We know it%26#039;s warming, and we%26#039;ve measured how much:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science...
Scientists have a good idea how the Sun and the Earth%26#039;s natural cycles and volcanoes and all those natural effects change the global climate, so they%26#039;ve gone back and checked to see if they could be responsible for the current global warming. What they found is:
Over the past 30 years, all solar effects on the global climate have been in the direction of (slight) cooling, not warming. This is during a very rapid period of global warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/62902...
http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/pro...
A recent study concluded:
“the range of [Northern Hemisphere]-temperature reconstructions and natural forcing histories…constrain the natural contribution to 20th century warming to be %26lt;0.2°C [less than one-third of the total warming]. Anthropogenic forcing must account for the difference between a small natural temperature signal and the observed warming in the late 20th century.”
http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/104...
You can see this in the third graph here, where the dotted lines are just from natural causes, and the full lines are natural + human causes:
http://www.pnas.org/content/vol104/issue...
If that’s not enough to convince you the Sun isn’t responsible, consider the fact that no scientific study has ever attributed more than one-third of the warming over the past 30 years to the Sun, and most attribute just 0-10% to the Sun.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...
So the Sun certainly isn%26#039;t a large factor in the current warming. They%26#039;ve also looked at natural cycles, and found that we should be in the middle of a cooling period right now.
%26quot;An often-cited 1980 study by Imbrie and Imbrie determined that %26#039;Ignoring anthropogenic and other possible sources of variation acting at frequencies higher than one cycle per 19,000 years, this model predicts that the long-term cooling trend which began some 6,000 years ago will continue for the next 23,000 years.%26#039;%26quot;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitc...
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/ab...
So it%26#039;s definitely not the Earth%26#039;s natural cycles. They looked at volcanoes, and found that
a) volcanoes cause more global cooling than warming, because the particles they emit block sunlight
b) humans emit over 150 times more CO2 than volcanoes annually
http://volcano.und.edu/vwdocs/Gases/man....
So it%26#039;s certainly not due to volcanoes. Then they looked at human greenhouse gas emissions. We know how much atmospheric CO2 concentrations have increased over the past 50 years:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mauna...
And we know from isotope ratios that this increase is due entirely to human emissions from burning fossil fuels. We know how much of a greenhouse effect these gases like carbon dioxide have, and the increase we%26#039;ve seen is enough to have caused almost all of the warming we%26#039;ve seen over the past 30 years (about 80-90%). You can see a model of the various factors over the past century here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Clima...
This is enough evidence to convince almost all climate scientists that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming. 42% 5 Votes
There is a lot of science behind our understanding of global warming:
http://norvig.com/oreskes.html
The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.
There%26#039;s a long history behind that science as well:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.h...
these scientific organizations, who all say that we%26#039;re causing the warming and that we have reason to be concerned:
NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
American Institute of Physics (AIP)
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
American Meteorological Society (AMS)
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academié des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Scientists have pointed out that due to drought we could lose access to water and power from Hoover Dam in the 6-13 year timeframe, the Pentagon has planned a scenario for food riots and global anarchy in as little as 16 years, the glacial source of the Ganges could be gone in about 30 years, and given accelerated melting observed since the last IPCC report was written, sea level rise could be several meters by 2100 (not the 40cm predicted in the IPCC report).
Maybe you have more information than all these scientists. 8% 1 Vote
contains a useful Summary For Policy Makers.
2) 41 years working for the UK government departments for food agriculture and environment. 0% 0 Votes 0% 0 Votes
The whole global warming scam was devised to make $$$ for some and to stroke egos for others (ie. Gore).
The Earth will warm ...... or Cool.....with or without man. 33% 4 Votes
