaust from your car. now think of all the other cars, trucks, trains, factories out there, spewing out their exhaust... then consider that with the amount of 'lungfuls of air' we really have to work with...

on number two, there's water to be concerned with... if you haven't read up on hurricane/iceage cycles, then you have no idea how important the ocean's tempuratures are to maintaining our habitable climate... we got the rest of katrina's rain all the way up here in indiana, for a full day. now, ever try to freeze saltwater? pretty hard, 'cuz it takes a much lower temperature to freeze than normal, non-saltwater for your icecubes... s'part of what keeps our comfortable climate going. (because the oceans can stay liquid and movable at a much lower temperature than freshwater, they can continue being a much more active 'heat exchanger' in the overall earth system.)

now, introduce a whooooole lotta freshwater melt-off from the artic/antartic regions, due to ozonehole destruction - less ozone lets through -more- radiation in all forms, which leads to melt-off. melt-off means more -fresh-, non-salt water introduced to the oceans, sometimes in incredible amounts (even though we may not be 'aware' or conscious of it at the time) - moreover, since freshwater is lighter than saltwater, it floats upon the surface of the ocean, blocking and interferring with the sunlight heat-absorbtion of the ocean currents.

eventually, this ocean-current blockage can lead to another ice-age... that's why 'global -warming-' can lead to 'global -cooling-'.

highly suggest anyone interested in said subjects look up darksyde's diaries on dailykos.com, or also at uti.com.

It'sa matter of how important we think we are in the universe...

Supposing we shape our envirnoment by force, or it is allowing us to mold it...

Nothing another 100 years of fossil fuels wont fix.

Intresting thread, global warmings one of the few things I've googled a lot, and found something new and intresting each time..

http://www.firstscience.com/site/articles/corbyn.asp
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/358953.stm

Two of my favs.. The first one is especially intresting I think..

They're both saying we're not to blame though, so maybe its just me trying to feel better about being part of the human race

Hey, leave Serenity pt. 2 out of this!

Global warming and the hole in the ozone layer are two different things. The ozone hole lets in more UV radiation, but that won't melt ice... it will just kill plants and give animals skin cancer. Greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, carbon monoxide) don't destroy stratospheric oxone, what does that is chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs.) The amount of CFCs in use has dropped dramatially since the 80s/90s, and the Ozone hole is actually shrinking again.

The thing about global warming leading to an ice age is one of the accepted "disaster" scenarios though. What would happen is the melting of ice in the Arctic would flow down (cold water sinks) and somehow disrupt the North Atlantic current. The North Atlantic current flows north from the equator and brings warm water (and as such, air) to Europe. If you look at a map, the north half of europe is the same latitude as southern canada, with the scandinavian countries being the same as Alaska. Even southern Europe is still the same level as me here in Washington, with the only exception being Spain... all nice and California level

What all that means is that if the North Atlantic current stopped, then all of europe would drop in temperature dramatically. Would it be an ice age, no... but even so that amount of change would have a devastating effect on every single ecosystem, no to mention the economic effects on all the countries and cities effected.

Yes, this is just one scenario, and rather far left on the bell curve of "No effect-medium effect-disaster" for global warming. I don't know if humans have had an impact on the amount of atmospheric CO2, Methane, or CO, but if we are, and if global warming has the *possibility* of creating a disaster scenario like above... wouldn't any amount of money it took to develop replacement technology to avoid said disaster be worth it?

I dunno. I just know what i've read and seen and what I believe in.

Oops, I clicked no, ignore that, I meant to say yes.. :-/

I believe in it, but I have one question.....Why is it called Global Warming if it makes it colder? That's like parking in a driveway and driving on a parkway.

Yep, I believe in it and the holes in the ozone and all of that. And I also think that humans are significantly contributing to it, as an aside. I read an article in National Geographic all about how the temperature has been rising, and while it doesn't seem like a big difference, in the big scheme of things it is. It was also about how global warming is affecting the behavior of wild animals. Pretty interesting, yet kinda scary, stuff.

i so much appreciate well-reasoned, thought-out responses... and i do appreciate a modicum of self-doubt with any argument; i don't display much anymore, 'cuz i'm just old enough now to feel that there's no hazarding on the 'doubtful' side of things. another notch to mark up just for age... it's been my experience that all 'safeguarding' endeavors cost -much less- than any current 'buyout' ecological credits, as in mercury credit, lead-release credit... y'probably know what i mean.

i guess, to bring up some 'old' news at this point... i'd call it the 'kyoto' credit, which was pretty much the first thing our 'beloved xian' pres'nint went out on his worldwide 'hate us' tour of the world, back in early '01... 'no, we won't honor this ecological pact the previous adminstration has worked so long and hard at... have a nice f'ckin' day!!' not to mention every other tree-friendly pact we could sign and honor... call me a tree-huggin' lib'ral all you want, and go fill your god-blessed suv on fossil-fuels afterwards...

hummm, i am not sure about freshwater sinking, no matter how cold it is compared to saltwater - i'd have to conduct a kitchen-table test myself to convince me. in any case, the oceans cover 70% of the earth's surface, so i don't feel like messing with them like that... but in any case, anybody who doesn't pay any mind to the 'kilimangero' scenario is just keeping their eyes shut while mother nature's trying to pry 'clockwork orange' eyelid hooks inside. these people, in my humble frank opinion, -should not- participate in the voting process anyways, as they are not capable of any problem even 'in front of their effin' face'. (dictatorial? yep, in certain cases... don't know how to solve that dilemma within myself, but it seems that mother nature's a much bigger mutha than me - so that's a much bigger deal to reckon with, in the first place!!

