I know all about the scientific support for the fact that the atmosphere is warming, but is global warming truly on the backs of human beings and more specifically those in developed nations. Cows emit methane and CO2, yet we don't blame the cow.

I just don't think this is our doing. It seems to me that we are simply on the upside of the cycle of climactic change. If the environment is too warm, we will adapt or perish. I don't think we can change that can we?

Have you seen "An Unfortunate Truth". Al Gore makes some pretty compelling arguments as to the global warming situation. I was convinced that we as humans have much to do with the increase in temperature. Maybe we aren't the total story, but I think we definitely have something to do with it.

skeptic. You are making a common argument against the realities of global warming. Is it known to what extent the presence of man is causing global warming? Not really. Are there cycles to the planet's temperatures? Of course.

When most people talk about global warming, they are talking about anthropomorphic global climate change. It is real. It is a problem. The toxins and pollutants that we emit do have an effect on the climate and to deny this is to seal our fate as a species. As the planet becomes more and more industrialized and developed, the rate of temperature rise increases exponentially.

You are right that the cow emits methane into the environment. Think a little further. Why are there so many cows. We have a much higher number of cows on the planet than the species should be able to sustain naturally. We have domesticated and artificially increased their numbers, so in fact it is again human behavior and industry that have caused the increase in greenhouse gases.

But how can we speak with such certainty that its our fault when I keep hearing that we are not sure how much of this is our doing. If its 5% should we actually be all up in arms? I get it if we are 50%+ to blame for the increase in global temperatures.

I see too often people making these great leaps from fact A to assumption B without any foundation. I just think we aren't as to blame as most people would assert.

How can you deny global warming and man's role in it. I just don't see it. We know what greenhouse gases are and what they do. Science has shown that particulates and pollutants can trigger warming trends. We can also see evidence that we are emitting these gases, particulates and pollutants. So all you have to do is simple logic. Something we all did in elementary school. We are part of the problem. Clean simple easy logic. We pollute, the global temperature rises.

What is to say that this warming trend isn't natural and we are simple coincidentally polluting at the same time. To some degree, this notion of global warming is another example of the arrogance of modern man, to think that we have the power to ruin the earth, a planet that has been around for a very very very long time and we are just a speck on the back of a speck of its history.

I have been in too many arguments over this topic. Global warming exists. Cant' be denied. How much of it is caused by humans? I don't know. Is some of it caused by humans? Without a doubt! Is most of it caused by humans? Somewhat likely but by no means the only answer.

There are natural warming and cooling cycles and if we manage to survive the upswing, the downside will certainly kill us. As a species we are much more adapted to the heat and surviving drought and the likes than we are equipped to survive the harsh cold that may follow this warming trend.

I say who cares what or who caused global warming. I say if there is something we can do about it, we should do it now and find more things we can do to assure that human existence will continue.

This is one of those arguments where each side is so entrenched that there is not compromise or middle ground. It may be semantics in some senses and it may be too scary for some to believe in. Our planet is warming and that does have an impact on human existence. So who gives a $&*$ who or what caused it. We just have to figure out if there is a way to reverse it, survive it or at least mitigate the effects so that live can continue for generations.

Global warming is a loaded phrase. It now has the connotation that humans are causing all of this and that hasn't been proven. The earth warms and cools. That is evident in the soils, ice and atmosphere. Why must we claim that we are the cause. Sounds arrogant to me.

Well, how about the evidence that the earth is warming at a speed never before seen? We have a temperate history for the earth going back hundreds of thousands of years and we have never ever seen such a quick rise in temperature. That's pretty darn compelling to me.

And I disagree that it's arrogant to think that we humand are 'ruining' the earth. I don't think we're really ruining anything except our own cozy home. I have no fear whatsoever for the earth itself. She will survive just fine no matter what we do to it. She's been through loads long before we were around, she'll likely go through loads more after we're gone. What we should be worried about is US! WE cannot survive at the rate we are poisoning our own home. We're like a disease or a parasite on the earth, if we get to be too much of a problem the earth will just get rid of us. We're supremely small and insignificant in the grand scheme of things.

I think if more people realized that there'd be way more environmentalists in the world. Sure, it's all nice and good to be altruistic in that we should respect the earth just because it's the right thing to do. I totally support that notion and so do most people here I suspect. But the fact is that most people won't be willing to make significant changes in their lifestyle just because 'it's the right thing to do'. We're a selfish species and we need to know that this will affect US before we're motivated to change.

Another bit of food for thought... Why do we need absolute proof that we are the cause of climate change? By the time we have absolute proof it will be too late!!! Changing our reliance on fossil fuels is the right thing to do on sooooo many levels, why do we need absolute proof that it's wrecking the climate before we change things? Isn't it worth it to stop polluting just for the sake that it's unhealthy for us to breathe in all those chemicals? Or maybe because fossil fuels are just not sustainable?

