» Site Navigation
1 members and 684 guests
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.
» Today's Birthdays
» Stats
Members: 75,905
Threads: 249,105
Posts: 2,572,113
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
|
-
Global Warming
Who all beleives in Global Warming? Me personally I dont believe it.
-
I believe that we aren't helping, but the earth does have natural cycles (ice age, warming period, hot climate, cooling period,... Repeat) I think that we are moving into a hot climate, which in time will cool back off.
That isn't to say that we shouldn't work to cut emissions/pollution. Even if global warming doesn't exist, they aren't good things.
-
You cant just ask that question with nothing else. I believe that everyone who does believe in it only do so based on what they've heard. The so called "facts".
This is a scientific conversation and so would need the believers to provide the proof to support their end of the story, and the non believers to do the same.
In all honesty, similar to what I said in the other thread, this planet has been here much too long, and we've been here too short of a time, to accurately measure something like that yet.
Based on modern studies though, it appears that global warming, the trend of rising and lowering CO2 levels, as well as rising and lowering planetary temperatures over so many years, coinciding with the suns cycles, is completely normal and natural. In fact, the planetary temperatures are actually dropping or have stayed the same for the last 15 years. That much IS a fact.
So much for global warming as the politicians would have you see it.. :p
-
Re: Global Warming
Heh,
I actually think we are heading into a mild glacial period.
dr del
-
I think the past is just repeating yeah we might be making it worse. Last year here in central Illinois we got 2 feet of snow and the weather was freezing but this year we had 2 days of snow the most was 2 inches, its been hoodie or long sleeve shirt weather as opposed to wearing layers at this same time last year. Just my thought.
-
The earth does have natural heating and cooling cycles but the cycle we are heading into is heating up the earth at an alarming rate compared to previous years. I have a crapload of facts that i can back up this statement with, like links to certain studies, but im at work right now so i dont have access to them. We gotta table this debate for like 2 hours until i get home lol.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
The earth does have natural heating and cooling cycles but the cycle we are heading into is heating up the earth at an alarming rate compared to previous years. I have a crapload of facts that i can back up this statement with, like links to certain studies, but im at work right now so i dont have access to them. We gotta table this debate for like 2 hours until i get home lol.
We haven't been around long enough to actually be able to tell how quickly the changes should happen, we are talking about cycles that take hundreds to thousands of years.
I agree that wee defiantly aren't doing the right things, and maybe even that we are helping it along... but in the end the Earth has was to deal with the excess C02. This isn't her first time around the block
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr del
Heh,
I actually think we are heading into a mild glacial period.
dr del
I agree.. They've already proven with over 30,000 monitoring stations that the temps have fallen in the last 15 years. I've also read reports on all the mini ice ages/glacial periods we've been able to record. For years people thought ice age meant the big one that came after the dinosaurs but now we know that isn't true.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
The earth does have natural heating and cooling cycles but the cycle we are heading into is heating up the earth at an alarming rate compared to previous years. I have a crapload of facts that i can back up this statement with, like links to certain studies, but im at work right now so i dont have access to them. We gotta table this debate for like 2 hours until i get home lol.
What are you talking about? None of the global warming projections have actually been met. Read through this very carefully and open your mind. Especially the parts I've quoted. The planet is doing what it does.. The next 15 years will be the tell all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ing-again.html
"The supposed consensus on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years."
"Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997."
"CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to come roaring back. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998. So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid."
"Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been steady warming from 2000 until now."
"If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories, he said."
He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate, Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America's most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met office's confident prediction of negligable impact difficult to understand.
The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun, said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists are not surprised."
"She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global climate, said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past, such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle flipped back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also thought likely to flip in the next few years .
Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept, because doing so means admitting that the oceans, not CO2, caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.
The same goes for the impact of the sun, which was highly active for much of the 20th Century.
Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment, he said. Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-made CO2, or by natural variability.
Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen by more than half a degree, as the cold La Nina effect has re-emerged in the South Pacific.
We're now well into the second decade of the pause, said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. If we don't see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the implications for some scientists could be very serious."
-
Re: Global Warming
*grabs some popcorn* a good debate for me to check up on every now and then while I work. :)
-
I'm more worried about he poles swapping over than I am about global warming...
-
Re: Global Warming
Indeed.
