The same proof that it is-none. We will know in about 500 years
Yes, unfortunately. Governments and business have not shown much determination to ban carbon dioxide emissions, nor to encourage renewable energy. There is already enough greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to continue the present warming for at least another hundred years, so global warming will certainly be worse in the future.
Petrol is not neutral as it is a fossil fuel that releases carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases when burned. This contributes to global warming and climate change.
Global warming will raise the temperature of the earth and cause great changes to the climate. The earth will cope with this. All living things on earth, however, may die if global warming continues.
Weather events are neither proof nor disproof of global warming being factual.A very cold week is weather, not climate. Climateis the pattern of weather over the years. So one cold winter, or one severe tornado is not evidence for or against climate change. Scientists look at the patterns over the years to see what changes there are.Global warming may mean lots of different changes in climate. Some areas may be much drier, others may be much wetter. During the recent cold winter in the US, parts of Canada were much warmer than usual. This doesn't prove anything, until it becomes a pattern.
Stagnation
The amount of CO2 released by the oxidation of tobacco leaves, worldwide, is not significant, nor a significant contributor to global warming overall. If we included the fossil fuel energy consumed in the planting, harvesting, and curing of tobacco crops and the CO2 from producing cigarette paper and the oxidation of that paper as the cigarettes are smoked, we still don't get a significant contributing factor to overall global warming.
Equatorial regions are getting hotter due to the increase in greenhouse gas emissions that trap heat in the atmosphere, leading to global warming. The polar regions are also warming, but at a faster rate than equatorial regions due to a phenomenon known as polar amplification, where feedback mechanisms amplify the warming effects in these areas.
There is nor proof that they can't so i bet they can!
Stagnation
No evidence disproves it. There is some evidence which at face value may seem to contraindicate human activity as the primary cause of global warming, but that evidence is most likely simply misinterpreted, in view of all the evidence supporting the hypothesis. One example was a recent study on cosmic rays. Editors at the Wall Street Journal jumped on this study as "proving" humans could not be responsible for global warming, even though the authors of the study could show no long term variation in cosmic ray bombardment, nor any significant impact of cosmic rays upon actual climate. In point of fact, in the opening paragraphs of that very study the authors acknowledged the human contribution to greenhouse gas emissions and their impact upon the global climate.
Unity in a paragraph is making sure that everything "flows." The paragraph should always begin with a topic sentence, such as "One of the reasons the climate is changing is because of pollution." From then on, whatever is being said must support the topic sentence. If you make claims, they need to be supported by logic. An example of a paragraph that would not be unified would be by inserting a random fact about your dog in a paragraph about global warming. They're not related, nor does your dog have an relevance to global warming.
Well,Republicans do want WAR,Don't belive global warming is caused by HUMANS nor exists,Lie most of the time like ''Democrat is a Religon that doesen't belive in God,so they kind of do,but I have a lot more reasons that would take to much time.