Every day, you hear numerous reports about how global warming is hitting the United States and that in a few years from now, disterous weather phenomena like hurricanes will be on the rise. But can scientist really prove that global warming really does exist? What is their backing that the earth is really getting warmer? Global warming is a theory, not something that people can test for accurately without many years of research and study. Ten or twenty years does not cound as being accurate. Scientists need to look at the big picture by looking at weather not only from the present, but also from over a hundred years ago to see if there is any change. Studying the weather can give people an idea that global warming is not a big issue and that scientists are in my opinion trying to scare the American people into submission. We had a record number of hurricanes during hurricane season 2005, yet last year we didn't have many hurricanes.
Second, wouldn't weather patterns and climates change over time? If global warming has been going for as long as scientists say, then wouldn't there have been some sort of noticeable change that non meteorologists could detect within the weather in their own backyards? Wouldn't temperatures slowly be on the rise each year? There isn't a lot of difference between the temperatures and weather patterns here in 2007 from when weather statistics were first recorded in the 1800's. Looking from a meteorology student's point of view, I would have thought that there would be some indication in the weather on whether or not global warming exists.
I don't want people to think that I'm saying that they are wrong if they do believe in global warming. I'm only saying that scientists are making such a big deal out of a theory that they have not proven. I would be interested in hearing other people's thoughts on global warming.
Actually, I HAVE noticed a change in the weather quite literally in my own backyard. For the last twelve years, Southern California has been getting unexpectedly hit a few times with snow during the winter. That's right! Actual snow! And not just in the moutains or hills. It's been hitting the valleys. And I have been noticing that the summers are getting longer every year and that they have been getting progressively warmer. Idk maybe it's just me, but I have been noticing changes.
-kookykrys
This is one thing I don't get: people say they believe in global warming, and then they cite that it's been unexpectedly cold in certain areas at certain times in the year.
It's not warmer weather, it's more fucked up weather.
--Mike
Warmth in some areas causes cold in others (the weather is a complicated creature), but global averages still rise.
El Nino could be partly to blame for the extremely warm summers you've been experiencing. Also, it depends on what the conditions in the region are like. It will be warmer in desert regions that in a more temperate climate setting. A certain weather pattern could make it seem like the summer is warmer, or the summer could just be above normal. As to the snow part, global warming would not cause snow to fall on warmer areas. The snow can be explained in a couple of different ways which I will explain later.
Here is a chart showing an increase in recorded temperatures over the last 150 years, not ten or twenty.
Also, records of a "little ice age" in the 16th/17th century that froze crops and caused widespread starvation on a broad scale are pretty clear. The ending of this little ice age has been defined by a rise in temperatures globally, which is why Europe is not frozen and starving from cold killing their crops.
Vineyards could be grown in England now, and were by the Romans, but during this period it became too cold for the vineyards to survive, and so they all died out. Since it was too cold for them then, and isn't now, it must be warm now. Or the grapes evolved.
There is a great mass of historical, archaeological, and geologic evidence for a global warming trend, not just grapes and dead Europeans.
Evidence for warming (not a cause for warming, but warming) is very strong. By the notion of proof that you seem to have set up, Holland and Florida need to disappear before global warming is accepted as a serious issue.
Before you demand more proof for something, you should define what it is that would convince you that hasn't been produced, not just "more proof than is there."
(I wrote this at 5:30 in the morning on no sleep, so if I sound uncivil...I don't mean to be.)
An ice age in England? If it got that cold after it was warm, then wouldn't that be global freezing or something? Places can have unusual weather conditions that can make it seem like their area is something else. Take Oklahoma for example during the Dust Bowl. It was very dusty and sandy and not a lot of things could grow. In fact, a lot of the stuff that tried to grow was covered up, blown away, or killed due to the climate at the time. Now, Oklahoma has trees and lots of growing things and not as much dust and dirt. I'm just saying that climates can change and not be attributed to global warming.
Weather also has not been recorded long enough for scientists to be able to tell whether there is really any global warming going on or not. The ozone could very well be becoming depleted, but the consequences wouldn't be a drastic increase in temperature. It would be gradual, over time. Like I said before, El Nino or La Nina (depending on where you live) could be partly to blame for the weird weather along with where the jet stream is and other weather factors.
