The arguments on global warming

September 25, 2004

Global warming is at the heart of a debate among scientists and politicians over the role of humans in altering the climate and regulating pollutants.

The case for global warming:

In 1988, James Hansen, a federal scientist, raised the possibility that humans are damaging the climate by adding greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

In 1999, UCI chemist F. Sherwood Rowland shared the Nobel Prize in chemistry for determing that chlorofluorocarbons damage the ozone layer.

In 2001, a United Nations panel that included UCI climatologist Michael Prather found that the sudden rise in global temperature over the past century almost exactly matches steep increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The panel forecast a 4-to 8-degree increase in the next century.

The case against:

Debate raged immediately over attempts to blame people for increasing temperatures.

Natural climate cycles before the industrial age also showed dramatic and sometimes sudden swings in temperature.

Bore holes, tree rings and satellite measurements of the sea surface all have limitations, enabling potential error to creep in, said John Christy, atmospheric-science professor at the University of Alabama in Huntsville.

In 2003, the Bush administration decided not to follow the Kyoto protocols, which limit industrial pollution, saying the economic impact of industrial regulations would exceed any benefits, and that more studies were needed to determine whether global warming presents a public health threat.

Source: Register news reports.