That the birds and fish cope with it ok is kind of reassuring but our technology isn't exactly that smart yet.
dr del
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slim
I'm more worried about he poles swapping over than I am about global warming...
The poles do that regularly too.. In fact, the last pole shift wasn't that long ago. Was it just a couple years? I'll have to look it up.
*** I should have said they are "shifting" regularly.
Check this out. I read this earlier last year.
http://m.aol.com/news/default/getCon...tampa-airport/
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Serpent Merchant
We haven't been around long enough to actually be able to tell how quickly the changes should happen, we are talking about cycles that take hundreds to thousands of years.
I agree that wee defiantly aren't doing the right things, and maybe even that we are helping it along... but in the end the Earth has was to deal with the excess C02. This isn't her first time around the block
We havent been around long enough but by looking at the different layers of the earth scientists have been able to pinpoint what the temps were, to a fairly accurate degree, over the past hundreds of thousands of years.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foschi Exotic Serpents
What are you talking about? None of the global warming projections have actually been met. Read through this very carefully and open your mind. Especially the parts I've quoted. The planet is doing what it does.. The next 15 years will be the tell all.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...ing-again.html
"The supposed consensus on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years."
"Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997."
"CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption and, in 2007, the Met Office claimed that global warming was about to come roaring back. It said that between 2004 and 2014 there would be an overall increase of 0.3C. In 2009, it predicted that at least three of the years 2009 to 2014 would break the previous temperature record set in 1998. So far there is no sign of any of this happening. But yesterday a Met Office spokesman insisted its models were still valid."
"Dr Nicola Scafetta, of Duke University in North Carolina, is the author of several papers that argue the Met Office climate models show there should have been steady warming from 2000 until now."
"If temperatures continue to stay flat or start to cool again, the divergence between the models and recorded data will eventually become so great that the whole scientific community will question the current theories, he said."
He believes that as the Met Office model attaches much greater significance to CO2 than to the sun, it was bound to conclude that there would not be cooling. The real issue is whether the model itself is accurate, Dr Scafetta said. Meanwhile, one of America's most eminent climate experts, Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology, said she found the Met office's confident prediction of negligable impact difficult to understand.
The responsible thing to do would be to accept the fact that the models may have severe shortcomings when it comes to the influence of the sun, said Professor Curry. As for the warming pause, she said that many scientists are not surprised."
"She argued it is becoming evident that factors other than CO2 play an important role in rising or falling warmth, such as the 60-year water temperature cycles in the Pacific and Atlantic oceans.
They have insufficiently been appreciated in terms of global climate, said Prof Curry. When both oceans were cold in the past, such as from 1940 to 1970, the climate cooled. The Pacific cycle flipped back from warm to cold mode in 2008 and the Atlantic is also thought likely to flip in the next few years .
Pal Brekke, senior adviser at the Norwegian Space Centre, said some scientists found the importance of water cycles difficult to accept, because doing so means admitting that the oceans, not CO2, caused much of the global warming between 1970 and 1997.
The same goes for the impact of the sun, which was highly active for much of the 20th Century.
Nature is about to carry out a very interesting experiment, he said. Ten or 15 years from now, we will be able to determine much better whether the warming of the late 20th Century really was caused by man-made CO2, or by natural variability.
Meanwhile, since the end of last year, world temperatures have fallen by more than half a degree, as the cold La Nina effect has re-emerged in the South Pacific.
We're now well into the second decade of the pause, said Benny Peiser, director of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. If we don't see convincing evidence of global warming by 2015, it will start to become clear whether the models are bunk. And, if they are, the implications for some scientists could be very serious."
The earth hasnt warme in the past 15 years...Ok big deal. If you look at a BIG graph of like the past 800,000 years then we are on the rise higher than the averages have been before.
-
A chart like this is what i was referencing: http://www.helpsavetheclimate.com/ipcc1.gif
Yea i know the site this came from can ruin the actual validation of the chart but you get the idea...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
The earth hasnt warme in the past 15 years...Ok big deal. If you look at a BIG graph of like the past 800,000 years then we are on the rise higher than the averages have been before.
