Is Global Warming a Natural Phenomenon?

[zan]

I saw those links when I looked back through the thread - apologies if I sounded patronising in my post... And I know YouTube is usually the last place you go looking for good information on anything, but the guy makes an interesting argument (although I'm sure I've seen scarier things!)

zan

[Strontium]

Hey no probs zen, Ive seen some great things on youtube that deserve better press.

[snowhound]

Hi All,

Unfortunately I can't download many of the links on this site due to the restrictions on my computer - damn and blast! However, I have read quite a lot about climate change and global warming issues and must say I am quite confused by much of what I have read. It's hard for me to know just what to believe, as the scientists writing the reports often seem to have such conflicting opinions - some say it's a natural phenomenon, others say not. Some say we are heading for increased global warming - others say we are entering another mini ice-age. Some say the Gulf Stream is weakening considerably and will shut down within the next 50-80 years so Britain will freeze - others say poppycock, it won't have any effect at all. Others say it's to do with solar activity - others say it's the ocean currents. Some say it's a mixture of everything! So poor confused Snowhound just doesn't know what to believe!

Personally, I do think climate change is a natural occurrence, and as so many of you have said, I also think we are exaccerbating the problem and speeding up the warming with all our CO2 emissions. If that is so, then I sadly think it's too late to reverse things, as I really don't believe for one minute that we'll ever stop flying planes and driving billions of cars, etc. But, like many others, I try and do my bit with recycling, conserving what energy I can and I do get the bus to work! Just my little drop in the bucket of what will probably be, will be.

[PMG]

Ok I'm now going to stick my toe into these turbid waters (when my toe and the rest of me missed out on university - and I have not a scientific bone in my body....) I've enjoyed reading this thread and the views expressed but I don't think its going to make any difference to 'folk in the street' no matter what is said - or how alarming the situation is. By that I certainly don't mean that we shouldn't try and change things - but - ordinary folk are generally tied in to a modern life and opting out isn't usually possible for most people, which means by default, whether we wish it to be so or not - we are contributing to some degree just by being human and being here!

Now whether we humans arrived naturally thro evolution or by creation matters little - cos I thinki we've got the wrong end of the stick - there we go full of our own importance again - those clever humans! We're not the beall and endall - I suspect this earth is not for humans to live on for ever and ever amen. We're behaving like typical humans - top of the chain - in charge - everything that happens will be down to us - no sorry I don't believe it - this earth was here before us and will be here after we've gone. We will have changed it - just like every other period in time has left its marks - buts thats all we are - a teenie time period where a life form called human came out on top for a spell, made a bit of mess of things and then disappeared......... when fossil fuels run out and we don't have anything else to run the economic giant on we will slowly die and disappear off this planet...........

Now I'm going to take my toe out of the water and leave before I get hit with numerous brickbats

Pauline

[coasty]

Right Here gos...

1 . Climate change does it happen? Well yes as can be judged by ice ages and the like.
2 , Global warming is it caused by man. Well I have read many articles by people much more intelligent than I , and it would appear there is some evidence that we are influencing things. I have also read read papers by equally clever people who say its sunspot activity. So well nothing proved as yet I would say.
3 , I think as a species our existence is not having a positive effect on the planet, but I am not sure that any global warming factors are any more serious than other problems we are storing up for ourselves. ie depletion of the seas species and the pollution of the oceons.
4 , I am always nervous of believing so called facts from any official body as someone somewhere will be making buckets of money from it. Take the proliferation of windfarms... very profitable and completely unproven as a reliable source of significant quantities of electricity.
5 , The current hysteria brings to mind the year 2000 computer meltdown that every expert in the world swore would happen. The computer experts made a bundle, The newspapers and tv reported little else. The politicians were able to talk about it and tell everyone how they would deal with it. What happened well nothing as I recall....
6 , I would suggest that the public debate on climate change is great for the politicians . Opportunity for lots of grand talk and posturing and a chance to divert attention from problems that can be solved.
7 , As for advice well I would say If you live on low lying ground sell up and move to a hill top. Because the chances of the governments of the world doing anything real about the problem for at least another 20 years are zero. That is if there is a problem,,,,

[matt_xyz]

Originally Posted by coasty

4 , I am always nervous of believing so called facts from any official body as someone somewhere will be making buckets of money from it. Take the proliferation of windfarms... very profitable and completely unproven as a reliable source of significant quantities of electricity.

bear in mind that there are far more individuals and organisations making money out of not tackling climate change. The oil industry in the US donates a small fortune each year to support senators who are sceptical about climate change and to support anti-climate change 'think tanks' and pseudo scientific institutes. That's a major reason why the current US govt is so reluctant to tackle climate change, they're not really that worried about competition from developing nations. They're far more concerned about losing the support of the hugely powerful and hugely rich oil industry, without whom Bush would never have got to power in the first place.

