Writers' Community!
Home Page Two Columnists Q&A Submit an Article FAQs Contact Author Login
Article Submission
We Need YOUR Articles!
We'll Promote Them for FREE!

Author Login

New Authors
Register Here


Now Serving 7,758 Authors
70,411 Quality Articles
& 3,663 Current Users Online!
Featured Authors
Ben Morrish (7,936)
Steve Kovacs (4,545)
Sandra E. Graham (7,883)
Fran Larson (2,271)
Joel Hendon (16,285)
Shari Vaudo (418)
David Tanguay (9,577)
Michael Ramzy (633)
Missing Link (766)
E. Raymond Rock (3,068)
Gregory Lewis (1,603)
Nancy Daniels (1,550)
Mark Parsec (15,056)
David Pekrul (3,696)

View All Featured Authors
Most Recent
The Great Pacific Garbage Patch - A Primer

List of 32 Society Benefits from Mattress Recycling

Celebrate America Recycles Day On Nov. 15

Save The Environment By Recycling

Plant A Tree For World Sight Day

An Introduction To Recycling Facts

Illuminating the Great Outdoors with Energy-Saving Light Bulbs

Global Warming Facts

Introducing a New Flavor of Energy-Efficient Light Bulbs

Going Green? Why Not Go All the Way?

Home » Categories » Science & Technology » Environment » Global Warming True Or False? » Printer Friendly

Global Warming True Or False?

Rated 3.5 out of 5
No Reader Ratings Available ?
Rate It  /  View Comments  /  View All Articles submitted by Bob Smith
Submitted Saturday, August 25, 2007
Bob Smith (304)

Log in to become a member of Bob Smith's Fan Club!


Global warming, now there are two buzz words guaranteed to start a debate any time they are mentioned around the old water cooler! Ask any group of people what they think of it, and you will get everything from: ‘Its the end of the world!’ to: ‘Its a left wing hoax designed to destroy our economy!’ So, let us look at just what the facts are.

Global warming was first observed (as hard as this may be to believe!) way back in 1896. In that year, a Swedish chemist named Svante Arrhenius was the first person to quantify just how much the world is warmed by carbon dioxide. In his report, he warned that the world was ‘evaporating our coal mines into the air.’ He was largely ignored.

Then, in 1979, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences issued a report that rising carbon dioxide levels could cause temperatures to rises, and warned that a ‘wait and see attitude’ could be dangerous. Unfortunately, the naysayers in all this are a very powerful group: oil, coal, gas, automotive and steel. All industries that create vast amounts of the greenhouse gases, and all with very deep pockets. Since the late 1980s, they have funded a whole host of lobbying groups like the Global Climate Coalition, and the Information Council on the Environment, specifically to downplay the danger or deny it outright.

On top of that, there is the problem that this issue is not something one nation can address alone. Recently, in the State of California, Governor Schwarzenegger signed an executive order with the goal of reducing car emissions ten percent by 2020. While quite the laudable effort, it will accomplish nothing! China and India are poised to become highly industrialized counties, meaning: more cars, more power plants, more greenhouse gases being vented into the atmosphere. And thats just two nations. What of the rest of the world? It was because of the global nature of the problem that the Rio Treaty on voluntary emission reductions was signed in 1992, and later the Kyoto Treaty was negotiated. However, while President George H.W. Bush signed the Rio Treaty, its mandates were never enacted; and, under pressure from lobbying groups, President George Bush did not sign the Kyoto treaty.

In recent years we've seen the effects of Global Warming: killer heat waves in America and Europe, wilted crops, smaller snow packs and receding glaciers, and bigger and stronger hurricanes. So, we must ask ourselves: who are we to believe? There are thousands of scientists around the world, from all manner of political and social backgrounds who agree that global warming is happening. And then there are the naysayers, all of whom are backed by industries that have a vested interest in preventing any actions that would endanger their profits. Which ones are impartial, do you think?




Reprint Rights

Log in to become a member of Bob Smith's Fan Club!

Comments on this article:


» left by secret33 (2 years 55 days ago.)
Reader Rating: 1 out of 5
Global warming is a serious threat to life on earth but it is being blown out of proportion for the sole reason to raise funding which usually is embezzled and squandered.
Respond to this comment
» left by Anonymous (266 days 13 hours ago.)
It's soooo not true, earth is going through a cycle, know it is slowly turning into global cooling!!
Respond to this comment
» left by Vivian from Palm (182 days 11 hours ago.)
That is not very smart using the mostcivilizedlanguage possible. :P

Respond to this comment

» left by Jordan (2 years 47 days ago.)
Reader Rating: 3 out of 5
Global Warming is a serious issue, affecting all walks of life on Earth. CO2 emissions are more massive than ever, and if we don't do something about this now, life on earth will be very hard for future generations. I'm 15-years-old and very involved with this issue. I'm writing an expository[informative] essay on the issue for Speech and Debate. How are people's careers affected by Global Warming?
Respond to this comment

» left by Joel Hendon (15,199)
Joel Hendon
(1 year 237 days ago.)

