Do you think we should have more evidence that greenhouse warming is real before taking actions?
89233
There is enough evidence as it is. It is happening, and the reasons may be natural (interglacials, etc) or man-made (which would be, ultimately, "natural" too), but that doesn't matter because the effects are altering the world right now. \nI think the people who always advocate for "more evidence" and "further consideration" instead of real action about pollution issues are those interested in their immediate benefits. I guess they want to buy more time to continue earning their profits, or maybe they think that anything we can do is useless. \nThe Kyoto protocol has been around for a while now, and guess which countries have been refusing to compromise?
1113639
Global Warming is a myth
695617
It is a very convincing story.  The reason they talk about it as 'truth' is because the general public is not very keen on hypothesis and theory, they just don't understand.\n\nHere is the reasons why it is so convining:\n\nCO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.\n\nLook at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest, and 2006 is shaping up to maybe break that record.\n(see links below)\n\nHow's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.\n\nThere has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.\n\nYes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up. \n\nJust to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.\n\nHI CO2: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm\nHOCKEY STICK: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm\nGeneral climate stuff: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm
965098
I believe this methodological approach compares data from observation of natural phenomena, rather than controlled experiments, to make a credible claim. It may not be feasible, legal, or ethical to do certain experiments, so you basically have to look at what's happening in nature to infer conclusions. Maybe try looking up 'natural experiment' or 'comparative method?'
669321
I think that the process is called the greenhouse effect.
1019295
Global warming is happening, make no mistake about it.  This natural cycle that we're going through seems to be accelerating.  Is it due to humans?  Quite possibly.  Can we do anything about it?  Maybe, but will it have a dramatic effect?  Who knows.\nNobody in their right mind believes we are going to "destroy" the planet.  At worst we'll just make it uninhabitable.
226332
It is happening... look at all the data. However, I think that "greenhouse gases" are a little overplayed as the scape goat... we ARE coming out of an ice age, after all.
818375
It's hard to predict a date that we will all die, but problems are already happening.\n\nCO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.\n\nLook at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest.\n(see links below)\n\nHow's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.\n\nThere has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.\n\nYes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up. \n\nJust to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.\n\nHI CO2: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm\nHOCKEY STICK: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm\nGeneral climate stuff: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm
627728
The fact that the globe has been slowly warming up ever since the last ice age should be reason enough to suspect that global warming isn't at all a catastrophe.  We people on Earth really need to start looking to other problems like natural resources.
675468
Not really but in fact the bigger problem is not CO2 but CO. Never the less you know that CO2 levels have suffer a cycle since the beginning earth however since the Industrial revolution they climbed hugely the climate has already changed. At least in my part of the planet it is hotter generally I notice it, my parents did and my friends in general, but it is the older people that notice it the most. The climate is cyclic, sometimes it makes things from 100 to 100 years and at the beginning one thought it might be that but it’s not it’s really a matter of global warming. (I am portuguese to now more about the fire in summer consult the web or see it in CNN in the summer), it is real and it is now
863668
Global warming is NOT a "natural thing."\nYes, our planet all on its own, for various reasons, does go through cycles of warmer and cooler temperatures.\nHowever, in the last 150 years we have added many billions of tons of carbon in various forms (carbon dioxide in the air is the biggest problem) to the planet's ecosphere -- more than any "natural" cause in the history of the earth.  \nI very much want to leave a habitable planet to my children, so they can do the same for theirs.  That means reducing humans' artificial climate changes which are causing a runaway greenhouse effect -- which is NOT natural.\n\nThe earth isn't going to "die" naturally for another 4.5 BILLION years or so -- why are you so relaxed about moving that deadline up by 4.9999 billion years?\n\n"only" girl -- it's not a theory, it's well proven.  You should keep up with science.
