Posts Tagged ‘temperatures’

Question: How does the fact that similar temperatures & CO2 levels existed in the past protect me from climate harms now?
I keep hearing people emphasize that similar climate conditions existed in the past — and therefore I shouldn’t worry about global warming. But I don’t understand this logic. After all, the earth has experienced ice ages in the past — and if we were headed into one now, knowing of past ice ages would hardly keep me any warmer as a result. So why should I consider this “the earth has seen it all before” argument valid?

Answer:

Answer by Electsigon
Well, in the past, the earth has experienced many states, or eras. Some include the Paleocene, and the Eocene. Each one has a very different climate and in history, eras with warmer climates generally come before ice ages. Some scientists say that because we are getting warmer, the water vapor from evaporated water will eventually condense into clouds, which would “Block out” the sun. This would in turn, lead to an ice age. So, in conclusion, they are basically saying that there is nothing to worry about because the earth has gone through this before, and it will recover and send us into a period of extreme cooling, as it always had.

P.S. it might not be era it might be eon… ill look it up

I’m doing a science project on the greenhouse effect the

details are here:

http://www.energyquest.ca.gov/projects/greenhouse.html

basically i’m taking jars with cups of water in them, one jar

being wrapped in plastic, and placing them in the sun and

measure the temperatures after an hour or two.

"Scientists are to hold an emergency summit to warn the world’s politicians they are being too timid in their response to global warming.

Climate experts from across the world will gather in Copenhagen next month to agree a stark message to policy makers, which they hope will break the political deadlock on efforts to curb rising temperatures. The meeting follows "disturbing" studies that suggest global warming could strike harder and faster than expected.

Katherine Richardson, a marine biologist at the University of Copenhagen, who is organising next month’s event, said: "This is not a regular scientific conference. This is a deliberate attempt to influence policy."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/feb/09/scientists-summit-climate-change

Now for all you conspiracy theorists out there, scientists have nothing to gain monetarily from such a summit. They already have no trouble getting research grants to study climate change, and influencing political policy at this point does not benefit them in any way.

What are your thoughts on this emergency summit?