Reader Rating: 1 out of 5
Bob, when Svante made his statement there were approximately 1.5 billion people living on this earth. Today there are over 6.6 billion. More than quadrupled. Naturally there are more CO2 emissions. All those humans and animals both domestic and wild, pass enough gas to raise that level. The implications of man made global warming could not be stopped if they were true. And all the scientists who are yelling the sky is falling, admit it. Besides, carbon dioxide particles are NOT the main heat sinks in our atmosphere. Water vapor particles are. We might try covering the oceans with plastic sheetings (it would be cheaper than what is being proposed.

And people are daydreaming if they think they can slow China and India's industrial growth.
What people better do is get their heads on straight and start working towards a sensible solution to areas of concentrated lower level air polution.

Also, your article stopped short of the latest findings. There is every evidence that Al Gore can return his portion of the Nobel prize. The ice you refer to as receding, is back, and there has been no measurable increase in the atmospheric temperature in two years now.

And you say that the naysayers are backed by industries that have a vested interest in preventing any actions that would endanger their profits. The opposite is true. Those pushing this agenda are those who are shoveling in millions of grant monies.


Respond to this comment

» left by Anonymous (280 days 15 hours ago.)
Political leaders are gathered in Kyoto, Japan, working away on an international treaty to stop "global warming" by reducing carbon dioxide emissions. The debate over how much to cut emissions has at times been heated--but the entire enterprise is futile or worse. For there is not a shred of persuasive evidence that humans have been responsible for increasing global temperatures. What's more, carbon dioxide emissions have actually been a boon for the environment.
 
The myth of "global warming" starts with an accurate observation: The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is rising. It is now about 360 parts per million, vs. 290 at the beginning of the 20th century, Reasonable estimates indicate that it may eventually rise as high as 600 parts per million. This rise probably results from human burning of coal, oil and natural gas, although this is not certain. Earth's oceans and land hold some 50 times as much carbon dioxide as is in the atmosphere, and movement between these reservoirs of carbon dioxide is poorly understood. The observed rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide does correspond with the time of human release and equals about half of the amount released.
 
Carbon dioxide, water, and a few other substances are "greenhouse gases." For reasons predictable from their physics and chemistry, they tend to admit more solar energy into the atmosphere than they allow to escape. Actually, things are not so simple as this, since these substances interact among themselves and with other aspects of the atmosphere in complex ways that are not well understood. Still, it was reasonable to hypothesize that rising atmospheric carbon dioxide levels might cause atmospheric temperatures to rise. Some people predicted "global warming," which has come to mean extreme greenhouse warming of the atmosphere leading to catastrophic environmental consequences.
 
Careful Tests
 
The global-warming hypothesis, however, is no longer tenable. Scientists have been able to test it carefully, and it does not hold up. During the past 50 years, as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have risen, scientists have made precise measurements of atmospheric temperature. These measurements have definitively shown that major atmospheric greenhouse warming of the atmosphere is not occurring and is unlikely ever to occur.
 
The temperature of the atmosphere fluctuates over a wide range, the result of solar activity and other influences. During the past 3,000 years, there have been five extended periods when it was distinctly warmer than today. One of the two coldest periods, known as the Little Ice Age, occurred 300 years ago. Atmospheric temperatures have been rising from that low for the past 300 years, but remain below the 3,000-year average.
 
Why are temperatures rising? The first chart nearby shows temperatures during the past 250 years, relative to the mean temperature for 1951-70. The same chart shows the length of the solar magnetic cycle during the same period. Close correlation between these two parameters--the shorter the solar cycle (and hence the more active the sun), the higher the temperature--demonstrates, as do other studies, that the gradual warming since the Little Ice Age and the large fluctuations during that warming have been caused by changes in solar activity.
 
The highest temperatures during this period occurred in about 1940. During the past 20 years, atmospheric temperatures have actually tended to go down, as shown in the second chart, based on very reliable satellite data, which have been confirmed by measurements from weather balloons.
 
Consider what this means for the global-warming hypothesis. This hypothesis predicts that global temperatures will rise significantly, indeed catastrophically, if atmospheric carbon dioxide rises. Most of the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has occurred during the past 50 years, and the increase has continued during the past 20 years. Yet there has been no significant increase in atmospheric temperature during those 50 years, and during the 20 years with the highest carbon dioxide levels, temperatures have decreased.
 
