Global Warming – Man-made or Natural?

Global warming has occurred many times in geologic history without man. NASA charts on the Intenet show woldwide mean temperature declining since 2003. The large amounts of money suggested to combat "human caused global warming" are so large that I fear objective science is being blinded by dollar signs for large consulting contracts.

Science is never finished, but a work in progress. The IPCC has closed all debate on the subject. This is not a scientific approach and raises doubts about the scientific credentials of the IPCC.

Mr. Henry is absolutely right in saying "science is never finished." IPCC and Mr. Gore may or may not be corect in their thesis in global warming. I have analyzed some of the data presented in Gore's book and others, albeit not all. In my humble opinion, the data are not those what I would call scientific data. With such vast numbers and variations, and yet, I have not seen statistical analysis on any of them. Science is not something that can be proved or denied by majority consensus. Did any one take a poll or a vote on the right or wrong of Einstein's E = MC2( square) ? That, unfortunately, is what the science, or pseudo-science rather, of global warming is. Biologically, global warming is a two edge sword. The vice or virtue will depend on whether or not we human can take advantage of it instead of whining about it. We should develop a concept to treat global warming like building canals and dams to tame the raging waters to our advantage.

Any Green technology isn't cutting the mustered to reduce the green house effect.

One example, if all the population in the world buys a hibrid and assume it cuts the co2 emmision in half, that is than canceled out by the estimated world population growth and new vihicle drivers in the next 20 year. And we're back at square one.
Other Green house reducing technologies are not reliable to because the longivity of product and energy it takes to accomplish it. It is estimated that one human life less in the world reduces the co2 admission by 20000 lbs over a life time.

Solution, like was preposed in the 70's, reduce the world population growth.
Looking at the population growth curve over the last 300 years paralles the co2 admission measured in the athmosphere over the same period, coincidental think not.

Even people who do too much exercise aren't helping the problem, Green no using more oxygen ang exhauling more co2. Put back farm land to Jungle helps a little but the biggest asset is Population control.

The anthropogenic protagonists overlook a simple fact of basic physical chemistry,- the solubility of CO2 in water, including seawater, is inversely proportional to temperature. That's why soda water or beer goes flat when you leave it out of the 'fridge. It is also a known fact that the climate world-wide has been warming since about 1800. Any geologist, glaciologist, anthropologist or just about any other kind of '-ologist' will tell you this. Therefore, atmospheric CO2 MUST rise, from CO2 de-gassing from the oceans' surface waters, as the earth warms. The cause of this warming is astronomic, due to the wobble on the axis, causing periodic variation in solar flux.
I am a geologist, and I know of no geologist who agrees with the anthropogenic theory of global warming.

Did Humans save the world from an impending ice age?? A few hundred years ago a "little ice age" decended suddenly on the world. Prehaps the advent of the Industrial Revolution with its increased emmission of CO2 & methane gas slowly halted the cooling climate and within a couple of centuries stopped it altogether and turned it into gobal warming that everyone is worried about. Perhaps without the "Industrial Revolution" the glaciers would be expanding southward as they did many times before.

Thanks SaJ
According to you , we must reduce global population and therefore , world needs few Hitlers to do the job. I wonder who is going to voluntere to remove them selves from the land of living? About 4 billion would be OK? And then we would be able to continou to polute the enviroment in comforth. Hybrid cars are not the answer, there is lot going on in this days to reduce CO2 emission and if humanity want's to survive it will act acordingly.
I just wish that people would be more optimistic and broad minded, cheerszzzzzzzzzzzz

While there may be some question as to whether man is changing the climate, there is no question that the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are increasing due to fossil fuel burning at a pace that is unnaturally fast. It is the latter fact that should concern us all. Global warming is but one of many possible consequences.

Also, the greenhouse effect is entirely consistent with the second law of thermodynamics, however poorly it may be described in some textbooks.

Burning the coal and oil as fast as we can pull it out of the ground just doesn't seem sensible. We need to transition to solar, wind and geothermal if at all possible, no matter where global temperature is heading.

