global warming / climate question!?
493390
Hi,\n\nThis is a fairly complex topic. The basic idea is that because H2O(18) is heavier than H2O(16), it has a higher heat of vaporization.  So, H2O(16) evaporates faster, and as evaporation occurs, the H2O(18)/H2O(16) ratio will decrease for the atmosphere and increase in the water.\n\nThe warmer the water is, the smaller the difference in evaporation rates. So, the ratio of H2O(18)/H2O(16) in atmospheric water vapor is a good indicator of ocean temperature. This becomes relevant for climate change research because that ratio is 'captured' when atmospheric water vapor falls as Arctic (or Antarctic) snow.  By taking an ice core and examining the H2O(18)/H2O(16) ratio of different samples, we can estimate the global temperature at the time that ice froze. This is one of the so-called paleothermometers used to reconstruct the earth's climate history.
162363
Global warming is an increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans. The term is also used for the scientific theory of anthropogenic global warming, which attributes much of the recently observed and projected global warming to a human-induced intensification of the greenhouse effect.
940416
C for sure.\nMy but didn't this question get some folks hot and bothered. \nMay I point out that yes the plants are using the co2. Meanwhile, we silly homo saps are, while busily pumping hydrocarbons and co2 into the atmosphere, blithely burning down, chopping down and otherwise doing away with rain forests in South America. We are also draining swamps in Florida and filling them in to build houses, hacking down forests in Africa and other countries for the same reason.  All that means less of those nice green plants to absorb all that CO2.\nNow it is possible that we are just in a between glaciation warm spell. But even if we are, there is still the possibility of pushing that warm up over the edge into something we might not be able to survive.
24166
Global warming\nFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit\nJump to: navigation, search\n \nGlobal mean surface temperatures 1856 to 2004 \nMean temperature anomalies during the period 1995 to 2004 with respect to the average temperatures from 1940 to 1980Global warming is an increase in the average temperature of the Earth's atmosphere and oceans. The term is also used for the more specific scientific theory of anthropogenic global warming, which states that much of the recent observed (and projected) global warming is human-induced and the result of a strengthened greenhouse effect caused by man-made increases in carbon dioxide (through the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation) and other greenhouse gases. The natural greenhouse effect keeps the Earth 30 °C warmer than it otherwise would be; adding carbon dioxide to an atmosphere, with no other changes, will make a planet's surface warmer. Current research tries to uncover more details, e.g. about positive and negative feedback mechanisms, to allow a more precise quantification of the effects of global warming.\n\nTemperature change is just one aspect of the broader subject of (human-induced) climate change. The scientific opinion on climate change, as expressed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and explicitly endorsed by the national science academies of the G8 nations, is that the average global temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and that "most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities". A small minority of qualified scientists contest the view that humanity's actions have played a significant role in increasing recent temperatures. Uncertainties do exist regarding how much climate change should be expected in the future, and a hotly contested political and public debate exists over what actions, if any, should be taken in light of global warming.\n\nBased on basic science, observational sensitivity studies, and the climate models referenced by the IPCC, temperatures may increase by 1.4 to 5.8 °C between 1990 and 2100 [1]. This is expected to result in other climate changes including rises in sea level and changes in the amount and pattern of precipitation. Such changes may increase extreme weather events such as floods, droughts, heat waves, and hurricanes, change agricultural yields, or contribute to biological extinctions. Although warming is expected to affect the frequency and magnitude of these events, it is very difficult to connect any particular event to global warming.
76539
You are absolutely right. It is a cycle.  We last had global cooling around 1650AD.  Did you know that water vapor has more of an effect on global warming than CO2?  In fact 2/3 of the increase in CO2 levels occurred way before we even started burning the fossil fuels!!\n   The good man above me is right that ice ages occur more often than 2 million years. In fact the last "little ice age" occurred around the Maunder minimum which forced the Vikings off of Greenland.  He is right about the sun spot activity too.\n   Wow this is very encouraging that other people have the true facts and aren't being fooled.\n   Did you know that about 99% of the weathermen think like we do?  Only problem is you have to go with the flow to get any funding these days.
