Why is temperature increasing day by day on Earth?
Long wave radiation strike on the earth but surface of the earth convert that long wave radiation into short wave radiation and throw back but C02 in atmosphere has tendecy to absorb that radiation. Due to absorption of this hot short wave radiation temperature increases and this is called global warming.now the question is this process is continuing since the formation of the earth but why it is so aggressive now? It is because cutting of a trees. As trees absorb CO2 during photosynthesis there is balance of CO2 cycle but now this cycle has been disturbed thus amount of CO2 increased and thus amount of radiation been increased and thus temperature is increased…Thanks.
What effect would thick cloud cover have on temperature of Earth's surface? Explain.?
It would cool the average temperature. The thick cloud would block out all incoming sunlight, however, it would prevent any of the earth's heat from escaping into space. Still even with the prevention of heat from escaping, the lack of sunlight would cool down the earth more
So... About global climate change...?
If global temperatures continue to rise, this will cause glaciers, Antarctica, and the ice on Greenland to melt, yes? But at the same time, with global temperatures rising and an increased water coverage are, would that not cause higher cloud coverage? And If temperatures continue to rise, eventually plunge the Earth into another Ice Age due to almost global cloud coverage, is this correct? And if so, how long would such a process take?
What is the global warming and their problems?what is the satification?
Primary problem with global warming is reduction of cloud cover. As temperature rises clouds will form only with much larger amount of water vapour in the air. Reduced cloud cover allows more sunlight to strike earth instead of reflecting. But the sunlight also dries out the farmland, converting it to near-desert. The large volume of water vapour needed to cause cloud formation will eventually accumulate and cloud formation will then proceed rapidly, creating much heavier rainfall, much stronger winds. The storm once started is going to deliver all that water vapour as rain along a narrow band of land that gets flooded, often many times in sequence while other areas nearby remain parched. Seeding of clouds to cause that water vapour to deliver water where one wants it may be a partial solution. Man-made reflectivity may induce a local temperature drop that will trigger rainfall when there is far less water vapour, thus less risk of deluges. We can plan to store vast quantities of water to allow us to irrigate in areas not favoured with natural rain distribution. Eventual melting of Antarctic glaciers would produce rising sea levels, Basically this would require people to move to higher land or build structures like Holland's system of dikes to hold back the sea and keep the land drained by pumping.
What are the alternative theories to anthropogenic global warming?
An alternative theory does not have to explain both. If we ignore physics for the moment, then they could be purely independent phenomena. While most scientists believe in AGW, virtually ALL legitimate scientists accept that the increase in CO2 is anthropogenic. That is by far the most rational and reasonable explanation of the CO2 increase. The temperature increase could then be ascribed to natural variation due to change in cloud cover distribution or change in water vapor distribution or some thing else that could cause a change in temperature without being observationally well-controlled. EDIT: I'm sure you realize that I believe the conventional explanation for the temperature increase is by far the most likely one. So by "ignoring the physics" what I mean is that although we would certainly expect to see a temperature increase because of the CO2 increase, maybe we don't have a complete grasp on the radiative transfer processes associated with that, so there's less of an effect that we realize. Then perhaps it's some other aspect of the physics that's giving the temperature increase. For example, while we explain the water vapor distribution on average to follow the Clausius-Clapeyron Equation, that only really tells us about the equilibrium (saturation) vapor pressure--the actual vapor pressure in the atmosphere is less than that and varies tremendously on many scales. Personally, I don't think we have very good historical controls on the global distribution of water vapor. That information is reliant on the balloon soundings, which have been extremely sparse over the oceanic regions and even many continental regions. They've also had (and still have) accuracy problems with their hygristors. What if the global distribution of water vapor has changed over the past 100 years, and that has caused the warming that we've seen? That could even still be anthropogenic, but unrelated to CO2 increase. Again, I think such a theory is much less likely to be true, but I'm not sure it could be ruled out based on observations. Nevertheless, it's still important that we get carbon dioxide emissions under control. Right now we are in a situation where we are running a large, uncontrolled experiment on the atmosphere and oceans. EDIT for Sagebrush: Saying that something is a "natural cycle" is not a theory. It doesn't explain a single thing. You might as well say that it was done by the work of invisible angels.