SaJ,
You'll be happy to know that population reduction measures are already underway and have been for quite some time. From the toxic foods we eat to the wars our masters wage - population reduction is in full effect.

The impact of CO2 levels on the warming climate is quite insignificant, as geological record shows a persistant 1500-year cycle of warming and cooling extending back at least one million years.

Regulation of CO2 emissions is pointless and counterproductive, in that no matter what kind of mitigation scheme is used, such regulation is hugely expensive.

i agree.

Okay so just maybe we have narrowly avoided an ice age but know the icecaps are melting and the sea levels are rising. If we don't start acting soon the sea levels will have risen by a metre by 2012 (where i live would be under water). I think that everyone could just do little things to cut down our greenhouse gas emmisions; eventhough they might be one of many factors causing global warming we should definetly try to do something. HEED THESE WORDS, IF WE DON'T DO SOMETHING WE ARE GOING TO FIND OUR SELVES IN ALOT OF TROUBLE-and my house will be underwater.

How cruel it might seem to be, the sun is dictating the proceedings of up- and downwards temperature condítions of the world, now as during all the time back in history. We can do nothing about this, so the smartest thing to do is to adjust to an ever changing ambient. At the same time, let´s be more sparingly using the fossil fuels just because burning carbon means release pollution gases, beside CO2, such as sulphuric acid etc, which lower the oceans´ pH. The immediate and urgent thing however is to reveal to the everyday people that the IPCC is a political body trying to prove that man is destroying our climate by giving off CO2, instead of scientifically looking into other explanations to the everchanging climate behaviour of the globe.

It is good that finally there is heathly criticism concerning IPCC applied partly-truths. Many conclutions in IPCC declarations are not based on the real facts. Many political decession has been made which are based on this IPCC truth, which seems to be the largest balloon in out time. Many people get payed just to keep the climate as it is. Propably the environment would be better if all those 2500 officers did not fly to Bali to discuss how to limit C02 and plane traffic. Also lots of not necessary energy is used and pollution is caused used to hold on to the climate.

I hope that also some money would be directed to dig out the real truth how to simulate and manipulate climate.

Note that the earths magnetic field decrease correlates with the melting of polar regions, which is very natural due to increase in radiation. There is only few studies.

The lure of science is the discovery stuff that was not previously known. The process
is expensive and time consuming. The endeavor forces economic constraints on the
supporting resources including the brain power trained to do science.

The growing preponderance of evidence indicates that the LARGE public and
“approved” private funding to support anthropogenic global warming theory is far out of
proportion to the yield. So disproportionately so, that there may be a different agenda
to the political and peer support than just a simple protection of scientific turf...another
argument for another time.

The hockey stick foundation for the “approved” theory of global warming lacks one
minor detail that is included with legitimate scientific work: a description of the
calculation method. Disclosure of the formula(s) and/or algorithm(s) used to derived
the graph is in order. Other literature on the subject states that the same statistical
legerdemain politely termed in this paper ADVANCED DATA SMOOTHING can be
used to turn a random data set into a hockey stick!

Michael Mann deserves the Bernard Madoff award.

Thanks to Kenneth Rundt for this assemblage of analysis with supporting research
and graphic presentation.

As an engineer and environmentalist I have been looking at this for a while now. I don't agree with human causing global warming. However it does not matter what anyone believes. If the computer models are correct radically reducing human causing CO2 will delay the global warming by a few years. Most think tanks in the world have concluded that diverting money into climate control is money wasted. There are far more pressing social and environmental concerns that need to be addressed but are getting little or no media attention because they are not as sexy as the world is coming to an end and it is all your fault. We will eventually naturally wean ourselves off oil and gas, we will not have a choice as the reserves dry up. Energy cost will go up and the standard of living of everyone on the planet will go down. Up until recently most of the planet has enjoyed low food and energy costs. We did have to put up with crappy air for quite a while but pollution control and non-leaded fuel have most cities breathing fairly decent air again. There is still more work to be done. Someone mentioned sulfur dioxide above and that is what is frustrating to me. We should be putting in controls to reduce sulfur and nitrous oxide emission but instead we are worrying about CO2 which make things grow. The Green movement has governments frothing at the mouth as a frightened population is asking to be taxed more to save the planet. More taxes will not save the planet just make you poorer.

