0
What else can I help you with?
Will global warming continue even if we try to stop it?
Yes, to some extent, global warming will continue no matter what we try to do to stop it. Once the process has started, it becomes very hard to stop. Added to this, we will inevitably keep adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere if we wish to maintain our high standard of living - and no one suggests we should not. However, by acting now we can begin to slow global warming down and hopefully stop it before it becomes too late. Scientists have given us a two degree Celsius buffer before irreversible damage occurs. A few years ago, economists thought that we could halt global warming before we reached that point, but now feel that it is already too late and that we run the risk of passing that threshold. Nevertheless we should try, and do it now. It has been said that if we take no substantive action before the year 2020, then the entire world may need to be placed on a war footing to meet the common challenge. Acting now is the alternative.
Why do people disagree with global warming?
Science looks for ultimate causes and attempts to answer the question of "why" phenomenon observed occur through observation and experimentation. Much like experts can't agree on the causes of gravity, there are many theories on WHY or HOW it is happening, but they all agree that it IS happening. There is never really 100% consensus in science because until a theory has been disproven it is a possibility to being the truth. Science is all about relative truths, and all "laws" are really just theories and can be replaced if new evidence is gained in support of an alternative hypothesis or explanation. ___________________________________________________________________ Actually, the large majority, globally, of scientists do agree on the causes of Global Warming, particularly on man-made global warming and on what to do to reduce it. The problem is that the media when discussing the issue and to avoid being labeled as biased often allows two experts to comment on it, one for each side. This creates the false impression that the scientific community as a whole is equally divided on the issue, which it is not. Add to that the fact that many so-called skeptical scientists and organizations are either directly or indirectly funded by those corporations which stand to loose should carbon dioxide reducing policies be adopted. The 'scientists' and organizations are often the loudest yet do little more then repeat global warming myths over and over again. Their objective is clear: not to debunk global warming as a whole but to spread misinformation so the general public wrongly believes the science is not settled. ______________________________________________________________ You will find that there is a great deal of grant money available in making sure that man induced global warming is a possible situation. This coupled with the fact that some political groups are attempting to make this "situation" be the cause to reduce lifestyles and transfer trillions of wealth to poor countries, make the issue one that many do not wish to go away currently. Facts are altered (climategate), ignored (pusedo science blogs) and lied about. When people like climate audit catch these lies, the main stream media all but ignore the reality. The lies are quickly swept under the rug and the alarmist crowd moves on. There are many good reasons to keep this "crisis" from being found false. The transfer of wealth, limiting of freedoms and the large grant money many "scientists" enjoy )with almost zero work or effort) make this a great scheme for lining pockets and changing lifestyles. If you view the data, it is hard to reach the conclusion that global warming is a man induced issue. That does not mean it is not happening, it does mean we can not actually say it is or is not. The greed of many though, will prevent us from ever saying 100% that it is not so.
In the first scientific classification of organisms all living things were placed into one of two kingdoms. What were these first two kingdoms?
The original first two kingdoms were animals and plants.
Do the ideas about the value of knowledge gained through scientific research come from a society's social ethical and moral concerns?
Yes, the value placed on knowledge gained through scientific research can be influenced by a society's social, ethical, and moral concerns. These concerns may shape the priorities of research funding, the direction of research, and the application of scientific knowledge to address societal challenges.
What kind of satellites are used for Global Positioning Systems?
GPS uses satellites that were placed into orbit by the Department of Defense. The government set up the entire network on their own, and it is free to use as long as you already have a GPS device.
What has Obama done for Global Warming?
signed a bill authorizing mass production of ice cubes to be placed in the ocean wich will cool down all the see animal habitats and make them happier.
What evidence do some scientists have for not believing in global warming?
Few research scientists would say that global warming is not taking place, because they would be disputing the temperature records. One leading scientist who was prepared to dispute the temperature records was the physics professor Richard Muller, who has been a longtime critic of climate studies. He knew he had the scientific expertise to investigate the studies that have been carried out and thereby to address what he called "the legitimate concerns" of sceptics who believe global warming is exaggerated. The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project at the University of California, Berkeley, was launched with a team of physicists and statisticians who set out to challenge the scientific consensus on global warming. Professor Muller unexpectedly found that the work of the three principal groups that have analysed the temperature trends underlying climate science is "excellent ... We see a global warming trend that is very similar to that previously reported by the other groups."Some scientists either do not believe that changes in greenhouse gas levels are a principal cause of global warming, or believe that predictions of future warming can not be made with certainty. These cases of caution or doubt are not so much based on concrete evidence negating mainstream scientific opinion, but rather a view that the evidence is not yet so absolute that these conclusions and predictions can be made with certainty.In 2001, Richard Lindzen agreed that global warming is occurring and could be caused by increased carbon dioxide (CO2) levels but was one who believed that scientists were not in a position to prove the connection. He said, "We are quite confident (1) that global mean temperature is about 0.5 °C higher than it was a century ago; (2) that atmospheric levels of CO2 have risen over the past two centuries; and (3) that CO2 is a greenhouse gas whose increase is likely to warm the earth (one of many, the most important being water vapor and clouds). But - and I cannot stress this enough - we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to CO2 or to forecast what the climate will be in the future."Other scientists were unconvinced that human activities are a significant cause of rising greenhouse gas levels, but recent biometric studies using C12 and C13 ratios have now proven that link.