It's a planet... A huge, terrestrial planet with a metal core (until proven otherwise), silica, molten stuff, etc.. It's also rather close to the sun which has great effects on its weather among other things. It has a moon, which also has great effects on these things. Oh, and there are other planets whose orbits sometimes cause them to align rather close to the earth. This also has huge effects on the earth. We're experiencing 2 of these major alignments right now, this year. Are you forgetting these tiny little details? It's doing what this type of planet does..
George Carlin said it best when he said the planet will be fine. Long after mankind is gone, this planet is going to be here and there will be life on it.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foschi Exotic Serpents
It's a planet... A huge, terrestrial planet with a metal core (until proven otherwise), silica, molten stuff, etc.. It's also rather close to the sun which has great effects on its weather among other things. It has a moon, which also has great effects on these things. Oh, and there are other planets whose orbits sometimes cause them to align rather close to the earth. This also has huge effects on the earth. We're experiencing 2 of these major alignments right now, this year. Are you forgetting these tiny little details? It's doing what this type of planet does..
George Carlin said it best when he said the planet will be fine. Long after mankind is gone, this planet is going to be here and there will be life on it.
I disagree. And for the record im not a hippy or anything lol but im just saying we are destroying the planet. In soooo many ways.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
I disagree. And for the record im not a hippy or anything lol but im just saying we are destroying the planet. In soooo many ways.
I agree that we aren't doing anything good for the planet with all of our garbage, waste, gasses, etc.. But I don't believe that we are the cause of global warming.. Considering the new evidence, and the fact that there was much less accumulation of garbage and pollution back during the last thermal maximum... If we used THAT as an excuse, then we'd have to say the garbage and pollution accumulation causes global cooling.
I bet if you were alive back when they first suggested the earth was round, you would have been certain they were wrong. You seem the type to refuse to believe anything new once something's already in your head. I bet you could fit more information in your brain, and the other information that has been there so comfortably for so long would not be a bit upset about it though... You should give it a try.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
Unfortunately (or fortunately for the millions upon millions of taxpayers dollars being funneled towards them), the IPCC was caught with their pants down creating fraudulent data points and deleting every other data point that didn't fit their graphs. I know nothing about the website you linked to but the place they're getting their information from is 100% fradulent. I'm open to hearing about man caused Global Warming but to date have not seen one scientificly rigorous, peer reviewed study that hasn't been rocked by scandal (famous hockey stick graph, East Anglia emails, etc).
Here is a link to one of many, many articles about it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...eneration.html
Here is a great quote from the linked article about the so called "science" and open mindness that goes on that the IPCC:
Quote:
They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.
This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones's refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got "lost". Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offence.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabberwocky Dragons
Unfortunately (or fortunately for the millions upon millions of taxpayers dollars being funneled towards them), the IPCC was caught with their pants down creating fraudulent data points and deleting every other data point that didn't fit their graphs. I know nothing about the website you linked to but the place they're getting their information from is 100% fradulent. I'm open to hearing about man caused Global Warming but to date have not seen one scientificly rigorous, peer reviewed study that hasn't been rocked by scandal (famous hockey stick graph, East Anglia emails, etc).
Here is a link to one of many, many articles about it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/c...eneration.html
Here is a great quote from the linked article about the so called "science" and open mindness that goes on that the IPCC:
Ya like i said, i didnt wanna use that bc i know someone was gunna prove it was BS somehow but there are similar charts provided by more accurate sources.
-
I can't tell you why or how exactly but I personally have been up north above the arctic circle and the permafrost that has been frozen for as long as anyone can tell (1000s of years or longer) is now not frozen. Buildings and bridges have sunk into mud that has not been mud in recoded history. Robins have been seen in the NWT mosquitoes too in regions that have always been too cold for them.
The truly frightening part of the whole thing however is the apex predators, the polar bears are suffering huge problems from pollution they are the keystone species for the world.
I can't say why but I know things have changed in the Arctic but they have. i am certain there will be an impact what that will be I cannot say but something. The past 5 winters are the mildest I have ever seen in my area.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/sc...anarctic.shtml
-
Re: Global Warming
Here's what I think, global warming/climate change is not anything caused by anything within our control, humans are not the cause of climate change what so ever, that's been pretty much proven.
What has also been proven is that our air quality is crap and getting crappier. Generally we are screwing up this planet, whether it is warming up or not is irrelevant. With all the ways to prevent against "global warming" also normally improve air quality and other quality aspects of life. We should still be trying to make this world a better place.
