1) Is the average global temperature rising?
2) is a higher temperature (in and of itself) a bad thing?
3) Can CO2 cause a global temperature increase on its own?
4) Is CO2 the major cause of this temperature increase?
5) are we causing the increased CO2 levels (if there is one)?
6) is an increased CO2 level (on its own) a bad thing?
7) Assuming you can answer yes to all of the above, is there anything we can do now to reverse it?
Please do not refer me to an inconvenient truth as i%26#039;ve seen that and %26#039;the great global warming swindle%26#039; and remain unconvinced either way.
When answering please consider that we produce only 3% of the global co2 output each year and that any comparative data (CO2 vs temp) should go back to atleast the cretaceous period.
Ice cores were proved to be unreliable in 2007 as ice can absorb co2 hence why they show lower co2 concentrations in the past
6) is an increased CO2 level (on its own) a bad thing?
Firslty the greenhouse effect keeps the earth warm and is therefore a good thing. Co2 is essential for life on earth and is not a pollutant. higher co2 levels results in reduced stomata in plants, they grow faster and larger with more roots, they then require less water and can survive in harsher soils or dryer enviroments, this is why eygpyt was once fertile land during a previous warm period which was warmer than today. however, if co2 reached 1000ppm we would be in trouble as it would become hard to breathe!
7) Assuming you can answer yes to all of the above, is there anything we can do now to reverse it?
We have little impact on the climate and trying to tinker with it could be far worse than leaving things as they are. However, adding extra co2 to the atmosphere could have other side effects we have not yet realised. I think the important thing is to try and use more renewable energy sources rather than buring coal or oil regardless of whether co2 is an issue or not.
The following paper from the non-intergovernmental panel on climate change (NIPCC) explains the current science very well without bias and covers all the points I have mentioned:
http://www.sepp.org/publications/NIPCC_f...
2. When you get near 2C, definitely. That will cause massive coastal flooding, and disruptions to agriculture which will cost hundreds of billions to deal with.
3. Well, it needs the Sun. But, if the Sun%26#039;s radiation is constant (and data shows it pretty much is) CO2 MUST cause warming because of its%26#039; basic physical properties. It%26#039;s much like putting a blanket on the Earth.
4. Yes. It%26#039;s the biggest greenhouse gas on this graph.
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Ima...
5. Yes. Here it is.
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Ima...
The previous high level for more than 500,000 years was 300.
Scientists have proven the increase is due to us by using %26quot;isotopic ratios%26quot;.
http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...
6. Yes. See #3.
7. Yes. Reduce fossil fuel consumption by developing alternative energy and conserving energy.
2. The temperature in and of itself is not the biggest problem. It%26#039;s all those other things that it causes. Sea level rise, for example, can wipe out entire nations and make hundreds of millions more into refugees. At the same time, nearly everything you eat has evolved under lower temperatures than the climate we%26#039;re heading toward. Extinction and/or reduced planting range of significant food crops are things we should be looking at. Twenty angry people killed 3000 on 9/11; what can 500 million angry people do? No, it%26#039;s not the end of the world. But it might easily be dystopia. Think %26quot;Mad Max%26quot; but without the cars.
3. Yes. (Although CO2 can also cause global temperature increase as a feedback from other initial causes, due to ocean-atmospheric feedback.) We know CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) are primarily responsible for the rise because of two %26quot;smoking gun%26quot; evidences that are proof of increasing greenhouse effect: (1) global stratospheric temperatures have been cooling over the last 50 years as surface temps are rising. This can only mean that heat is being trapped at the surface, which is a smoking gun for increased greenhouse effect. Here%26#039;s the data:
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/images...
http://hadobs.metoffice.com/hadat/hadat2...
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/temp/sterin...
(2) Nighttime temperatures are rising faster than daytime temps, inicating that a reduction in nighttime cooling is the major driver of the observed warming. Again, this is a %26quot;smoking gun%26quot; for increased greenhouse effect. Here%26#039;s the data:
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/gcag/GCAGdealte...
4. Yes. Here%26#039;s a chart showing relative contributions.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3248/2705...
5. Yes, there is a CO2 rise; here%26#039;s a graph of CO2 during the last 10,000 years:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3006/2615...
... and yes, we are causing the CO2 rise. Beyond the obvious sharp increase in atmospheric CO2 that coincides with the industrial revolution, isotopic analysis of atmospheric CO2 shows increasing amounts of %26quot;old%26quot; carbon combined with %26quot;young%26quot; oxygen. Here%26#039;s the science:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984JGR......
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/mk...
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/ab...
6. Not necessarily, but again the effects are the killer; see #2 above.
7. Yes. We need to stop buring fossil fuels and begin relying on non-fossil energy sources. That means more nuclear, more wind, more biomass and more solar. Existing coal-fired power plants need immediate retrofitting with simple, cheap filters to remove CO2 from the air. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/200... The CO2 captured that way needs to be sequestered in environmentally benign ways that keep it out of the global carbon cycle for long periods of time. All this is possible, and not even terribly difficult. It requires only political will.
2. During the medieval warm period (820 – 1040 AD), Greenland supported farming. Those areas previously farmed are now covered in glaciers. Obviously the melting and reformation of glaciers is a cyclical occurrence.
3. The earth experienced a little ice age which ended around the late 1860%26#039;s or so. This is about the time man started recording temperatures. This would be like measuring a lake depth after a severe drought, then worrying about it flooding as it rose to normal levels.
4. The earth has been warming for the last 18,000 years, since the last major glacier time period. During this time frame, the glaciers have been melting at a fairly consistent rate. Also, for most of the last 1 billion years, the earth had NO glaciers or ice coverage.
http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/i...
5. The AGW theory states that CO2 is the primary driver of temperature. They arrived at this idea because they did not know of anything else which could cause it. But during the 70%26#039;s and during the current decade, temperatures dropped while CO2 continued to rise. This means that natural occurrences are driving temp, not CO2.
6. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation and sun spots provides a much better correlation to earths%26#039; temperature than CO2 levels ever have.
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/200...
http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/...
7. Polar Bears are experiencing a population boom. Coke sales in the arctics are through the roof. Polar Bears have been around for thousands of years, and remember, we are only at the average for the last 2,000 years. They lived through all the previously warmer climates. The original picture of 2 bears on a floating ice block was a complete scam. The photographer explained that the bears were in no danger and close to shore. The picture was lifted from a public PC by another passenger and sent around the world.
8. Many glaciers are expanding. Even Antarctica is growing on 98% of is land mass. Only 2% is melting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1...
9. There is no consensus on AGW. This was a lie that has been propagated by the media.
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...
10. Yes we emit CO2 into the atmosphere and it is a greenhouse gas, but, we only contribute about .28% of all the greenhouse effect. Water vapor makes up about 95% of the greenhouse effect. CO2 and other trace gases round out the greenhouse gases at about 5% for all of them. Of that 5%, only 3% is CO2, and most of that is natural. Again, our contribution to the greenhouse effect is a paltry .28%
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenh...
11. The spread of disease is not attributed mainly to temperature. If this were the case, Florida would be a giant festering disease ridden cesspool. Economic standing is the primary determining factor in the spread of disease. Poor cultures can not fight the disease or eradicate the pests like more successful nations.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB12077886...
12. Natural climate disasters (hurricanes, cyclones, etc) have never been scientifically linked to global warming (whether natural or man made).
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppa...