I do know that rising temperatures will be detrimental to human health and water supplies.
I am not an IPCC, climate on NASA scientist. In the studies they have ranged from stating dominant to 70-95%. I do not know the answer.
There are many scientific laws that apply , but the the one that comes to mind first is the Stefan Boltzmann Law.

There are many reasons to reduce CO2 emissions and if the consensus of the majority world's leading scientists do not convince you, the geopolitical,security and economic aspects should.

global warming or not, that makes no sense. of course global warming would cause storms. do you even get how storms start? dumb dumb dumb

OMFG!!!!! I just heard that mushrooms contribute to global warming!!!! All of you GD tree hugging nature fascists will now have to eat something else besides mushrooms.

__________________
THAT explains it!!!



Word of warning... I don't play well with others.

How do you know this? The science I am familiar with indicate warmer temperatures are beneficial....increased productivity of food sources and so on. Nonetheless... that is not what I asked. What is the optimal temperature? Meaning, at what temperature does the earth need to be at for a beneficial balance to be attained?

You are correct, you do not know the answer. Man's contribution is <1%. With out knowing this answer, answering the remaining questions would make little sense.

You are right, there are many laws that apply, but how is this relevant? Stefan's law is about calculating the "effective" temperature and this has nothing to do with "optimal" temperature nor does it contribute toward explaining how the 1% of CO2 emission by man is capable of having any significance on the other 99% of this dynamic, complex adaptive system we call Earth.

I think you are getting ahead of yourself. As best I can tell, we have not yet determined that CO2 and certainly not man's contribution of CO2 is significant in affecting the Earth's Climate and certainly not significant to the point of being able to "control" Earth's climate.

I can be convinced, but only with real science not politics...and I have yet to see any real science being used to support the panic that is being generated. Who are the scientists that make up this "consensus"?... not that this really matters anyway, because as far as I know, there is no such thing as "consensus" in science. If it is to be science, it either is... or it is not... the rigors of the scientific method makes no room for agreements. Agreements are for politics. Climate change is nothing more than a hypothesis and needs to undergo the scrutiny of all the scientific disciplines so that we can make it settled science--one way or the other---and as of now, it is not settled.

__________________
"Liberals live in a house of mirrors...that is why they don't like what they see" 1WISEGUY

'My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it.'
-- Barack Obama


"If God had wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. " Jay Leno

Where do they say this? I have seen much smaller ranges.

If you cannot follow what rising sea levels and melting ice shelfs will do then I will not exlain it to you. There could be some small regions that the rising temperatures would have transient positive effects for agriculture,yet in the end the negative impact is over shadows this. If we get to the point that massive amounts of methane are released in melting permafrost it will cause momentum to exceed what has been predicted.


I said I did not know where in the range given (70-100%) it was likely to fall. Do you want to explain your <1% statistic?


Stephans law is about Stefan-Boltzmann equation - that converts radiant energy to temperature. It has nothing to do with effective or optimal temperatures. Do you even know what you are talking about when referring to laws of science?



No, it is scientific theory and and based upon scientific laws.

There is no panic, just rational people that understand that we need to seek alternative energy not only to reduce emissions , but for the geo-political, security, and economic factors as well.

Moose farts also cause globaloney.

__________________
honor the fallen; http://www.militarycity.com/valor/honor.html
Iraq body count http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Storms of "hot air" generated by liberals is the greatest contributor to "global warming"....... no doubt

__________________
Definition of political correctness:
A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical liberal minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

I'm politically incorrect and damn well satisfied to be so. Gummer

Most people are egocentric - they are only concerned about things that affect them personally. They will only come to grips with the reality of global warming at the grocery store when they are fighting in the isles for the food on the shelves.

>>>Bogus or not, you need to believe (or at least convince people that you believe) that global warming is a problem in order to get elected anymore. Ask Bush. Ask Gingrich. Ask McCain.