Now what I don't agree with is the obvious agenda of corporations trying to use global warming as a scare tactic and implement laws they gives them tax payers money and put restrictions in areas of my life where they are not needed.
-
I know about the arctic but the numbers don't lie either. Places that are use to hot weather have been getting cooler weather. That part is just as obvious as the ice melting in the arctic.
It's obvious the weather is changing ALL over the planet. But again, the planetary temperatures have not risen at all in 15 years but have dropped.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foschi Exotic Serpents
I agree that we aren't doing anything good for the planet with all of our garbage, waste, gasses, etc.. But I don't believe that we are the cause of global warming.. Considering the new evidence, and the fact that there was much less accumulation of garbage and pollution back during the last thermal maximum... If we used THAT as an excuse, then we'd have to say the garbage and pollution accumulation causes global cooling.
I bet if you were alive back when they first suggested the earth was round, you would have been certain they were wrong. You seem the type to refuse to believe anything new once something's already in your head. I bet you could fit more information in your brain, and the other information that has been there so comfortably for so long would not be a bit upset about it though... You should give it a try.
lol youre judging me and saying im narrow minded by like 3 posts in this thread? Ok well it doesnt seem like your welcoming my opinion with open arms lol... Im not saying im right, but i dont think you are either. Id rather debate global warming than discuss our personalities lol.
CO2 amplifies the green house effect. The level of CO2 is higher now than ever before. Even through the natural hot and cold cycles of the earth that we talked about earlier. There are numerous HUMAN causes that are raising the levels. Most species populations in ecosystems can be shown using an "r" graph. Where once the carrying capacity is reached the population will level itself off. The graph of human population of the world looks like an "r" on its side. When will we reach the carrying capacity of our ecosystem, "earth", and essentially self destruct? Well at the rate were going... Mammal species have an average lifespan of 1 million years on earth. At the rate we are going, humans are not going to make it that far, i assure you.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by ball python 22
Who all beleives in Global Warming? Me personally I dont believe it.
Global warming is a scientific fact. But if you don't want to believe it, nobody can make you.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkS
Global warming is a scientific fact. But if you don't want to believe it, nobody can make you.
Exactly! Its a scientific theory. If you wanna ignore it or dont believe it thats fine but to say its not real is just not true.
-
I think the question should not be who believes in global warming, but who believes that humans cause global warming. Of course global warming is a fact. So is global cooling. The planet goes through cycles.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
Exactly! Its a scientific theory. If you wanna ignore it or dont believe it thats fine but to say its not real is just not true.
You've said a lot about global warming for several posts but have yet to produce any supporting evidence. I am open to hearing about man caused global warming but have not seen ANY legit studies to date. There were problems with your other posts too that I skipped but will go back now because of this post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
The earth hasnt warme in the past 15 years...Ok big deal. If you look at a BIG graph of like the past 800,000 years then we are on the rise higher than the averages have been before.
The Earth experiences incredibly different fluctuations in atmospheric makeup, rainfall, and literal Earth changing events such as super volcano eruptions and meteorite impacts, that makes average temperature over very long time spans completely useless for a man caused global warming debate. The Earth today is not going to have the same average temperature as it did 800,000, 400,000, or 200,000 years ago. I suppose that's good data to have (I'm all for expanding knowledge) but it's completely irrelevant to this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike41793
We havent been around long enough but by looking at the different layers of the earth scientists have been able to pinpoint what the temps were, to a fairly accurate degree, over the past hundreds of thousands of years.
What may (big maybe on may) be useful would be temperature data since man started becoming industrialized and may actually be able to do some damage. I am not familiar with the methodology used for proxy climate data (using layers of the earth) but it seems iffy and easily fudged from the brief research I did. However, giving it the benefit of the doubt, proxy climate data still suggests that there has been zero man caused global warming.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11676&page=81
From above link:
Quote:
For central Greenland (Cuffey et al. 1995, Cuffey and Clow 1997, Dahl-Jensen et al. 1998), results show a warming over the last 150 years of approximately 1°C ± 0.2°C preceded by a few centuries of cool conditions. Preceding this was a warm period centered around A.D. 1000, which was warmer than the late 20th century by approximately 1°C.