1145738
Global warming is really a fact that should be considered serious.\n\nQuestion:\n1. Don’t you feel the atmospheric temperatures around you are higher than the past?\nSupporting Fact:\nAt least there is slight increase in it. Factor: rise of few Celsius degrees in temp.\n\nQuestion:\n2. Is not the fact spoken about glaciers being melted down to water, thus increasing the sea levels drastically? \nSupporting Fact:\nIslands like Maldives are at risk!\n\nQuestion:\n3. The emission of so many vehicles, factories using fossil fuels is simply great evidence for this cause, yet there are many other factors to be mentioned. \nSupporting Facts:\nCarbon Dioxides, Carbon Monoxide are certain (green house gasses) harmful elements released to the open air. These gasses are not engaged in the purification act, supported by the greenery (Trees), due to reducing population. In result these harmful gasses break the ratios of 20% or so Oxygen content in the atmosphere, and may cause serious damages to human life.\n\nAll these consequences will lead to one place, that’s called the “Climate Change”. Then we’ll really remember the days we were merely talking about Global Warming!\n\nSuggestion: watch the theatrical block buster film, “The Day After Tomorrow” for some knowledge about the situation.\n\nWish You All the Best!\nGood Luck!\n\nand check the link below, i couldn't go through it at a stretch.
943646
We don't need to counter the greenhouse effect. Global warming is caused by the Sun, not by anything that we are doing. and we cannot prevent it. We need to make realistic plans to move our cities inland, not to waste time trying to prevent it.\n\nAttributing global warming to human causes is political hype, exploited by unscrupulous people who want to gain fame without having to do anything to earn it and influence without being responsible to anybody in their use of it.\n\n13 NOV 06, 0323 hrs, GMT.
338217
Finally someone has come to their senses.  The problem with "global warming" is that you can't prove or test anything!  Its all in theory.   Check some of these sites and read the Crichton novel "State of Fear".
142525
I have no doubt about the fact that the planet is warming up. But it has warmed up and cooled down throughout the history of the planet. It even did this before humans were around. Who was to blame for it then? Nature, same as today. More greenhouse gases are released by natural means (without human involvement) each year than what humans have contributed over the last 10 years.
806892
The 'debate' is in the media only.  The data only supports human-caused Global Warming.  It has nothing to do with political party IF you actually look at the data like a scientist.\n\nCO2 is 30% higher than it has been for 650,000 years. Methane is 130% greater. These are two of the main pollutants humans put into the atmosphere in excess, and they are two of the primary greenhouse gases.\n\nLook at the 'hockeystick', which shows a dramatic warming since 1950 after a fairly stable climate for 1000 years. In fact, the 10 hottest years in recorded history have all happened since 1990, with 2005 being the hottest, and 2006 is shaping up to maybe break that record.\n(see links below)\n\nHow's that for proof of man's fault in this? There is ample proof, any real scientist will tell you that.\n\nThere has NEVER been an article doubting man's influence on global warming published in a peer-reviewed journal. A recent study of almost 1000 proved that.\n\nYes, the earth naturally heats and cools, but the rate and amount we are warming now is unprecedented in the recent geologic past. We are doing this, and we must stop it. This is not some political statement or rhetoric. This is science trying to educate a crass, ignorant public of the damage they are doing. The magnitude of temperature increase ALREADY is about 10x that of the 'little ice age' of the middle ages, and rate and amount are only going up. \n\nJust to be clear, glacial and interglacial cycles are mainly controlled by astronomical fluctuations, but we have a detailed record of the last 7 cycles, and what the climate and CO2 is doing now is way different and extreme. The rate of increase is much higher than in the past AND the value itself is much higher.\n\nHI CO2: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4467420.stm\nHOCKEY STICK: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5109188.stm\nGeneral climate stuff: \nhttp://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3897061.stm
722880
All of the following sites allow that global warming is a reality. What makes them somewhat refreshing is that they do not automatically assume man is the cause of global warming (they do not dismiss it, either) and attempt to objectively pursue all sides of the argument.\n\nhttp://test.weathereye.org/expert/warming/\nhttp://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=942400#post942400\nhttp://www.gcrio.org/ipcc/qa/index.htm\nhttp://www.gcrio.org/ocp99/toc.html\nhttp://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/Index.jsp\nhttp://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/globalwarming/paleostory.html\nhttp://www.marshall.org/subcategory.php?id=9\n\nHope this helps!