Global Warming/Climate Change

[paulegend]

lol sorry about the idiot comment i get annoyed with my mates when they talk about this. so i apologise. for that im the idiot


@ joel

its easier to diprove the facts rather than prove them thats why i havent given any evidence. its widely available if people are that interested.

the earthquake that supposedly happened 1000 years ago was aparantly compared more to a a ricter scale of only 6.5 to 7. the difference was that the wave that hit was much larger which caused more damage.


there has been worse natural disasters as you have pointed out before man polluted. but those events where world ending disasters.

how people can say that the worlds climate isnt getting worse is completly ignorant.

ok mate how about this. you dont believe and thats fine. but what do you suggest?? do you think we should just carry on polluting the atmosphere?? after all we cant stop global warming.

 

[Ride The Walrus]

Fires can occur naturally too, doesn't mean humans can't cause one.

I didn't say humans don't cause global warming.
We do. But we're just making it occur worse/quicker.

 

[Brian]

ome people are idiots.

of course global warming and climate change is real.

for the last couple of years in britain and ireland we have had actual snow......................... in the last few years we have had "storm" type wind and rain in novemeber-december and then large snow falls in december-january. **** noone who watchs football should think otherwise. we have had a winter break the last couple of seasons... it may not be an official winter break but it was a winter break.

before this japan incident we have had the new zealand disaster and the australian.

this is the worst EVER earthquake in japan. last year the mid west of ireland had its ONLY ever earthquake. not too long ago new orleans was the new lost world of atlantis and tai land was almost wiped off the face of the globe with a tsunami. and what about the hurricane in birmingham............................ also the mini twisters that went through the oxegen festival a couple years back

of course its fecking real.

if you read anything about the global warming "myth" then you would know that earthquakes can be caused by climate change.

of course i doubt the "myth"-team have even bothered to research the topic before forming an opinion.

---------- Post added at 08:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:42 PM ----------

put a sponge into the microwave and put it on for a minute and you will see how the greenhouse effect can cause earthquakes and volcanoes

First of all there has been snow in Ireland before(yes I mean substantial snow).
You do realise that many earthquakes used to occur but they couldnt be recorded like for instance was Mt Vesuvius erupting on pompeii caused by Global Warming.

I live in Ireland and my Brother or Sister has been to the last 7 oxegens and they have told me that the "mini twisters" were little gusts of winds that went into circles as they were in confined spaces i.e inbetween groups of people and tents.

I am not saying Global Warming isnt happening but Alot of your proofs are nearly following the Simpsons riddle "if a tree falls in a forest but nobody is around to hear it, does it make a sound"

 

[Joel`]

lol sorry about the idiot comment i get annoyed with my mates when they talk about this. so i apologise. for that im the idiot


@ joel

its easier to diprove the facts rather than prove them thats why i havent given any evidence. its widely available if people are that interested.

the earthquake that supposedly happened 1000 years ago was aparantly compared more to a a ricter scale of only 6.5 to 7. the difference was that the wave that hit was much larger which caused more damage.


there has been worse natural disasters as you have pointed out before man polluted. but those events where world ending disasters.

how people can say that the worlds climate isnt getting worse is completly ignorant.

ok mate how about this. you dont believe and thats fine. but what do you suggest?? do you think we should just carry on polluting the atmosphere?? after all we cant stop global warming.

Yes it's easy to disprove facts, but it DOES NOT prove your own theory. You have evidence for an accelerated rate of climate change, you cannot prove it isn't naturally occuring, yet. As I said, you can disprove my theory of magic pixies, but that doesn't help prove your argument for gravitational attraction.

No, there have been natural disasters like this before in history. To say something is worse than the other, then you have to compare them using the same units. You wouldn't call the earthquake a thousand years ago worst if it was lower on the ricter scale.

Umm, I never said I don't believe. Read my first post before you question my opinions.

You're stating your opinion as fact. I'll sit on the fence until Science can definitively prove it one way or another, instead of making rash uninformed statements.

---------- Post added at 09:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 PM ----------

I didn't say humans don't cause global warming.
We do. But we're just making it occur worse/quicker.

Sorry then, thought you were using it as an argument against.