1008228
Ok, I don't know why everyone has to be so rude. I wrote a paper on global warming and it was a real bear, so I feel your pain. It's not the easy issue you'd think, especially if you're trying to examine both sides of the issue. The media treats global warming like it's just a fact, while in reality global warming is a theory, one with many facets and holes. I'm not saying that it's not correct, but there are many unanswered questions. \n\nHere's some real help for you:\nhttp://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/index.html\nhttp://www.globalwarming.org/\nhttp://www.climatehotmap.org/\nhttp://weather.about.com/cs/globalwarming/index.htm\n\nPapers worthy of reading:\n\nBliese, John R. E., (2001) Facts and Myths about Global Warming: A Conservative Perspective. The Green Elephant Magazine, Summer Edition, 2001\n\nHoughton, Sir John (1997). Global Warming: The Complete Briefing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA.\n\nIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), (2001). Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, Technical Summary.\n\nSinger, Fred (2003). Global Warming: Fact or Myth. Environmental Defense, CapMAG, Washington, D.C.\n\n\nWhen you get around to finishing your paper, check out www.wordtechs.com for help proofing and polishing it to an "A."\n\nBest wishes,\n~Tia~\nYahoo Brainiac\nhttp://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/asktheplanet/brain.html
881026
Actually, global warming would lead to stronger storms which make larger hail. I think this idea you have said about hail decreasing in size over time is wrong because it doesn't make much sense.
639674
global warming per second celcius?
145826
It really sucks.  I just watched a report on 60 Minutes about this subject and we are in deep trouble.  They showed a picture of the arctic in 1979 and one just taken six months ago.  It is unbelievable how much ice has melted in just 26 years.  The most noted authority on this catastrophe said that even if we were to stop putting greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, it wouldn't change the fact that our global temperature will still rise.  It probably wouldn't rise quite as fast, but it will still happen because of all the gases we have already emitted.  We can only sove this problem collectively as a human race and not separately as nations.
105681
Wow, I am totally at a loss to understand what you are asking. \n\nGlobal warming is not due to carbon dioxide? \n\nYou can easily calculate how much warmer the earth is because of the presence of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in its atmosphere, compared to a black body at 1 AU from the sun (about 33 degrees C). Without global warming, mainly due to carbon dioxide and water vapor in the air, the earth would be MUCH colder. \n\nAnd you are correct that carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas. There are many more. Such as water vapor and CFCs and HFCs and nitrous oxide and methane and so on. But CO2 does contribute, a lot. \n\nWe can't see light in a vacuum? Well I guess if I passed light through a vacuum I would not see it until it bounced off something. But if I was in the vacuum and the light went into my eye, then I would see it. I just don't understand your statement. \n\nAnd I have no idea what those two statements have to do with the first question about scientists and quizzes.
1139832
global warming omg end of the world  lol
982
Global warming has two main applications. The first is that there are certain gases that trap heat in the atmosphere, warming planets. This is known to take place on Venus, Earth, and the gas giants. Earth is the hospitable place that it is because of global warming.\n\nThis takes place because of greenhouse gases, which allow radiation from the sun to pass through the atmosphere and warm the surface of the earth. The surface then re-radiates this energy back towards space in the infrared spectrum. This energy would escape and our planet would be as cold as the moon, were it not for the greenhouse gases (mainly CO2, ozone, methane, and water vapor). They absorb the infrared energy and radiate it back to earth, increasing the overall amount of radiation hitting the earth's surface, keeping it warm day and night.\n\nThat this takes place is clear and indisputable. There is simply too little energy coming from the sun to account for our planet's temperature. The controversial point is when global warming is applied to the current rise in average global temperature that has taken place over the past 50 so years. Most scientists believe that warming of the planet is due to increases in greenhouse gases, mainly CO2, mainly due to human activities on earth.
