Global Warming: Global Warning!
by It is time we humans did something.
Earth, the only planet which supports life with its its resources. Nowhere in the universe have we found a planet so similar to earth. We know it as a planet which consist of plants,animals,humans,buildings and a atmosphere. Although nothing wrong may seem to be happening, we are undergoing a huge change in global temperatures. Climate change is not new to earth. It seems that Antarctica had one time been a tropical place and places near the equator was covered with snow. So, why are we worrying about global warming? Temperatures around the world have been increasing tremendously due to advance in industries. Many chemicals and poisonous gases are released into the air such as nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and methane. These gases when in the atmosphere absorb the heat from the sun thus reflecting back to the surface of the Earth. This is known as the greenhouse effect. The consequences of global warming are rising of sea levels, change in nature and change in climate. Due to the increase in temperature, sea water expands causing increase in the sea level. Not only that, ice glaciers in Antarctica and arctic will melt doubling the effect. Change in climate is also due to global warming. Places which have dry seasons will experience prolonged dry periods and drought. There will also be water shortages leading to many lives lost. However, places with a tropical climate will continue to have more wet periods leading to floods and destruction of properties and lives. Nature can also be affected. Trees which grow in tropical climates will move to temperate climates while trees which grow in temperate climate will start to grow in cold climates. Trees which cannot adapt to this change will die or will be extinct. The same applies to animals or maybe who knows even humans! Furthermore global warming has already affected some life forms such as polar bears and penguins as they cannot adapt to the changing climate. It is time we humans did something to stop this. Governments have already tried their best by reducing carbon emission such as improving public transport so that the public will use them instead of their private vehicles. Also, CF Cs or (Chlorofluorocarbons) are banned by some countries which agreed in an international treaty. So remember, next time you turn on that air conditioner, think again. An action taken to curb global warming can go a long way!
Liked it
-
-
-
-
-
Post Commentcarolina
On March 9, 2009 at 7:13 pm
Unfortunately, you are probably preaching to the choir here. Those of us who actually *see* the problems are few and far between. The rest of the population are trying to hide their heads in the sand, or denying that anything untoward is actually happening. I have seen so many comments left on various sites to the effect that whatever is happening is simply ‘Mother Nature’ in action, and that we have done nothing to cause these things. Others actually have the temerity to suggest that nothing at all has changed. I don’t know what rocks they’ve been living under, but they insist that the weather is no different now than it was 20 or 30 years ago, much less hundreds of years ago. I also have to admit some culpability in contributing to some of the problems, as I find it impossible to exist here in Southern AZ without sometimes using the AC. I do use an evaporative cooler for most of the hot months, however they have no affect at all during the monsoon season. I DO, however, try to offset my AC use by doing other things that are good for the environment. I don’t know if there’s time to reverse the effects of the past, but I certainly hope so. It WILL, however, mean that EVERYONE will have to contribute, not only a few of us. So, are we doomed?
lee
On March 10, 2009 at 5:18 pm
William Happer is hardly a climate change “denier.” A physics professor at Princeton, he is a former director of energy research for the U. S. Department of Energy, where he supervised work on climate change between 1990 and 1993. He is also one of the world’s leading experts on “the interactions of visible and infrared radiation with gases,” and on carbon dioxide and the greenhouse effect. Two weeks ago, he told the U. S. Congress, “I believe the increase of CO2 (in the atmosphere) is not a cause for alarm.”
Claims that an increase of atmospheric CO2 will lead to catastrophic warming “are wildly exaggerated,” according to Prof. Happer. While a doubling (we have seen about a 35% rise since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution) might lead to a 0.6C rise in global temperature, he told Congress, “additional increments of CO2 will cause relatively less direct warming because we already have so much CO2 … that it has blocked most of the infrared radiation that it can.”
Prof. Happer added that while CO2 concentrations have risen steadily for more than 100 years, warming began before that — 200 years ago — and even during the time when temperatures and carbon concentrations have risen together, the link has hardly been consistent. For instance, while CO2 was rising rapidly from 1950 to 1970, temperatures were going through an especially cold period.
Over the past decade, while carbon dioxide concentrations have continued to grow, there has been “a slight cooling,” according to the Princeton physicist. Any warming in recent decades, then, “seems to be due mostly to natural causes, not to increasing levels of carbon dioxide.”
Why then do organizations such as the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) continue to put faith in climate supercomputer models that show disastrous warming in the coming century? Because, as Prof. Happer explained, the IPCC believes in what is called a “positive feedback loop.”
In short, water vapour and clouds account for about 98% of the greenhouse effect versus less than 2% for CO2. The IPCC believes, though, that a doubling of CO2, while not significant on its own, will trigger a huge increase in the greenhouse impact of water vapour. But so far, in the realworld, “the feedback is close to zero and may even be negative.” Prof. Happer testified.
The significance of Prof. Happer’s statement is not that it proves global warming is false, but rather that it shows there is no consensus among respected scientists. The notion that the “science is settled,” as claimed by global warming advocates, is not true.
Also, two weeks ago, three of five independent scientists asked by Japan’s Society of Energy and Resources to assess the current state of climate science concluded that global warming, to the extent it is still occurring, is a natural phenomenon, not manmade.
In his official contribution, Kanya Kusano, program director at the Earth Simulator at the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, called the IPCC’s warming theories “an unprovable hypothesis” and likened the current supercomputer models to ancient astrology.
Even the Discovery Channel, never a fan of scientists who dissent from climate orthodoxy, reported last week on a University of Wisconsin study that shows global temperatures have at least flatlined during the past decade and that that trend could continue for another 30 years. The authors of that report — Kyle Swanson and Anastasios Tsonis — think rapid warming could resume after that. But for now, warming has ceased.
Against this legitimate scientific doubt, recent statements by environmentalists and alarmist scientists sounds positively hysterical.
Robert Kennedy, Jr. called coal companies “criminal enterprises” and demanded their CEOs be jailed “for all eternity.” Michael Tobis, a climate modeller at the University of Texas labelled as “palpably evil” anyone who questioned the wisdom of former U. S. vice-president Al Gore and suggested that doubting Mr. Gore was “morally comparable to killing 1,000 people.”
U. S. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu claimed warming will lead to “no more agriculture in California.” Meanwhile Susan Solomon, of the U. S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and lead scientist with the IPCC, said even if carbon emissions are stopped, temperatures around the globe will remain high until at least the year 3000 and within 10 years “the oceans will be toxic, and all life in them will die.”
Ironic, isn’t it, that those who doubt the warming theories are the ones called the “deniers.”
MW
On March 10, 2009 at 8:02 pm
what he ^ said
carolina
On March 10, 2009 at 10:41 pm
What *I* said!
carolina
On March 10, 2009 at 10:49 pm
BTW…Even IF it’s ‘flatlined’, for 30 years?? what are our children and grandchildren going to do? Personally, just looking at the bizarre weather we have had this winter…and continue to have…(it’s snowing in the Puget Sound area as we speak, in March, in an area that historically has very little snow during the winter, and that is usually only for a week or two every eight years or so…I mean, what’s wrong with this picture? Of course, this area wasn’t hit as badly, by far, as the midwest and the east.
Since I have many farmer friends, I know that on top of all of our other economic woes, food is going to go even further up in price. We are literally going to be paying a heavy price for these ‘glitches’ in the climate. Of course, we have been doing so for a while now, but it continues to worsen. Not only in the US of course.