 

[Grenwald]

I cant remember's where abouts in the cycle we are, and what the Earth's climate should be doing as a consequence, but this is 1 of the reasons the Earth's climate fluctuates over time!
I know its wikipedia, its a little insubstancial, but accuarate enough
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles

 

[JonoMUFC]

Although temperatures increased overall during the 20th century, three distinct periods can be observed. Global warming occurred both at the beginning and at the end of the 20th century, but a cooling trend is seen from about 1940 to 1975. As a result, changes in 20th century trends offer a good framework through which to understand climate change and the role of numerous factors in determining the climate at any one time.

Early and late 20th century warming has been explained primarily by increasing solar activity and increasing CO2 concentrations, respectively, with other factors contributing in both periods. So what caused the cooling period that interrupted the overall trend in the middle of the century? The answer seems to lie in solar dimming, a cooling phenomenon caused by airborne pollutants.

The main culprit is likely to have been an increase in sulphate aerosols, which reflect incoming solar energy back into space and lead to cooling. This increase was the result of two sets of events.

Industrial activities picked up following the Second World War. This, in the absence of pollution control measures, led to a rise in aerosols in the lower atmosphere (the troposphere).
A number of volcanic eruptions released large amounts of aerosols in the upper atmosphere (the stratosphere).

Combined, these events led to aerosols overwhelming the warming trend at a time when solar activity showed little variation, leading to the observed cooling. Furthermore, it is possible to draw similar conclusions by looking at the daily temperature cycle. Because sunlight affects the maximum day-time temperature, aerosols should have a noticeable cooling impact on it. Minimum night-time temperatures, on the other hand, are more affected by greenhouse gases and therefore should not be affected by aerosols. Were these differences observed? The answer is yes: maximum day-time temperatures fell during this period but minimum night-time temperatures carried on rising.

The introduction of pollution control measures reduced the emission of sulphate aerosols. Gradually the cumulative effect of increasing greenhouse gases started to dominate in the 1970s and warming resumed.

As a final point, it should be noted that in 1945, the way in which sea temperatures were measured changed, leading to a substantial drop in apparent temperatures. Once the data are corrected, it is expected that the cooling trend in the middle of the century will be less pronounced.

source

I like that you sourced your response lee, but i find it hard to believe that with the increased industrialization that we only increased sulphate aerosols in to the atmosphere, so does the source then say there was no more CO2? just seem like the source is a little incoherent

 

[Lee]

I like that you sourced your response lee, but i find it hard to believe that with the increased industrialization that we only increased sulphate aerosols in to the atmosphere, so does the source then say there was no more CO2? just seem like the source is a little incoherent

No, greenhouse gasses were still there and increasing. Just hidden.

From the same source...

To sum up, anthropogenic sulfur emissions appear to be the main cause of the mid-century cooling. These emissions decreased the mean global surface temperature by approximately 0.5°C during this period, while anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions caused a warming of approximately 0.4°C. Therefore, even though greenhouse gas emissions continued to have a warming effect during this period, it was more than offset (hidden) by anthropogenic aerosol emissions, until those emissions were brought under control by government intervention while greenhouse gas emissions continued to increase unabated. In other words, the mid-century cooling is actually an expected result based on our current understanding of climate science, and is successfully hindcasted by climate models.

 

[Glocken73]

Global warming does NOT cause earthquakes!!!!

 

[Chaz Sexington]

Not enough substantial evidence for what? The Earth is on a warming trend, Ice shelves and glaciers are shrinking, there's more CO2​ in the atmosphere than ever before. All facts, the only thing which is still up for debate is whether it's because of Humans or not.

Yet the Earth has been considerably warmer within the last 1000 years, e.g. the Viking Age. The 17th-20th century was a mini-ice age.

Currently, from what I've understood, we're just before a massive ice age. Temperature's swing massively before an ice age (e.g. viking age - cooling - global warming) before plummeting. However, the gov't is very happy to be allowed to increase taxes to make more money.

 

[JonoMUFC]

No, greenhouse gasses were still there and increasing. Just hidden.

From the same source...

To sum up, anthropogenic sulfur emissions appear to be the main cause of the mid-century cooling. These emissions decreased the mean global surface temperature by approximately 0.5°C during this period, while anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions caused a warming of approximately 0.4°C. Therefore, even though greenhouse gas emissions continued to have a warming effect during this period, it was more than offset (hidden) by anthropogenic aerosol emissions, until those emissions were brought under control by government intervention while greenhouse gas emissions continued to increase unabated. In other words, the mid-century cooling is actually an expected result based on our current understanding of climate science, and is successfully hindcasted by climate models.

Very interesting, i may have to read up a little more to produce a better argument then what you have got on the table