Is global warming the result of natural phenomena or human activity?
Scientists don’t fully understand the role of natural CO2 emissions on climate, much less the role of human emissions. Earth was in the grip of an ice age 440 million years ago, despite the fact that CO2 concentrations were up to ten times current levels. There is similarly little evidence of a link between human CO2 emissions and climate change. Two-thirds of the rise in global temperatures since the mid-19th century occurred before 1940, when carbon dioxide emissions from human activities were still minimal. Further, despite a more than 19 percent rise in such emissions since 1979, the planet temperature has cooled slightly over the past 18 years by 0.9 degrees Celsius. Is the cure worse than the disease? The initial objective of international negotiators is to reduce CO2 emissions to their 1990 levels by the year 2000, with further reductions slated for 2010 and 2020. Just stabilizing these gases at 1990 levels could cost one to three million jobs in the U.S., according to CONSAD Re
Related Questions
- Is global warming the result of natural phenomenon or human activity?; and 4) Is the prescribed cure for global warming worse than the disease?
- What do I say when a scientist claims that his model shows global warming from human activity?
- Is global warming, caused by human activity, even remotely plausible?