Matt

[The Black Rabbit]

Originally Posted by coasty

Right Here gos...

1 . Climate change does it happen? Well yes as can be judged by ice ages and the like.
2 , Global warming is it caused by man. Well I have read many articles by people much more intelligent than I , and it would appear there is some evidence that we are influencing things. I have also read read papers by equally clever people who say its sunspot activity. So well nothing proved as yet I would say.
3 , I think as a species our existence is not having a positive effect on the planet, but I am not sure that any global warming factors are any more serious than other problems we are storing up for ourselves. ie depletion of the seas species and the pollution of the oceons.
4 , I am always nervous of believing so called facts from any official body as someone somewhere will be making buckets of money from it. Take the proliferation of windfarms... very profitable and completely unproven as a reliable source of significant quantities of electricity.
5 , The current hysteria brings to mind the year 2000 computer meltdown that every expert in the world swore would happen. The computer experts made a bundle, The newspapers and tv reported little else. The politicians were able to talk about it and tell everyone how they would deal with it. What happened well nothing as I recall....
6 , I would suggest that the public debate on climate change is great for the politicians . Opportunity for lots of grand talk and posturing and a chance to divert attention from problems that can be solved.
7 , As for advice well I would say If you live on low lying ground sell up and move to a hill top. Because the chances of the governments of the world doing anything real about the problem for at least another 20 years are zero. That is if there is a problem,,,,

Pretty well agree Andy.
The difficulty lies in semantics though, as I've alluded to before.
The title of this thread is "Is Global Warming a natural phenomenon".
Like the (changed) title of the 4x4 thread -
"Why have 4x4s" (duh - to do the job that 4x4x were invented for),
the title of this thread can be answered very simply.
"Is Global Warming a natural phenomenon?"
Strictly speaking - YES. Of course it is. As is Global Cooling.
Pedantically speaking though, in common parlance, and used by your average politician looking to gain a vote or two, as well as the man on the street, what is meant by "Global Warming" these days is actually "Anthropogenic Global Warming, or accelerated Global Warming, AGW".

Is Global Warming a natural phenomenon. Yes.
Is Anthropogenic Global Warming a natural phenomenon? By definition No. (But that said, that all depends on what one means by "natural".

So...
Is Climate change a natural phenomenon? Yes.
Is Man-induced Climate change a natural phenomenon? Similarly, depending on what you mean by "natural", in most cases I expect, NO.

Thats the trouble with debating this subject. The actual words and phrases mean very different things to many people.

AGW is a huge economy now. Believe it or not.
Like it or not.
Whether that is a good thing or not - ie it helps people at least think about behaving with a little more responsibility, ie as strontium said, much earlier, well, that may well be correct, I suppose. Maybe. I'm really not sure. Possibly, though I remain sceptical and yet to be convinced...

Strange. This is a very generic subject (it should affect us all), but incredibly specific in terms of opinion also.

Annnnyway...
Regarding your post - I certainly agree with you, basically.
Doug.

[coasty]

Morning Doug,,,,

Just knew you would be having your say on that.

and ...

8 , Heres one for you I am aqainted with a guy who owns a crane hire business, This last couple of years he has made a pile of money from erecting wind turbines in Scotland and the like, to the extent he has had to purchase and import another new heavy lifting crane. and do you know what else he bought ??? A nice sparkly top of the range Range rover,,, Now come on lets see someone work out how many acres of forest he will have to plant to balance that lot in his carbon equation......

9 , Last but not least who was it who said "We reap as we sow". Until we stop the Lunatics from running the Assylum. ....I tell you we are all doomed,,,,,,( how do you type in a private fraser type voice from dads army?).

[The Black Rabbit]

Originally Posted by coasty

Morning Doug,,,,

Just knew you would be having your say on that.

and ...