well, to pull up a final follow-up, there's no final word to get from mutha-nature on this problem - we can only take half-assed guesses ourselves. i wish to err on the safe side of things. we humans are verrrry reticent to 'take blame' (blame is such a loaded word in our language; it implies so much guilt and doubt and negativity and so on and so on...) - y'know, we could bypass the whole 'blame' process of feeling bad about ourselves, and simply -take responsibility,- which is less negative, gives us something to do, and even -emboldens- us with the that-all-too-necessary feeling of importance, to take care of our fragile lil' sphere that, everyday and without question, takes care of us in too many ways that we never even think to ask.

but as far as 'blame,' remember the 'caeser's last breath' scenario, and think back on, oh, about 125 years of industrial revolution now... where we started asking machines and fossil fuels to do soooooo much of our heavy lifting now. that's really a lot of bad air out there. and think of sci-fi scenarios of 'atmospheric processing', like the big reactor in 'aliens'... it's a plausible industry, and usually only has 100 years or so estimated to process a whole -planet's- atmosphere.

it's nothing to take lightly, and it infuriates me all the more whenever i hear of this 'disbandonment' of radio commentators... they just don't have an effin' clue about all this. they're just getting paid to keep their jobs, based on ratings, based on a scientifically-illiterate public, based upon a bad public/privately-controlled education system.

anyhow, according to what'cha wrote, i think we're on the same side of this thing, eh?? btw, sorry i haven't seen 'serenity' lol - but by way of the trailers, it just looks like another filler sci-fi flick. i'll probably see it someday and end up buying the dv, lol...

The average temperature across the globe is rising but some local areas will cool due to shifting ocean currents.

The human race is making impressive strides in the advancement of stupidity. I hear that they've even invented this thing called Internet where people can have any answer they desire at their fingertips, but instead use it to post their thoughts on lists where they get an ego boost defining themselves against what others think while hypocritically pretending to listen and accept their views. Weird, huh?

Yes, global warming is happening.

And yes, we are causing it, but in an unexpected way: global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s.

As every good pastafarian well knows.

If you don't believe it, then check the graph: http://www.venganza.org/

Correlation does not imply causality.

~Ulrika~

Really?

D'oh! And here I was, all set to join the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monter. Thanks for setting me straight, Ulrika.

Chosen, may His noodly appendage reach you and give you enlightment and insight...

and Ulrika, may it happen to you too...

What's global.. warming? huh.

Of course Global Warming is real, and of course we are contributing to it. We've only really had about 100 years to really really work at it, but thus far are doing a fine job to kill earth.

One of the biggest fears of global warming is the temperature of the oceans rising. This will not only cause devestating storms, but there are very temperature sensitive plants (many of which create a good amount of our breathable air), and animal life that would die off if it rises a relatively small amount

Oh, and on the Ice Age thing. It was my understanding from articles that I've read, that we are actually within an Ice Age now, but just a very temperate point in it's long, slow process.

A recent discovery is that global warming is a direct result of all the hot air coming from these forums.

The question seems to be poorly posed, because it is somewhat open to interpretation.

To start:
Global warming is not a belief system, it is an observed phenomenon. So, alternative question #1:
Do you believe that the data indicates that global average temperatures are increasing?
I doubt this is the intened question for this poll, since you need to be able to access and interpret the data and there probably aren't many forum readers who are qualified to do that very well. (understanding regional variation, heat island effects, interpreting ice core sample measurements....)

The consensus among scientists who study this is that it is indeed happening. So, alternative question #2:
Do you belive the scientific community when they say that global warming is happening?
I think this is probably the question that was being asked. The problem I see is that questions like this have to be asked at all. However, I do understand why it is a problem.

First part of the problem are the scientists and I hate to blame them (since I am one), but ask them a question and you get a 20 minute explantion interjecting all the caveats and details about uncertanty, so that in the end (after the listener finishes her/his cat nap) you're not sure what the answer is.

Second is the general population. I find it frightening that a society that depends so heavily on technology has such little understanding of what science is and how it works. Science is not a belief system and its not just memorizing facts. Its a way of looking at problems and addressing them in a way that lets us understand how and why things are the way they are.

Third are the disseminators. I think this is the biggest problem. Who is reporting scientific findings and what are their agendas? Drug companies that hide data that makes their product look bad, scientitsts trying to make themselves look good to get better funding, political or religous groups trying to promote an ideology are all examples of scientific findings being distorted for public consumption. I don't think that this happens as often or as badly as people seem to think, but when it does it is sensational and it drowns out all the good work that goes on unnoticed. What is probably more prevalent are simply errors in communication. Scientists tend to communicate using techincal terms, this is importatnt because they are very precisely defined and not easily open to interpretation. When technical work is put into terms that the average person understands it opens up lots of space for misinterpretation (actually ties in with the previous 2 sources of problems).

What seems to be the bone of contention among the posters seems to be alternative quesetion #3:
What are the effects of global warming and what should we do about it?

ooh, look at the time... I have to go now *ducks behind the fire resistant wall*

well I am gonna go burn some oil in my backyard for fun! See ya

That's more difficult than it sounds, but I've found you can do a pretty good job (and melt asphalt) if you mix it (10W30) with WD-40.

The temperature is sweltering here in Scotland compared to the last ice age. But I don't blame the Americans.

Yes sir, global warming is very real.. this very morning i let skipper my 11 year old cat outside to bask in the sun when she went outside she layed down in her usual spot right next to my tool shed well i guess this global warming thing struck her (a patch of the ozone layer missing maybe?) and she heated up to un chartered temp's causing my tool shed which she was laying next to,to catch fire.. i ran and called the fire department and they were able to extinguish the flames which ingulfed poor skipper but my tool shed now lays in shambles. It was a blazing inferno i tell you.