Hello

I watched a talk show on television , yesterday night
Someone claimed that human beings are responsible for climatic changes on earth because of industrial pollution .
Someone else claimed that human impact is definitly negligible.
Glacial and tropical conditions are cyclic regardless of the human action
Although the former hypothesis was supported also by a nobel price for physics I was not convinced at all
It seems a nonsense to me that we can really change the the global ( not the local ones) enviromental conditions of our planet

Ecologists and "Greens" are a little bit exagerating in my opinion
What do you think ?

It's undeniable that we're the cause of the climate change. Millions of tons of CO2 sadly aren't nonsense, and in the last few years there has been a lot of scientific evidence that the CO2 is the main cause of the climate change. The climate has always been changing, but has never changed that drastically as it does now. People who absolutely deny these scienific _facts_ just don't want to realise that they should change their way of life in favor of our planet, imo.

Simply put: Nature wants to low us down to the level of the other animals, or at least tries to put us in the situation where we have to think about all this.

Tornadoes, Tsunamis, Hurricanes all that are simply raising because of the 'sudden' raise of the temperature of earth, and the cause of it.. You know it already. Soon enough we get those storms daily.

Agreed with above. A good movie to watch is called "An Inconvenient Truth" - is proves that it is due to pollution and how we are currently living our lives.

Thanks,
Adoado.

...and climate change is not all, what about the oil removed from the ground?
Oil makes the perfect shock absorber and since the removal, earthquakes are becoming more pronounced in ther effects and feel.

Ozone, most of the lost ozone can be directly attributed to rocket ships of any discription going thru the layer.

They blast a hole in the ozone layer approximatly 2 miles in circumference which requires 5 years to refill, if theres anything left to refill it of course.
If you were to calculate every knmown recorded mission thru the ozone layer, you would come with a figure that almosts accounts for 95 % of the ozone loss.

But not all changes can be said to be human enfluenced.
In or around 1981 ish, ships started crashing into rocks and shorelines that they never use to.
The cause was found to be the planet tipping on its axis which threw out star navigation so causing these accidents to happen.
Now shihps navigate with sattelite directions.

We are also moving into a belt of cosmic ionized matter which some think is contributing to temperature rises.

And, who can say what effects our own sun is having on all our woes...
freaky stuff happening everywhere.

That with the rocket ships and the earth axis tipping is probably from a science fiction book, but it's undeniable that the CO2 amount in our atmosphere is permanently rising. Even if a few scientists are still not yet sure if this causes global warming today, when the CO2 rising continues it must have global effects.

Let's build a flat scaled model of our earth
A cylinder 10 mt diameter and 0.25 mt height , full of air
Big cities such as New York, London, Paris etc are small circles abt 0.5 cm diameter
The total surface of the big and the small circles is less than 0.01% of the surface of the earth
The circles emit some smoke
If your model is realistic you need a magnifying glass to see it
Well catastrophic ecologists claim that this smoke can modify the climate inside the cylinder
I have some doubt

i'm not sure what to say.. you cant use those kinds of "common sense" arguements to dispute actual science.

Since i assume you havent read the various papers, reports, studies, etc, I dont see how you can even begin to understand the issues at hand. Why do people assume that they are qualified to judge a scientific theory if they really know nothing about it? This is same problem with creationists.

There are indeed scientists who dispute some aspects of the climate change theories, but they do so by using more science. There are some doubts too about the extent of climate change caused by artificial means, but not because "New York looks so small on a map"...this is silly.

Its not about how big the city is, its about the volume of emissions released over time. There is no question that the global climate is becoming warmer, and that human activities are partly responsible. The question is how much..