8 , Heres one for you I am aqainted with a guy who owns a crane hire business, This last couple of years he has made a pile of money from erecting wind turbines in Scotland and the like, to the extent he has had to purchase and import another new heavy lifting crane. and do you know what else he bought ??? A nice sparkly top of the range Range rover,,, Now come on lets see someone work out how many acres of forest he will have to plant to balance that lot in his carbon equation......

9 , Last but not least who was it who said "We reap as we sow". Until we stop the Lunatics from running the Assylum. ....I tell you we are all doomed,,,,,,( how do you type in a private fraser type voice from dads army?).

Heh heh!
I couldn't let you down now chap, could I?
Doug

[coasty]

Originally Posted by The Black Rabbit

Pretty well agree Andy.
AGW is a huge economy now. Believe it or not.
Like it or not.
Doug.

By matt_xyz bear in mind that there are far more individuals and organisations making money out of not tackling climate change. The oil industry in the US donates a small fortune each year to support senators who are sceptical about climate change and to support anti-climate change 'think tanks' and pseudo scientific institutes.

And another thing I agree with you both,,,, Lets be honest guys its because mankind will make money wherever they can , its why we have people who trade on shares make money on a rising and a falling market....and its why I am working in the Rail sector because I reckon all governments will have to spend there for the next 20 years. We are all here to line our pockets and give our kids the best we can . The trick is not killing the goose (or in this case the earth) that laid the golden egg as we do it.

[coasty]

I think I need to go for a lie down,,,

[The Black Rabbit]

Originally Posted by coasty

And another thing I agree with you both,,,, Lets be honest guys its because mankind will make money wherever they can , its why we have people who trade on shares make money on a rising and a falling market....and its why I am working in the Rail sector because I reckon all governments will have to spend there for the next 20 years. We are all here to line our pockets and give our kids the best we can . The trick is not killing the goose (or in this case the earth) that laid the golden egg as we do it.

Yep.
Fair enough.

Doug

[ChrisJB]

Originally Posted by coasty

Right Here gos...

1 . Climate change does it happen? Well yes as can be judged by ice ages and the like.
2 , Global warming is it caused by man. Well I have read many articles by people much more intelligent than I , and it would appear there is some evidence that we are influencing things. I have also read read papers by equally clever people who say its sunspot activity. So well nothing proved as yet I would say.
3 , I think as a species our existence is not having a positive effect on the planet, but I am not sure that any global warming factors are any more serious than other problems we are storing up for ourselves. ie depletion of the seas species and the pollution of the oceons.
4 , I am always nervous of believing so called facts from any official body as someone somewhere will be making buckets of money from it. Take the proliferation of windfarms... very profitable and completely unproven as a reliable source of significant quantities of electricity.
5 , The current hysteria brings to mind the year 2000 computer meltdown that every expert in the world swore would happen. The computer experts made a bundle, The newspapers and tv reported little else. The politicians were able to talk about it and tell everyone how they would deal with it. What happened well nothing as I recall....
6 , I would suggest that the public debate on climate change is great for the politicians . Opportunity for lots of grand talk and posturing and a chance to divert attention from problems that can be solved.
7 , As for advice well I would say If you live on low lying ground sell up and move to a hill top. Because the chances of the governments of the world doing anything real about the problem for at least another 20 years are zero. That is if there is a problem,,,,

An excellent summary. I like it.

Regards, Chris

[RantingSquirrel]

I totally disagree the the continual rereported myth that sunspots/solar activity is to the blame (or have some linkage) for current global warming/climate change. The following contains evidence that sunspots are not a current factor (or the relationship is not large enough to be an influence).
Climate myths: Global warming is down to the Sun, not humans - climate-change - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment
http://publishing.royalsociety.org/m...pa20071880.pdf

[coasty]

Originally Posted by RantingSquirrel

I totally disagree the the continual rereported myth that sunspots/solar activity is to the blame (or have some linkage) for current global warming/climate change. The following contains evidence that sunspots are not a current factor (or the relationship is not large enough to be an influence).
Climate myths: Global warming is down to the Sun, not humans - climate-change - 16 May 2007 - New Scientist Environment
http://publishing.royalsociety.org/m...pa20071880.pdf

Are they giving evidence or are they scientifically argued opinions?. Evidence is the ability to circumnavigate the world therefore proving the world is round..