The UN's IPCC since 1998 have spent 10 years trying to stick something on CO2 and have come up with zero.You have to feel for this most benign and beneficial of gases that it doesn't deserve such a witch hunt and attempt to bismirtch its name!

In the time the IPCC has conducted its fruitless search the following problems have arisen;
- ice core records improved showing Temperature led CO2 rise by 800yrs
- CO2's radiative forcing is limited not linear, and runs out of puff at 22ppm
- man only makes 2% (6 Giga Tons) of annual omissions, nature 98% (360 Giga Tons)
- CO2 makes up 0.038% of Earths atmosphere. How can a trace element move a mountain!
- water vapour and clouds make 95-98% of greenhouse gas warming
- temperatures 1940 to 2009 with little measureable warming despite a 30% rise in CO2
- radiosond measurements could not find any greenhouse gas signature 10km up in Earths atmosphere. The GG theory looked good on paper, but there is no actual evidence

Only a handfull of Governments (primarily European), all enviromental journalists and a smattering of scientists on the gravy train actually believe in this junk science. Even the Al Gore claim of there being "a consensus" is absolute rubbish.

There is no official listing or amasssing of scientists or survey ever been condcted to support the Nobel prize winning Mr Gores vacant words. In fact The Oregon Peitition now consists of 32,000 recorded scientists who regard his dodgy film an inconvenient lapse in scientific history that should be consigned to the garbage bin like Mr Gores claim to have invented the internet.

Man made global warming is exactly that. A man made theory of huff, puff and hot air and no scientific integrity. Time to cut off the funding to the IPCC and shut down the windbags

The UN's IPCC since 1998 have spent 10 years trying to stick something on CO2 and have come up with zero.You have to feel for this most benign and beneficial of gases that it doesn't deserve such a witch hunt and attempt to bismirtch its name!

In the time the IPCC has conducted its fruitless search the following problems have arisen;
- ice core records improved showing Temperature led CO2 rise by 800yrs
- CO2's radiative forcing is limited not linear, and runs out of puff at 22ppm
- man only makes 2% (6 Giga Tons) of annual omissions, nature 98% (360 Giga Tons)
- CO2 makes up 0.038% of Earths atmosphere. How can a trace element move a mountain!
- water vapour and clouds make 95-98% of greenhouse gas warming
- temperatures 1940 to 2009 with little measureable warming despite a 30% rise in CO2
- radiosond measurements could not find any greenhouse gas signature 10km up in Earths atmosphere. The GG theory looked good on paper, but there is no actual evidence

Only a handfull of Governments (primarily European), all enviromental journalists and a smattering of scientists on the gravy train actually believe in this junk science. Even the Al Gore claim of there being "a consensus" is absolute rubbish.

There is no official listing or amasssing of scientists or survey ever been condcted to support the Nobel prize winning Mr Gores vacant words. In fact The Oregon Peitition now consists of 32,000 recorded scientists who regard his dodgy film an inconvenient lapse in scientific history that should be consigned to the garbage bin like Mr Gores claim to have invented the internet.

Man made global warming is exactly that. A man made theory of huff, puff and hot air and no scientific integrity. Time to cut off the funding to the IPCC and shut down the windbags

The UN's IPCC since 1998 have spent 10 years trying to stick something on CO2 and have come up with zero.You have to feel for this most benign and beneficial of gases that it doesn't deserve such a witch hunt and attempt to bismirtch its name!

