Is it possible Plate Tectonics could be causing Global Warming?
We all know Pangaea was a theory of Plate Tectonics. So what if Plate Tectonics was causing Global Warming. It could be the possible giant earthquakes, and the breakup of ice on arctic shelves?
- 1 decade agoFavorite Answer
This was studied, as was every other possible cause. The evidence that man is contributing to global warming is overwhelming.
The IPCC report has been called the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. Well over 90% of climate scientists agree with it. The IPCC represents scientists from 120 countries.
The IPCC scientists have actually erred on the side of a conservative report. They are not alarmists as skeptics claim.
skeptic argument: there is no consensus
"People that say this often have little or no grasp of the science and are using denial to avoid having to face a danger. Fix the denial mechanism by showing them this list of sustainable/green technologies. Then make them read this consensus and say the following quote out loud: "I don't know anything about science, so given the choice of trusting 99.9% or 0.1% of the experts, I'll go with the 0.1%". If still they don't think that sounds silly and they don't start to ask questions then you are wasting your time trying to educate them. This ratio is correct because there are 12,301-14,305 members of the AGU and who knows how many European experts on climate. As Eli Rabbet says "if you ain't a member of the AGU you ain't no damn climate scientist in the US, just like the AMA". Also keep in mind that with the tens of thousand of climate change skeptics on the planet if only %1 of them are corrupted by the $10,000 payment (or bribe) currently being offered by Exxon through AEI then you will have at minimum 200 skeptics/deniers. So far 200 skeptics/deniers have not turned up."
The AGU or American Geophysical Union with its 14,000 members is just one group in the following list of scientific organizations that support the IPCC report.
Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
Royal Society of Canada
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Academié des Sciences (France)
Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
Indian National Science Academy
Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
Science Council of Japan
Russian Academy of Sciences
Royal Society (United Kingdom)
National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
Australian Academy of Sciences
Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
Caribbean Academy of Sciences
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Royal Irish Academy
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
"In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed or published the same conclusions as presented in the TAR report:"
NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
American Geophysical Union (AGU)
American Institute of Physics (AIP)
National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
American Meteorological Society (AMS)
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)
"If this is not scientific consensus, what in the world would a consensus look like?"
"Specifically, the "consensus" about anthropogenic climate change entails the following:"
"The climate is undergoing a pronounced warming trend beyond the range of natural variability;
the major cause of most of the observed warming is rising levels of the greenhouse gas CO2;
the rise in CO2 is the result of burning fossil fuels;
if CO2 continues to rise over the next century, the warming will continue; and
a climate change of the projected magnitude over this time frame represents potential danger to human welfare and the environment.
While theories and viewpoints in conflict with the above do exist, their proponents constitute a very small minority. If we require unanimity before being confident, well, we can't be sure the earth isn't hollow either."
"This consensus is represented in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (TAR WG1), the most comprehensive compilation and summary of current climate research ever attempted, and arguably the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. While this review was sponsored by the UN, the research it compiled and reviewed was not, and the scientists involved were independent and came from all over the world."
"The fact is that there is an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community about global warming and its causes. There are some exceptions, but the number of sceptics is getting smaller rather than growing.
Even the position of perhaps the most respected sceptic, Richard Lindzen of MIT, is not that far off the mainstream: he does not deny it is happening but thinks future warming will not be nearly as great as most predict."Source(s): The Scientific Basis for Anthropogenic Climate Change http://chriscolose.wordpress.com/2007/12... The 2008 National Academy of Sciences Summary Brochure on Climate Change http://dels.nas.edu/dels/rpt_briefs/clim... http://scholarsandrogues.wordpress.com/2007/07/23/... http://www.logicalscience.com/consensus/consensus.... Great site showing overwhelming support for IPCC findings. http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/... http://www.logicalscience.com/ http://gristmill.grist.org/skeptics
- bubbaLv 61 decade ago
No, it is the buildup of minor gases (CO2, CH4, N20 and others ) in the atmosphere resulting from human activity. There is no doubt about the influence of theses gases - they make life as we know it now comfortable on the planet.
In the past, the major cycles of ice ages and thaws, controlled the the obit and tilt of the planet, have been the major driving forces behind the heating and cooling of the planet. CO2 builds as the planet warms from decaying material and decreases as the plant cools because the decay process slows.
Now, however, humans pump billions of tons PER YEAR of CO2 into the atmosphere and it has increased I think about 20% (not sure about number - someone may know the right number) during the past decade. That has made the atmosphere able to hold more of the heat radiating from the earth that would be sent into space. We know the radiative forcing ability of CO2 and warming just a little lets the atmosphere hold more water vapor, which warms the planet even more. A new equilibrium is going to have to occur. Laws of physics and all determine this. The ice is melting as predicted at the poles and high elevations. It is to widespread to be earth quakes and we would detect this.
The ocean is really a key factor and scientist are working to understand their influence better. Hopefully, it will offset of moderate climate change.
Some people suggest volcanoes are the major factor. However, volcanoes can put t lot of aerosols into the stratosphere, as well as the troposphere, and that can sometimes have a cooling effect. Yes, they emitt CO2 but they also emit ofther substances that balances the effects somewhat.
Just saw a presentation from the American Meteorological Association from this past winter meeting in NC that indicated that the cleaner air (less SO2 and particulate matter) may mean even less sunlight is reflect away from the planet. We don't know if this is significant for GW yet or not. Good for human health though.
Unfortunately, humans are a major cause of climate change. The facts are just to hard to ignore for scientist. There is no "hard evidence" it is starting to cool. This is only propaganda from the ill ill informed. The link below provides a summary of the problems in a fairly clear fashion. Takes a while to come up.
Now, even a lot of conservatives are convinced of the issue. Just saw Pat Roberson and Newt Gingrich doing separate commercials with liberal figures saying its time to take this serious. Ronald Regan did. Bush senior did. Are these just liberal tools? I'm not sure what to call the anti -GW folks now. Just uninformed loners I guess.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Global Warming may cause Tectonic Rebound as large volumes of ice are melted and their masses redistributed, but Plate Tectonics does not cause Global Warming
- RickLv 71 decade ago
It is possible that undersea plate tectonics are effecting the oceans.
Scientists truly have no idea about how many active undersea vents exist.
Do you mean the recent Antarctic ice shelf breakoff - located around the southern end of the 'Pacific Ring of Fire'?Source(s): It's not Global Warming, it's Ocean Warming : http://www.iceagenow.com/Ocean_Warming.htm Scientists Don't Know! - Maybe 3 million undersea vents? http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn1221... Alarmists don't want to deal with this NASA web page about what appears to be hot spots in the oceans! http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/k...
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Dr JelloLv 71 decade ago
I think the believers are more likely to say that global warming causes plate tectonics, as to them everything is explained by blaming global warming.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Global Warming isn't happening it's a cycle that the earth goes through every so often. Scientists have found hard evidence that it's now starting global cooling.
- 1 decade ago
highly unlikely because tectonic plates were around for previous iceages so how could they effect this one
- Anonymous1 decade ago
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Not possible because Al Gore can't charge carbon credits for it.