706254
ok now here is some truth for you. Global warming is a THEORY nothing more, it has not been proven. an ALL the scientists do not agree. more than half do not agree and because of that they do not get media coverage. That is why all you hear is global warming on the news because it gets ratings. Many, many scientists agree this is a phase, the earth has wamring periods and cooling periods, we just now are getting out of a cooling period. every here of the "year without a summer" in the 1770's. that was the height of the cooling period. if you look back further in the 1300's it was hotter then, than it is now according to historical evidence. Volcanoes produce almost 10 times the green house gasses then humans produce per year. Nature is not this fragiel little thing like all the libs want you to believe, its very tough and adaptive it recycles many of the wastes we produce but also many of the wastes itself produces which in comparison to ours is infintismal. I agree we should not be reckless and find better, cleaner and more efficient ways to do things. If you want the truth, yes global warming is true, the "globe" is "warming" but not because of the Dodge Diesel you drive, but because its a cycle and in a few centuries it will begin to cool again. Most people here never heard of what these very same scientists were saying in the 70's. the same people screaming about global warming were do the same thing about "global cooling" in the 1970's and some suggested we put coal soot on the ice caps to gather heat from the sun to melt them. Look it up, its true. So before you goes starting going nuta about this global warming farse, do your homework instead of believing everything you hear on the ratings driven news everynight.
33842
I have an MS in paleoclimatology, and I have to say that it is one of the most fascinating topics Ive ever delved into.  It's also amusing to see non-scientist's responses here and on other message boards!\n\nIf you wanted to ask a scientist, you would have to define what you mean when you say "ice age."  There are varying degrees of "ice ages."  For brevity sake, I will assume you mean the relatively cold periods that last approximately 100,000 years that have dominated global climate for the last 2 million years.  Contrary to popular belief, there are periods during the "ice ages" that are almost as warm as today.\n\nBased on paleoclimate evidence that suggest the ice ages have come and gone at least six times in the last 2 million years, the probability is that it will occur again.\n\nThe difficult and possibly dramatic question is: when?  Seeing as though the last "ice age" generally ended about 12,000 years ago (this is debatable, since there is no one date where everywhere across the globe it suddenly became warm), and the average interglacial is 10,000 years, we are overdue.\n\nConsider the widely accepted hypothesis that "global warming"--whether it be natural, human-induced, or a combination--can ultimately (Ill spare you the details) lead to an ice age.  Melting polar sea ice, indicator species dying off in the tropics, large disintigrations of ice shelves in the Antarctic, estimations that global sea level may rise 4 inches in the next 100 years, "wild" weather in many parts of the US...  are these all tell-tale signs that we have already begun down the road to the next glacial period?!?!?\n\nNew-ish data suggest that past climates have changed rapidly--like someone else mentioned either in this thread or another similar one--several degrees Celsius in a matter of decades or less!  The great ice sheets that once reached as far south as Long Island and Iowa wont reappear for tens of thousands of years, but it could get chilly across much of the country real quick!  And possibly as soon as 2020!
234985
It is clear that we are in a period of Global Warming.  The average temperatures are rising.  That is a fact.\n\nIf you mean, are we suffering from a man-made global warming, that is a tougher question.  A lot of experts have debated this and disagree.  Here in Florida, we have had two really bad hurricane seasons in a row, and a lot of people are scared that this is because of "Global Warming" but the experts at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric agency are reporting record warm temperatures and at the same time are downplaying the man-made causes by saying there is no "proof"\n\nAn interesting thing that may happen is that Europe may go through a mini ice age because of this warming.  There is an oceanic conveyor belt that helps distribute heat throughout the world.  This belt ends up in the Artic near Europe.  When the polar ice caps melt, there is an influx of fresh water that changes the salinity in the ocean up there.  This breaks that belt and so the warmth stays in the other portions of the globe.  There was a great special on this a couple of months ago on the History channel.\n\nI don't know if we are causing the Global Warming, but I do know that we are trashing our environment and we should be a lot better consumers so that our children and grand children will have a vibrant and healthy world to live in!
976022
Argue about Global Warming by showing a chart of the temperature rising, but also show a shart of the average temperatures in the world 100,000 years ago, and argue if Global Warming is something to worry about.\n...because years ago, there was a warming trend alot, and a cooling trend which produced ice ages.
1107357
Global warming caused by humans is a myth.  It has been debunked by scientist after scientist.  The reason the earth is in a "warming cycle" (the temp on earth has risen 1 degree in the last 100 years..1 DEGREE) is because the sun is hotter.  \n\nThe environment is the new "religion" of the left, both in America and abroad. They don't believe in God and hate America.