In your opinion do you think there is such a thing as Global Warming?
450642
Absolutely.  Interestingly enough, though, there is also such a thing as particle refraction.  This is the pollution particles (mostly sulfates) in the air forming droplets and mixing with clouds.  These smaller particles reflect more light than unpolluted drops, therefore refracting much light and warmth from the earth.  This is referred to as global dimming.  Global dimming actually helps to balance out the global warming.  If we were to somehow end all particle pollution, then the earth would warm at a faster rate.  Without the global warming, the particle pollution would eventually freeze us out.  Therefore, if we end either process of pollution, we must end both or the earth will suffer grave consequences.  If you want more proof of global warming, investigate the hurricane trend of the last few years.  We have had an increase in the frequency of hurricanes because the ocean waters are warmer--check National Geographic, I remember an article in August or September of last year.
732590
I feel they will continue unless addressed global warming problems are acted upon as apposed to just being talked about.\nI feel worse weather is yet to come. Since I am not omniscient, I cannot guarantee these things will happen but it is my assumption they will?
1093830
Here's something to dwell on:\n\nGlobal Warming has become a religion run by fanatics reminiscent of the leaders of the darkest days of the Inquisition that nearly destroyed civil society only a few hundred years ago. We are not to question the great god of Global Warming. Those who do are separated from civil society and labeled as heretics. \n\nThe simple truth is there is no scientific consensus on Global Warming. In fact, as the media frenzy screams global warming, there are a growing number of scientists who are expressing their doubts.  In 1992, just prior to the UN’s Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, 425 scientists and other intellectual leaders signed The Heidelberg Appeal, a quiet call for reason in dealing with the climate change issue, which expressed a conviction that modern society is the best equipped in human history to solve the world’s ills, provided that they do not sacrifice science, intellectual honesty and common sense to political opportunism and irrational fears. Today, the Heidelberg Appeal has been signed by more than 4,000 scientists and leaders from 100 countries, including more than 70 Nobel Prize winners.\n\nAlso in 1992, another statement from some 47 atmospheric scientists was issued saying greenhouse global warming theories derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. The statement went on to say, "We are disturbed that activists, anxious to stop energy and economic growth, are pushing ahead with drastic policies without taking notice of recent changes in the underlying science."\n\nIn 1995, over 85 scientists and climate experts from research labs and universities worldwide, signed the Leipzig Declaration. In part it says, "In a world in which poverty is the greatest social pollutant, any restriction on energy use that inhibits economic growth should be viewed with caution. For these reasons, we consider ‘carbon taxes’ and other drastic control policies – lacking credible support from the underlying science – to be ill-advised, premature, wrought with economic danger, and likely to be counterproductive."\n\nIn 1997, a Gallop Poll of eminent North American climatologists shows that 83% did not support the claims of the green house theory of Global Warming.  In 1998, The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) issued a petition for signature by atmospheric scientists saying there is no scientific evidence indicating that greenhouse gases cause global warming. That petition was signed by more than 17,000 scientists and leaders involved in the issue. \n\nGlobal Warming scaremongers have tried to discredit these statements from the opposition, saying either they are too old to be counted in today’s debate or that they weren’t signed by real scientists. Neither is true. One only has to look at the signers on the documents and statements to know who and what they are. The relevance of the documents can be answered in two ways. First, most of the signers of these documents from the 1990’s hold the same positions today. Second, as is the fallacy in the Global Warming debate, such drastic climate changes, as described by scaremongers, would not come about overnight. Though the proponents would have you believe otherwise, 15 years is but a microsecond in the study of the earth’s activities.\n\nHowever, there is great question about the validity of the documents promoted by the Global Warming crowd. In May 1996, unannounced and possibly unauthorized changes to the United Nation’s report on climate change touched off a firestorm of controversy within the scientific community. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change the science group that advises the United Nations on the global warming issue, presented a draft of its report in December 1995, and it was approved by the delegations. However, when the printed report appeared in May 1996, it was discovered that substantial changes and deletions had been made to the report to make it conform to the P
716969
Correct. The man's a nut case - global warming is mainly from his hot air, but is otherwise a myth.