It's extremely unlikely that 11th century man polluted more than we do, yet, these studies using techniques you support, show the Earth was "warmer" in 1,000 AD than it is today.
Scientific Theory does not equal fact. Some scientists believe man caused global warming but many many do not. There are several different competing Scientific Theories for the origin of the universe (String Theory, Big Bang, etc) but they are not all correct.
Let's see some evidence (cited peer reviwed studies) that aren't rocked by scandal and fraud and I will keep an open mind when I read them.
-
Do I believe it happens?...Yes. Do I believe man causes it?...No. Hear are a few links I have found on the topic so you can get out of them what you will:
No Need to Panic About Global Warming
Climate Alarmism: And the wall comes tumbling down
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995
5 myths about green energy
The IPCC consensus on climate change was phoney, says IPCC insider
Silencing global warming critics
James Cameron cancels debate with climate skeptics
As a matter of fact an older Co-worker of mine remembers back in the early 70's, Time magazone had an article about the upcoming Ice Age. Alot of these "scientists", ten years ago, said that there would be any snow in ten years. RRRRRRRRiiiiight. I also have trouble with saying that if the glaciers melt then the oceans will rise. Ever put ice cubes in a glass of water and let them melt? The glass doesn't suddenly overflow because the ice melted. I prefer to listen to the science that talks about the connection between how the activity of the sun affects the climate of the earth and not live my life in fear.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabberwocky Dragons
You've said a lot about global warming for several posts but have yet to produce any supporting evidence. I am open to hearing about man caused global warming but have not seen ANY legit studies to date. There were problems with your other posts too that I skipped but will go back now because of this post.
-Man caused global warming is due to all the CO2 we are producing. I already posted about that. Like higher population of the world+deforestation+burning fossil fuels = stronger green house effect. Which means global warming. You cant honestly tell me that you think none of these things have negative effects?
The Earth experiences incredibly different fluctuations in atmospheric makeup, rainfall, and literal Earth changing events such as super volcano eruptions and meteorite impacts, that makes average temperature over very long time spans completely useless for a man caused global warming debate. The Earth today is not going to have the same average temperature as it did 800,000, 400,000, or 200,000 years ago. I suppose that's good data to have (I'm all for expanding knowledge) but it's completely irrelevant to this.
- the average temps of the world still stays relatively the same through these ups and downs. What im saying is that yes we could be going into an "up" period, which was someones argument earlier in the thread so yes its relevant, but the rate at which the temps are rising are faster than any "up" period in history. This is another example of global warming.
What may (big maybe on may) be useful would be temperature data since man started becoming industrialized and may actually be able to do some damage. I am not familiar with the methodology used for proxy climate data (using layers of the earth) but it seems iffy and easily fudged from the brief research I did. However, giving it the benefit of the doubt, proxy climate data still suggests that there has been zero man caused global warming.
-If you dont trust scientists methods for collecting the temps for the layers of the earth then idk what to tell you? I generally trust people that are experts.
Scientific Theory does not equal fact. Some scientists believe man caused global warming but many many do not. There are several different competing Scientific Theories for the origin of the universe (String Theory, Big Bang, etc) but they are not all correct.
-Yes thats true. Scientific theory doesnt equal fact BUT 97% of scientists agree that climate change is taking place. That is a scientific theory. Whether or not it is caused by humans i guess is really the debate. But if you really dont think were causing it then what do you honestly think is?
-
Sorry that post didnt come out like i wanted :(
My responses have the hyphens^
You dont have to quote that if you dont wanna, i realize youre talking to me lol.
-
Re: Global Warming
Hi,
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetiredJedi
............ I also have trouble with saying that if the glaciers melt then the oceans will rise. Ever put ice cubes in a glass of water and let them melt? The glass doesn't suddenly overflow because the ice melted. I prefer to listen to the science that talks about the connection between how the activity of the sun affects the climate of the earth and not live my life in fear.
Just wanted to note something about this specific point.
Sea ice melting will not increase sea levels, but land based ice will. Not only from the water it releases (minimal) but mainly from the fact that the removal of the weight of it will create a "bounce effect" in the continental plate underneath it.