In the time the IPCC has conducted its fruitless search the following problems have arisen;
- ice core records improved showing Temperature led CO2 rise by 800yrs
- CO2's radiative forcing is limited not linear, and runs out of puff at 22ppm
- man only makes 2% (6 Giga Tons) of annual omissions, nature 98% (360 Giga Tons)
- CO2 makes up 0.038% of Earths atmosphere. How can a trace element move a mountain!
- water vapour and clouds make 95-98% of greenhouse gas warming
- temperatures 1940 to 2009 with little measureable warming despite a 30% rise in CO2
- radiosond measurements could not find any greenhouse gas signature 10km up in Earths atmosphere. The GG theory looked good on paper, but there is no actual evidence

Only a handfull of Governments (primarily European), all enviromental journalists and a smattering of scientists on the gravy train actually believe in this junk science. Even the Al Gore claim of there being "a consensus" is absolute rubbish.

There is no official listing or amasssing of scientists or survey ever been condcted to support the Nobel prize winning Mr Gores vacant words. In fact The Oregon Peitition now consists of 32,000 recorded scientists who regard his dodgy film an inconvenient lapse in scientific history that should be consigned to the garbage bin like Mr Gores claim to have invented the internet.

Man made global warming is exactly that. A man made theory of huff, puff and hot air and no scientific integrity. Time to cut off the funding to the IPCC and shut down the windbags

we dont know yet but from after studing and writing an essay i think that both its natrual and manmade

Hope the world is reading me. My point of view is that we only can try do things that seems to be good to reduce polution, population(through family planning stuff or like one time chinese one child policy), finding substitutes to oil consuming machines and so on, but whatever the outcome, it won't be enough to save things out. Humanity, if he's the real culprit, has taken hundreds fo years to put the earth in such a mess, I don't think it'll take few years to get it back to a "normal point". If bad things will happen to some part of the world first, small islands in oceans for example, due to the rise of the sea level I'm afraid there's not much we can do but try reducing bad factors and then wish for a miracle. For those who want to know, I live in a tiny island in the Indian Ocean, Mauritius, and our highest peak is at only 890 metres high. I'm no biologist, no geologist, no Al Gore either, this is just how I see it all.

you dont know what you are talking about!!!!!!!!

you dont know what you are talking about!!!!!!!!

You didn't answer the question!!!!!!!!!

You didn't answer the question!!!!!!!!!

In school I'm taking Earth Science and we're learning about the atmosphere. The other day our teacher was talking about global warming and i wondered what causes it or if it even exists for that fact.

Global warming has happen many times in the earths 4 billion years of life it was only 30 to 40 years ago that the people were preparing for and ice age now what are we preparing for?

404 reviews
Global warming has happen many times in the earths 4 billion years of life it was only 30 to 40 years ago that the people were preparing for and ice age now what are we preparing for?

i would like to know about: Proof that MAN didn’t cause global warming

Kevin....RELAX buddy. You would do well bo brush up on your math and do a little research about current rates of ocean rise. Currently they rise at approximately .3 MM per year which makes the rise per 100 years only 8 inches. By 2012, if you have a waterfront lot the water will rise there a whopping 0.24 inches or 1/4 inch.

By the way, temperature rise actually LEADS CO2 rise.....by about 800 years in fact. Just a little something Mr. Gore fails to mention in his movie and presentations. The first thing we should keep in mind is that the first word in the IPCC is "INTERGOVERNMENTAL"....It is a politically based and funded entity. Enough facts will come out in time....at some point the truly objective scientists will get on the ball, organize, gather real data, analyze it, and then properly market the real facts.

this article fucks

Whilst Mr Rundt's list of degrees and PhD's sounds impressive, does it ever say he is a climatologist? No. Does it even say he has ever studied climatology in his life? Again, no. This is like going to the optometrist and asking for his opinion on the health of your heart. Whether, he is right or wrong remains to be seen, but his opinion is no more noteworthy than anybody else's.

fgfjkjgjdgkngdkdgksdlskglklsngklkgngkdlkggskkgdklgklgdkgdsklngdslkngdlkngdslkngdslkngdslkngdklngdslknsdglknsgdklnsgd

Man made global warming is horsesh*t in my opinion.