Karen.

I think if more people realized that there'd be way more environmentalists in the world. Sure, it's all nice and good to be altruistic in that we should respect the earth just because it's the right thing to do. I totally support that notion and so do most people here I suspect. But the fact is that most people won't be willing to make significant changes in their lifestyle just because 'it's the right thing to do'. We're a selfish species and we need to know that this will affect US before we're motivated to change.

RIGHT ON KAREN!

People want a return on their investment whether that be financial or otherwise. We need to understand that the only ROI that will matter in the future is our ability to live.

I think a healthy dose of skepticism is ok, but to spit in the face of science, research and technology and deny global warming is just foolish. Things are changing and I hope people wake up before it is too late.

I have felt for some time that the reason people aren't reacting is that the change is too slow. We live in a world of instant gratification, a world of the here and now. If we can't tell a difference between today and the same day last week, last month or last year, then there can't be much change. Sure experts can go on and on about the rising temps and changing weather, but unless the common person sees sudden and notable changes, they will go on with their business and ignore the looming disaster.

Is it real? I don't get what you are going for hear. Science has shown that the average global temperature is rising. If that is global warming, then yes it is real. This question almost doesn't require a response but I couldn't resist.

Global climate change may be real and in fact is shown to be the norm, but is Anthropomorphic Global Climate Warming really proven or is it just theory? I think that we may be contributors, but aren't we and everything we do as natural as the trees?

the argument of what is natural and unnatural is a sticky one and in fact maybe not even accurate at all. To say that there is a natural path or things that are natural supposes that there is such a thing as both the natural and the unnatural. The one justifies the existence of the other. I think that the concepts of natural and unnatural are inaccurately used in many arguments.

All of this is semantics, but really what is natural? If you mean anything "existing in or formed by nature", then I would challenge you to find anything that does not fit this definition. If that be the case, then the argument about nature is moot in this case. Man may be doing "natural" things but that does not excuse the behaviors that are a substantial cause of the environmental woes.

I don't want to hijack the thread to talk about the natural and unnatural debate, but I must say that it is a dangerous one. To play with the word nature in such a way can lead to excusing all man's actions. Its a Pandora's Box of sorts. Once you say that all man's behaviors, choices and decisions are natural, then how can you enforce the concepts of law. Murder, theft, arson, etc, would then become natural and arguably unpunishable. A religious defense could be made by some.

This argument could go on and on and in fact in the world of academia and scholarly debate, it has. I think this is one of those times when the words themselves fail to express the concepts behind them.

Nature and the expression of what is natural often point to different concepts. The natural often implies that which is created by the earth and its processes outside of the realm of man. It can be seen in a way to imply man's arrogance. Man as separate or above nature. This is a dangerous notion. Man is integral to nature and must behave as such., For man to view his position above nature often rules out the harmonious relationship we seek.

Natural or not. I think that's a side argument. Global climate change is real. Look in the Ohio River Valley these past few weeks. Torrential (tropical-like) rainfall, flooding, lower than average temps. This isnt' normal and maybe not even an anomaly. This may be a tangible sign of global climate change and a shift in global weather patterns. As soon as people stop fighting over semantics and whose to blame, maybe we can focus on the actual changes that are occurring and understand where we are headed.

So what I am getting is that global warming may not be real or more accurately may not even be correct. So how do we know where the major issues will be? Why do I always hear about a rise in overall Global Average Temps.? Is that important or just a single fact among many many pieces of information?

Unfortunetly I think the media has done a disservice to this issue in many ways. They often focus on rising temperatures and call it 'global warming' when that's really only part of the story. It would be more accurate to call it climate change. The temperature of the Earth as a whole (ie the average of all temps on earth) are rising and this can/will cause major shifts in climate. Not every location will see warmer temperatures. Some will actually see colder temperatures. Others won't see significant differences in temperature but instead will see huge differences in rainfall. The key is that local climates could change massively. Weather patterns are gradually becoming more violent (ie more violent, destructive storms). Ice caps will melt, flooding huge amounts of coastal lands. Water temps will change, causing huge changes in fish habitat.

Climate is a very complicated thing and has an enormous influence over our lives as human beings. We've just barely begun to understand how climate works and now we're flipping it on it's head. No one really knows what's going to happen because no one really knows enough about the Earth's climate to make accurate predictions. All we know is that it's definetly changing. The change is undeniable, the only thing that's debatable is wether we're the cause and just what will happen in the future. I believe those arguments are really just a waste of time because at this point it doesn't really matter. The possibility of severe and catastrophic climate changes is real enough that we need to act NOW!

Karen.