I dont think that anything I have heard about the subject could be classified as factual evidence. I would put everything I have read into the " the balance of probability " and " the current best scientific opinion is" catagories.

However I do live on top of a hill so the odd bit of flooding isnt a personal issue.

[RantingSquirrel]

Originally Posted by coasty

Are they giving evidence or are they scientifically argued opinions?. Evidence is the ability to circumnavigate the world therefore proving the world is round..

I dont think that anything I have heard about the subject could be classified as factual evidence. I would put everything I have read into the " the balance of probability " and " the current best scientific opinion is" catagories.

However I do live on top of a hill so the odd bit of flooding isnt a personal issue.

Hiya
Well in terms of the Royal Society report I'd firmly put that down as evidence (i.e. quantifiable...right spelling?????).
I do 100% agree with your ascertains concerning politicians. A lot of their current targets/strategies are pure hyperbole, for PR. I worked in Defra (contrary to its remit not that environmental ) my boss authored a high level action plan based on research conducted by working groups. We chose several sectors as high priority for action based upon evidence. Unfortunately for us, at the same time there were textile/labour disputes in China/ summer water shortages and we were ordered to amend the focus areas based on short term thinking. It changed from policy based on evidence to evidence based on policy. Just shows how inept the inner workings of whitehall are.
It does not give you much faith in the system

[Paul mabbott]

Here goes with my bi-monthly reiteration of the facts which are agreed by most scientists (those not paid by Esso and such!) and now (whoopee) by George Bush and cronies. I really ought to get this as a file and just paste it in whenever some eejit starts denying anthropogenic enhanced climate change (not you! )

The greenhouse effect is what keeps the Earth alive as we know it - without carbon dioxide in the atmosphere this planet would be too hot or too cold to support life, as we know it - Earth would be like Venus or Mars ....

So the warming effect of greenhouse gases is not contested. Any scientist, or other reasonable person, will recognise that increasing or decreasing the amount of 'greenhouse gas' in the atmosphere will alter the heat contained in the atmosphere overall - increase the amount of carbon dioxide, methane or other gases from industrial and/or agricultural practices and global temperatures will rise. No one, equally, would deny that other factors can/do have an effect - but most of these factors will have a 1000 to 1000000 year cyclical time scale. No one (other than a few fundamentalist bigots) denies that the Earth has been demonstrably warming for 2-300 years out of sync with any projected natural cycles and at an accelerating rate. This is clearly a human effect.

I think that no one with any credibility would now argue against the fact that the major cause of rapid global warming is human industry/agriculture. So please lets not have any more of these childish debates about "natural"versus "anthropogenic". What there is room for debate over is (a) exactly how this is going to affect different people in different parts of the globe and (b) what we are going to do about it! It would be nice if some of the wafflers on this thread could say that they are going to get into public transport, become vegetarians, produce their own energy ,,,,,

Originally Posted by RantingSquirrel

Hiya
Well in terms of the Royal Society report I'd firmly put that down as evidence (i.e. quantifiable...right spelling?????).
I do 100% agree with your ascertains concerning politicians. A lot of their current targets/strategies are pure hyperbole, for PR. I worked in Defra (contrary to its remit not that environmental ) my boss authored a high level action plan based on research conducted by working groups. We chose several sectors as high priority for action based upon evidence. Unfortunately for us, at the same time there were textile/labour disputes in China/ summer water shortages and we were ordered to amend the focus areas based on short term thinking. It changed from policy based on evidence to evidence based on policy. Just shows how inept the inner workings of whitehall are.
It does not give you much faith in the system

[The Black Rabbit]

Originally Posted by Paul mabbott

Here goes with my bi-monthly reiteration of the facts which are agreed by most scientists (those not paid by Esso and such!) and now (whoopee) by George Bush and cronies. I really ought to get this as a file and just paste it in whenever some eejit starts denying anthropogenic enhanced climate change (not you! )

The greenhouse effect is what keeps the Earth alive as we know it - without carbon dioxide in the atmosphere this planet would be too hot or too cold to support life, as we know it - Earth would be like Venus or Mars ....

So the warming effect of greenhouse gases is not contested. Any scientist, or other reasonable person, will recognise that increasing or decreasing the amount of 'greenhouse gas' in the atmosphere will alter the heat contained in the atmosphere overall - increase the amount of carbon dioxide, methane or other gases from industrial and/or agricultural practices and global temperatures will rise. No one, equally, would deny that other factors can/do have an effect - but most of these factors will have a 1000 to 1000000 year cyclical time scale. No one (other than a few fundamentalist bigots) denies that the Earth has been demonstrably warming for 2-300 years out of sync with any projected natural cycles and at an accelerating rate. This is clearly a human effect.