I've watched the news today and the very thought that this group of political retards think they can control the climate by a matter of 2 degrees is just nonsense. There are far too many factors to take into consideration when looking at climate control and the reasons behind its changes.

Are we contributing to the problem? Possibly but not significantly. We don't output any where near as much C02 compared to the oceans, vegetation, volcanoes etc. And lets not forget the most effective greenhouse gas - water vapour. Is that my fault too?

I'm all for clean energy. I'm all for not relying on fossil fuels. I'll drive a hybrid if its in my interests to. But my message to the governments of the world is stop ramming this garbage in my face. I'm not stupid, what made you think I'd buy this nonsense.

PS. If you're that bothered about effecting the climate why did you all turn up in private jets and limos to the Copenhagen Conference? Hypocritical tosspots!

Man made global warming is horsesh*t in my opinion.

I've watched the news today and the very thought that this group of political retards think they can control the climate by a matter of 2 degrees is just nonsense. There are far too many factors to take into consideration when looking at climate control and the reasons behind its changes.

Are we contributing to the problem? Possibly but not significantly. We don't output any where near as much C02 compared to the oceans, vegetation, volcanoes etc. And lets not forget the most effective greenhouse gas - water vapour. Is that my fault too?

I'm all for clean energy. I'm all for not relying on fossil fuels. I'll drive a hybrid if its in my interests to. But my message to the governments of the world is stop ramming this garbage in my face. I'm not stupid, what made you think I'd buy this nonsense.

PS. If you're that bothered about effecting the climate why did you all turn up in private jets and limos to the Copenhagen Conference? Hypocritical tosspots!

As this feed rightly points out atmospheric water accounts for a significant percentage of global warming. Of course in burning hydrocarbons and cooling powerstations we are also adding water to the atmosphere, but this is at low altitude where the air is relatively warm and it quickly forms into large droplets and only acconts for a small amount of the earths natural water cycle.

To give you a feel for how powerful greenhouse gas water is - it takes around 10m of water to absorb sunlight - however it only takes 10 millionths of a metre (10um) of liquid water to absorb and trap the heat that is radiated back from the earth.

My concern is airliners produce around 6.3 Kg of water per nautical mile (1852m) travelled which is equivelent to a 10um film of water about 30cm wide. It doesn't sound much but it does that every 12 seconds of flight (equating around 629 square metres in total). This water is formed from very small ice particals around 1um diameter in air around -55 degrees celcius. Due to viscous drag it is likely to take such a small partical a long time to fall from airliner altitude 11700m down to 2500m where the particle can melt and form larger droplets.

this is all sum straighht up bullshit! get your facts straight Al gore is behind all this shit. Trust me I Kno Everthing

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL N00B

take your SUV pull it into your garage leave it running then count how long it takes you to croke,mulity by zillions.this is how long we all have

i think u npeople r stupid global warming isnt real go bac to skool and if ur in skool go bac to 1st grade loser hahahaha

i think u npeople r stupid global warming isnt real go bac to skool and if ur in skool go bac to 1st grade loser hahahaha

i think u npeople r stupid global warming isnt real go bac to skool and if ur in skool go bac to 1st grade loser hahahaha

Ok this didnt help me at all at school im doing a debate and this site was a waste of MY time!!!!!!

u suck, global warming sucks, this site sucks, anyone who believes in global warmign sucks, im so with u linny im doing a report 2, this site was a waste of my time. kdzjopig: correction:they shud go bak 2 peskool. maybe they need nap time hahaha

lol

bailey and me LOL =D fuck you all!!! XD

()======>

penis masters

UR ALL FART EATERS!!!

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooolllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll =D

/\
| |
\/

ohhhh yea

everyone so tell me is global warming caused by humans or not and give me clear info because im on a project!

not good
very bad
i hiaty it
alrelly bad
bad

i win the argument coz i no best its man made

i no more then you famo lol

so cool man
so cool

yeah i am cool thanks

hey ur gay u dick y u all arguing over 5 lines

hey ur gay u dick y u all arguing over 5 lines

boo