The "little ice age" was hardly local. It caused starvation in all of the known world at that time. More importantly, this cooling was in the past, and has been reversed, and continues to be reversed. Reversal of global COOLING is global WARMING. Whether that's "long-term" and going to destroy the environment or not is debatable, but the point is it's warmer now and the polar ice caps are melting in front of us, with sea levels rising--and this is dangerous because of our many low-lying cities like New Orleans, Amsterdam, and London. Even if it's a short-term trend, it's still there and a dangerous one.
Also, local climate change is one thing, but temperatures are recorded (as well asgeologic evidence being collected) globally and averaged.
They had a drought and a lot of their crops were killed which caused a lot of the starvation in England and that area.
A drought of varying intensity that lasted between three and five hundred years?
Besides, how can you tell whether global warming is really occuring or whether people are trying to scare everyone else? Temperatures have been recorded for less than 200 years. You don't have an accurate comparison when looking at about 100-150 years. You would need to look at a couple hundred years worth of temperatures to be able to tell if global warming really does exist or not.
No, to prove a long-term trend you would need that. Nobody has claimed that global warming is a really long-term trend spanning several hundred or thousand years.
And I beg you to come up with an explanation for the worldwide retreat and breakup of glaciers. Don't say "some glaciers have advanced," because "some" of most everything goes against most trends; that doesn't mean trends aren't there.
The earth can change on its own which could make people think that it is actual global warming. You can't really prove that there is actually any truth in the fact that humans are the cause of global warming though. A lot of it could be natural and not actually man made...something else to think about.
I never claimed that humans were the cause. There wouldn't be a "proof" for that, only strong correlation. However, not being our fault doesn't mean it isn't bad. Measures that prepare for large amounts of land to be lost or glacier melt to diminish with the loss of glaciers don't depend on whether it's our fault, but only whether it's happening.
As for greenhouse gases, if we can come up with reasonable ideas as to ways to maybe slow it, we should do our best--waiting for "proof" that something that is good for other reasons anyway should be done to cry and combat a life-threatening problem is dangerously idealistic. Waiting a couple hundred years while Holland and half of Florida to disappear to find out "oh yeah, I guess maybe it was due to factors under our control" is stupid, and using the fact that global warming might not be our fault as an excuse to poison the air is unethical and shortsighted.
I found a good website for you to take a look at Nancy Robertson. Al Gore's movie on global warming is not accurate and here is some backing to that.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
If it is only a theory, then how do you prove the Polar caps is not just coincidence? And how about the gray whales, which are on thier way back toawrds the edangered species list? If you can't find proof in the news, look at all of the animals which are effected by this. I don't think there is any coincidence between the warming climate and the decline in species who depend on thier climate not to change.
Think what you will, I'm a firm beleiver.
That Antarctica's ice caps are increasing in size? The thing is Global warming is real but its not as how the media portrays it. The Earth has had climate changed through out its history and this phenomena is no different; its not the C02, is just a change the Earth goes through every hundred years or so. It is sad that the Gray Whales, as Majestic and wonderful that these creatures are, have been added to the list again. However it is not your fault that their natural habitat has been altered by Global Warming as the current theory suggests; check this video out maybe it will change your perception on this issue:
http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=100946...
Global warming is not a political game it is here and it is real. To make this as simple as possible to explain just think of our earth before it was ever populated with humankind. The Earth was an undisturbed planet that flourished with natural water, vegetation, and natural occurrences. Now back at present time when the Earth is populated and we have created disturbance. From soil depletion, to emissions, and natural disasters we have made am impact on our planet that it has never reacted to before. The effects of our disturbance have not hit us hard enough and that’s why people doubt that it is here and real. Researchers at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science cited a range of evidence that the Earth's temperatures are rising:
-- The Arctic regions are losing ice cover.
-- The populations of whales and walrus that Alaskan Eskimo communities depend on for food are crashing.
-- Fresh water draining from ice and snow on land is decreasing the salinity of far northern oceans.
-- Many species of plankton -- the microscopic plants that form the crucial base of the entire marine food web -- are moving north to escape the warming water on the ocean surface off Greenland and Alaska.
Referenced from:
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/02/19/MNGE1BECPI1.D...
Global warming is not a political game it is here and it is real.
Not only are you wrong, you're right at the same time. Global warming is real, but Big Oil has made it a political game.
Something to think about...
Scientists are taking the approach you described, but the media twists the evidence all out of proportion. The problem arises from people who are not trained as scientists interpreting scientific data.
Cheers
http://progressiveu.org/blog/leslieq
Check it out...it's a work in progress.