In science, the ultimate test is the process of experiment. If a hypothesis fails the experimental test, it must be discarded. Therefore, the scientific method requires that the global warming hypothesis be rejected.
 
Why, then, is there continuing scientific interest in "global warming"? There is a field of inquiry in which scientists are using computers to try to predict the weather--even global weather over very long periods. But global weather is so complicated that current data and computer methods are insufficient to make such predictions. Although it is reasonable to hope that these methods will eventually become useful, for now computer climate models are very unreliable. The second chart shows predicted temperatures for the past 20 years, based on the computer models. It's not surprising that they should have turned out wrong--after all the weatherman still has difficulty predicting local weather even for a few days. Long-term global predictions are beyond current capabilities.
 
So we needn't worry about human use of hydrocarbons warming the Earth. We also needn't worry about environmental calamities, even if the current, natural warming trend continues: After all the Earth has been much warmer during the past 3,000 years without ill effects.
 
But we should worry about the effects of the hydrocarbon rationing being proposed at Kyoto. Hydrocarbon use has major environmental benefits. A great deal of research has shown that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide accelerate the growth rates of plants and also permit plants to grow in drier regions. Animal life, which depends upon plants, also increases.
 
Standing timber in the United States has already increased by 30% since 1950. There are now 60 tons of timber for every American. Tree-ring studies further confirm this spectacular increase in tree growth rates. It has also been found that mature Amazonian rain forests are increasing in biomass at about two tons per acre per year. A composite of 279 research studies predicts that overall plant growth rates will ultimately double as carbon dioxide increases.
 
Lush Environment
 
What mankind is doing is moving hydrocarbons from below ground and turning them into living things. We are living in an increasingly lush environment of plants and animals as a result of the carbon dioxide increase. Our children will enjoy an Earth with twice as much plant and animal life as that with which we now are blessed. This is a wonderful and unexpected gift from the industrial revolution.
 
Hydrocarbons are needed to feed and lift from poverty vast numbers of people across the globe. This can eventually allow all human beings to live long, prosperous, healthy, productive lives. No other single technological factor is more important to the increase in the quality, length and quantity of human life than the continued, expanded and unrationed use of the Earth's hydrocarbons, of which we have proven reserves to last more than 1,000 years. Global warming is a myth. The reality is that global poverty and death would be the result of Kyoto's rationing of hydrocarbons.
 
Arthur Robinson and Zachary Robinson are chemists at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine.

Respond to this comment

» left by Anonymous (222 days 8 hours ago.)
Reader Rating: 5 out of 5
Bullcrap!!! if global warming is real than I'll be a monies uncle. Not that if it were rue I would become the uncle of a monkey, I'm just trying to make a point.

Respond to this comment

» left by Anonymous (210 days 4 hours ago.)
Reader Rating: 5 out of 5
I agree.....global warming is a pile of crap!!! There is proof that the world is actually still COOLING from the last stone age...eat them apples!!! Did you also know that Ale Gore's house uses 20 times more electricity than the average household?!?!?! WHAT A FLIPPIN HIPPOCRITE!!!

Respond to this comment

» left by Anonymous (209 days 7 hours ago.)
Obama wants to give farmers money for NOT producing crops. He calls it CO2 credits. Another Crock! Why pay people for NOT being productive. We shouldn't be taxed on energy costs. What the hell is that going to do for us the consumer??? Energy companies should have an incentive offered to them to make cleaner more efficient fuels. And yes, I agree about Global Warming...it HASN'T been proven. There are still a lot of scientists that don't believe in the new buzz word. Liberal used to stand for Change...Now it stands for "I'm a flipin' idiot that can't think for myself but I'm still rolling with a movement".

Respond to this comment

Was this article helpful to you? Leave a Public Comment or Question:

This Article has been viewed 2,431 times.
Article added to SearchWarp.com on 8/25/2007 6:09:40 PM.
View other articles written by Bob Smith (304)


If you found this article interesting, you may want to check out:

Disclaimer:  All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional or organization.


Today's Most Popular
Global Warming True Or False?

Global Warming is a Left Wing Power Ploy . . . Or is it?

Growing Plants with LEDs

Limestone information and facts

Marble Information

Global Warming: If You're Overweight It's Your Fault!

Global Warming- How are Animals Affected by Global Warming

Centrifugal Chillers

How To Make Water From Air

Australia's love of coastal living is leading to some serious environmental problems.

Viewed from Cache. Load Time: 0.031.

Home  |  Page Two  |  FAQ's  |  Contact  |  Terms of Service  |  Article Submission Guidelines  |  Questions & Answers  |  Privacy  |  Mission / About
Copyright © 1999-2009 SearchWarp.com, All Rights Reserved - SearchWarp.com is an IcoLogic, Inc. Company