Was forced to recant his scientific work which was placed on the Index?
Galileo
Which Tundra Animals are close to extinct?
"Endangered is the category in animal species is placed in before extinction. There are several different animals in the category in the Tundra. Caribou, Arctic Fox, Polar bears, and even Musk Ox's are all considered close to extinction if we don't watch closely."
Who is work was forced to recant his scientific work which was placed on the Index?
galileo
Will global warming continue even if we try to stop it?
Yes, to some extent, global warming will continue no matter what we try to do to stop it. Once the process has started, it becomes very hard to stop. Added to this, we will inevitably keep adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere if we wish to maintain our high standard of living - and no one suggests we should not. However, by acting now we can begin to slow global warming down and hopefully stop it before it becomes too late. Scientists have given us a two degree Celsius buffer before irreversible damage occurs. A few years ago, economists thought that we could halt global warming before we reached that point, but now feel that it is already too late and that we run the risk of passing that threshold. Nevertheless we should try, and do it now. It has been said that if we take no substantive action before the year 2020, then the entire world may need to be placed on a war footing to meet the common challenge. Acting now is the alternative.
What is the scientific term for the appearance of elodea cells placed in a hypotonic solution?
The scientific term for the appearance of elodea cells when placed in a hypotonic solution is turgid. This occurs when water moves into the cell causing it to swell and become firm.
Is global warming caused by the heating of Earth by the trapping of incident sunlight by greenhouse gases?
Yes it is, the green house gas emissions - and not just CO2 .!. - placed by Humanity into Our Atmosphere in the last Century clearly have had and are having an Effect: to what extent, compared to other current Natural Sources, is of little or no consequence after the Glaciers are No More.
Whats been done about global warming?
Very little has been done, unfortunately. Some emphasis has been placed on developing alternatives, but most countries continue accelerating development of fossil fuel resources without regard to carbon sequestration. The US rendered the Kyoto Protocol ineffective, and subsequent efforts to address the problem have also met with very little success. It looks like we may have to accustom ourselves to dealing with a rapidly warming world.
Minimum requirements for an assembly to be placed in GAC?
Assemblies deployed in the global assembly cache must have a strong name
Why do people disagree with global warming?
Science looks for ultimate causes and attempts to answer the question of "why" phenomenon observed occur through observation and experimentation. Much like experts can't agree on the causes of gravity, there are many theories on WHY or HOW it is happening, but they all agree that it IS happening. There is never really 100% consensus in science because until a theory has been disproven it is a possibility to being the truth. Science is all about relative truths, and all "laws" are really just theories and can be replaced if new evidence is gained in support of an alternative hypothesis or explanation. ___________________________________________________________________ Actually, the large majority, globally, of scientists do agree on the causes of Global Warming, particularly on man-made global warming and on what to do to reduce it. The problem is that the media when discussing the issue and to avoid being labeled as biased often allows two experts to comment on it, one for each side. This creates the false impression that the scientific community as a whole is equally divided on the issue, which it is not. Add to that the fact that many so-called skeptical scientists and organizations are either directly or indirectly funded by those corporations which stand to loose should carbon dioxide reducing policies be adopted. The 'scientists' and organizations are often the loudest yet do little more then repeat global warming myths over and over again. Their objective is clear: not to debunk global warming as a whole but to spread misinformation so the general public wrongly believes the science is not settled. ______________________________________________________________ You will find that there is a great deal of grant money available in making sure that man induced global warming is a possible situation. This coupled with the fact that some political groups are attempting to make this "situation" be the cause to reduce lifestyles and transfer trillions of wealth to poor countries, make the issue one that many do not wish to go away currently. Facts are altered (climategate), ignored (pusedo science blogs) and lied about. When people like climate audit catch these lies, the main stream media all but ignore the reality. The lies are quickly swept under the rug and the alarmist crowd moves on. There are many good reasons to keep this "crisis" from being found false. The transfer of wealth, limiting of freedoms and the large grant money many "scientists" enjoy )with almost zero work or effort) make this a great scheme for lining pockets and changing lifestyles. If you view the data, it is hard to reach the conclusion that global warming is a man induced issue. That does not mean it is not happening, it does mean we can not actually say it is or is not. The greed of many though, will prevent us from ever saying 100% that it is not so.
How much scientific weight should we place on the results of these models?
The scientific weight placed on model results depends on factors like model accuracy, validity of assumptions, and uncertainty quantification. It is important to consider model limitations, potential biases, and variability in input parameters when interpreting results. Results should be compared with observational data and validated against real-world outcomes to assess reliability.