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.
617090
Global warming is definately a huge issue.  I don't think any countries are enacting on this issue currently
806691
Global Warming is taking place, and I am not so sure it is just the people who are the culprits of this catastrophic event. There are much deeper reasons for this phenomenon that is taking place. We may be contributing to this problem. But  we alone aren't the only contributing factors. Scientists are studying this, and they have other theories. Reverse polarities may be taking place. \nPersonally, I think that because the Earth spins slightly off its axis, thus it has a wobble, and the Earth is coming to a stop. The sun is a powerful force, and as the Earth slows, sun's effects upon us are becoming more and more prolific. Cancer is more prevalent than ever before, for just one example. \nYes, Global Warming is happening, and I don't know if we are really able to stop it, or how much we contribute to the problem. We may be speeding up the process, but I don't think we are completely to blame.
997939
In this enviroment of Global Warming I would say not. Cold is not cool any more, warming is hot.
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.
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".
282103
Is the book you read "State of Fear"?\n\nYou can debate this all you want, but you wont get anywhere until you define 'global warming.'  I think I wrote a long-winded explanation in another answer, so search for that.\n\nThe long and the short of it is:\n\n1.  The Earth goes through natural warming and cooling, based on a HUGE range of varying natural processes, from changes in orbital paramaters to changes in sea ice thickness in polar regions.  It has done this since there were oceans and an atmosphere, and will always continue.\n\n2.  Humans have influenced certain properties of the atmosphere and hydrosphere that may be contributing to accelerated warming (ozone depletion, increased levels of 'greenhouse' gases, etc).  Since we dont know if the Earth would be warming anyway, we cant definitively say that a current warming trend is related to human influence (but its a good bet).\n\n3.  Global warming trends are difficult to understand.  As a paleoclimatologist, I dont even understand it.  I dont know where the temperature data has been collected, the spatial distribution of the data points, I dont know what the temperatures are being compared to (the Earth has been much warmer at times in the past), I dont know if the scientists who tabulate the data are being influenced by something other than true science, etc.\n\nBottom line is that its a VERY VERY complex problem.  Unfortunately, the more data that are generated, the more complex and vague the answer will become, and the more people will become divided over the interpretation of the data.\n\nIt would be wise to minimize our impact on the climate system (or any Earth system for that matter) as best we can, no matter what the answer is.  The more interesting question is: when will the next 'ice age' begin, if it hasnt already?!?!?
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.
843194
No, temperatures are going up due to Global Warming.\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
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!
537292
No and yes. \n\nWith regards to un-educated and mis-informed rubbish that goverments tell us that global warming is an artifact of human activity on this planet no I do not. Global warming is a topic which for the last thirty years or so has been 'fashionable' to study. If you look it at this way, the Earth is approx 4 to 6 billions years old and we are only studying the past few centuries. To me this is not even a dot on the Earths timescale so how can we possibly deduce mans influence on the climate. The climate of the earth is changing constantly. What we recognise as the four seasons; sping, summer, autumn (fall) and winter have only been in existance for the past few million years!\n\nAlthough some scientists have looked at the recent erosion of the ozone, they fail to see the bigger picture and take into account the varying orbit the planet has around the sun, its tilt and wobble (see link below for info on the Milankovitch Theory). They also fail to recognise in they're studies the gravitational pull of the earths core and the movement of the fluids contained within. Additionally the 'hotspots' or 'solar flares' on the sun are not taken into account when global warming is discussed, of which also effects our climate.
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.
435454
I watched a show on the history channel last night and it talked about "darkening" From what I heard it still balances nature. The program said without "darkening" the "global warming" rate would increase 5-10 fold. The whole concept is interesting but I'd need to hear more.\n\nJason