I think that no one with any credibility would now argue against the fact that the major cause of rapid global warming is human industry/agriculture. So please lets not have any more of these childish debates about "natural"versus "anthropogenic". What there is room for debate over is (a) exactly how this is going to affect different people in different parts of the globe and (b) what we are going to do about it! It would be nice if some of the wafflers on this thread could say that they are going to get into public transport, become vegetarians, produce their own energy ,,,,,

I assume people are "debating" whether Global Warming is a natural phenomenon or not, on this thread, because that is the title of the thread...
"Is Global Warming a Natural Phenomenon". No? I might have got that confused?

Stu's first post again... (14th October)
"Global Warming is a Natural Phenomenon" is something that I hear on almost every debate about global warming and climate change on the TV and radio. While we're definitely coming out of an ice age, it seems as though many feel that this is the only/main reason why the planet is getting warmer and that global warming is a natural phenomenon without significant change by man.
As a result, should we be looking to re-label 'global warming by human action' to enable people to more easily identify the distinction between natural climate change and anthropogenic climate change?"



Paul.
You seem frustrated that you are having to post your "reiteration of the facts which are agreed by most scientists" in a "bi-monthly" fashion.

One can only assume that there be many reasons behind you having to re-post the same post every two months. I'm pretty sure you going down the route of "I really ought to get this as a file and just paste it in..." would not alter that at all.

One of the reasons might be that there are maybe some people who just may disagree with you. You might call them ignorant or childish or fundamentalist bigots. (Interesting....)

Another reason may be that people don't look on the subject with the level of simplicity you do.
I tend to find that no matter how simple I find things at first glance, the more I look, the more complicated things become - almost without exception.

Whilst your unequivocal stance on Global Warming is possibly to be applauded, I would hesitate before I condemned those who found the whole subject more than a little confusing and or complicated, and really not in any way shape or form, simple at all. That said, I certainly appreciate we probably have very little time to debate the whole subject ad nauseum - including what we intend to do about GW or AGW.

Another possible reason why you post the same thing every two months is that many very reasonable people might feel somewhat aggressively accused (wrongly in a lot of cases I'm sure) of not doing their bit for the environment, whereas in reality they probably are - but in different ways to you.

One final reason why you've re-posted the facts is that some people aren't listening, or possibly haven't read your posts before.
Doubtful I know. But possible?

Now.
The last bit of your post...
"So please lets not have any more of these childish debates about "natural"versus "anthropogenic". What there is room for debate over is (a) exactly how this is going to affect different people in different parts of the globe and (b) what we are going to do about it! It would be nice if some of the wafflers on this thread could say that they are going to get into public transport, become vegetarians, produce their own energy ,,,,"

I asume I must be "one of the wafflers" as I hold my hands up and suggest again that I am one of the MILLIONS who DO find the whole subject more than a little complicated and often confusing.
I do not intend to apologise for that, nor I should, nor should anybody, of course.

If you wish no more debate on Global Warming, Anthropogenic Global Warming, the defintion of "Natural" etc... and a debate instead on "what are we going to do about it" - I suggest that would be an excellent new thread, but nothing really to do with "Is Global Warming a Natural Phenomenon", entirely different in fact.

On that thread, I would be particularly interested to know what you feel you are NOT doing to help counterract anthropogenic global warming, and how you can improve that.
I think we all know what you feel you ARE doing....
I'm assuming here though... I might well be wrong.

You have limited yourself to producing two or less children.
You are not driving a car, (I take it that is what you meant by "Getting into public transport").
You are not eating meat.
You are breaking the first law of thermodynamics by "producing your own energy"... (Apologies. That WAS a childish dig!).

You can do your bit for the environment and to help counterract GW or AGW, as can others, most here in fact ,if not all.....
BUT in very different ways to you.
Like I said, thats an entirely different thread, which I urge you to start, as you seem to think there's room for debate on that and nothing else.


Well, I've waffled again - its difficult to be succinct when you are desperately trying to be polite! Five words soon become ten, and ten, fifty.... etc...
Never mind eh.