Talk:Controversies in Science/Are humans causing global warming/A critique of Contributions of past and present human generations to committed warming caused by carbon dioxide

I agree with the methods outlined in this article - there is further evidence to support C02 absorption in both the ocean and land at different rates that is found in the article that we have used, titled "Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model" Dlodh574 02:54, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * How do you account for the amount of CO2 that is absorbed by plants and trees that require CO2 to live? The absorption of CO2 by these organisms greatly decreases the amount of detrimental CO2 that is released by humans. Humans cannot be completely responsible for the cause of global warming if there are things that are depreciating the amount of CO2 that they release.Bmina836 02:59, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

The argument made by scientists are that global warming is not as simple as the formula where an increase in Co2 leads to an increase in greenhouse effect which leads to an increase in temperature. The problem with this formula is that the concept of global warming is in fact not this simple but instead is a complex system made of 5 subsystems (atmosphere, hydrosphere, ect...) which have their different temperatures as well as multiple factors that compose their own individual climates. Wasim24 03:09, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with you because in my article i found out that in 1996 Hingane, a scientist, compared two industrialized cites with two non industrialized cities. The industrialized cities had more population and the surface temperature in the industrialized cities was much higher then those of the non industrialized cities.Hmohy985 03:10, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Computer simulated results should not be the foundation of this article. Computer driven data could have inaccuracies with formulas, human error, and scenarios which can lead to inaccurate conclusions. Furthermore, the results from this study should not be used as premise for the causes of global warming. Additional data and experiments would need to be applied. Lbora286 03:11, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * As the results are based on computer simulation and a projected CO2 level is predicted, accurate results of CO2 emission levels cannot be produced. Additionally, this study does not take into account the absorption levels of trees and plant life and how this component ties into CO2 levels. Based on this exclusion of data, this study and the results cannot accurately represent the true story of what is occurring with current and future CO2 levels. All components need to be analyzed in order to accurately analyze CO2 levels.Jdzur290


 * I agree with the fact that accurate results of CO2 emission levels cannot be produced. The study does not take into account many factors and assumes that the temperature of the earth can be measured by a simple equation. The fact that the results were derived from a computer simulation can also lead to a host of bias's both personal and scientific.--Colinc (talk) 02:23, 24 October 2012 (UTC)