Parts of the european landmass are still bouncing from the last ice age in fact. :D
dr del
-
I won't repeat the facts and reasons already said. And while I believe humans aren't the cause of global warming, we are definitely making it worse. I've been wearing short shorts and a t-shirt lately due to the warm temperature. The seasons are out of wack. I haven't seen a proper winter in years, not to mention the drought my state has been in. We hardly get rain anymore. The record breaking summers aren't helping either.....
Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk
-
Re: Global Warming
I personally believe in climate change and that man is responsible. It doesn't really matter what I believe, though. I tend to believe the people that know what they're talking about, and even though some data has been altered, there seems to be an overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community that climate change is real and is man made.
Here's a quick link to a wiki article. Yes, I know wiki is lame, unreliable, etc. but I like wiki because they include all of their great references. I could have linked to their references, but why bother when wiki does it already? Just a quickie post, though, an independent study found 97.4% of publishing climatologists and just under 90% of all earth scientists think significant man made global warming is occurring.
It doesn't really matter, though. You can choose to believe in climate change or not believe in it. You can choose to believe man is responsible or that it is just a natural occurring trend. The two opposing sides have different motives which is why they both try to influence your beliefs. You either believe that man is causing climate change and you will hopefully support alternative energy and reducing fossil fuels and the pollution, war, and long term climate effects that go with using fossil fuels. Or you believe that it's a hoax and you are comfortable with the status quo, continue using fossil fuels, save the tax dollars for supporting the fossil fuel supply instead of researching alternative fuels, and save the money wasted on researching this hoax.
Personally, I would like to see this country lose it's dependence on fossil fuels. I'm sure other countries feel the same way. Fossil fuels are finite and we will eventually need to find other energy sources anyway, so why not start now?
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr del
Hi,
Just wanted to note something about this specific point.
Sea ice melting will not increase sea levels, but land based ice will. Not only from the water it releases (minimal) but mainly from the fact that the removal of the weight of it will create a "bounce effect" in the continental plate underneath it.
Parts of the european landmass are still bouncing from the last ice age in fact. :D
dr del
I agree and that's why I used the glass as an example
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdeus
...there seems to be an overwhelming consensus amongst the scientific community that climate change is real and is man made...
I respect everyone's opinion and am not trying to change anyone's beliefs but this I do disagree with. HERE'S A LINK that says just the opposite and only a handfull of scientists believe it.
"The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider. The actual number of scientists who backed that claim was “only a few dozen experts,” he states in a paper for Progress in Physical Geography, co-authored with student Martin Mahony."
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdeus
...Personally, I would like to see this country lose it's dependence on fossil fuels. I'm sure other countries feel the same way. Fossil fuels are finite and we will eventually need to find other energy sources anyway, so why not start now?...
I don't see a problem with looking for alternatives either but right now it doesn't work so well and is expensive. It will be pretty cool once the technology is complete. Just wanted to repost this.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by ball python 22
Who all beleives in Global Warming? Me personally I dont believe it.
Global warming is so much more complicated than the earth getting warm. That being said "Globarl Warming" has been endorsed by every science academy. People who don't believe in global warming either don't have the credentials to take serious or are going against the vast majority of scientists who do.
-
Re: Global Warming
Or perhaps realise that when you are caught altering the original data not once but twice to fit your pet hypothesis that you are no longer a scientist at all. ;)
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by dr del
Or perhaps realise that when you are caught altering the original data not once but twice to fit your pet hypothesis that you are no longer a scientist at all. ;)
True. How about if it's such an overwhelming fact that it's happening that they change it from Global Warming to Climate Change, that way everything that happens can fall into that. The climate has been changing since the beginning of time.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetiredJedi
HERE'S A LINK that says just the opposite and only a handfull of scientists believe it.
Actually, that's not what it says. Well, it is, but that's if you believe the conservative paper and not the article it references. In the paper by Professor Hulme, he states "That particular consensus judgement, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields.". In other words, a few dozen experts that actually study the specific field of detection and attribution came to that conclusion, but the other hundreds of climatologists and other scientists who specialize in other fields still agree.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetiredJedi
I don't see a problem with looking for alternatives either but right now it doesn't work so well and is expensive. It will be pretty cool once the technology is complete. Just wanted to repost this.
Sorry, I meant to reply to this as well. I do agree with the points made in that article, but that doesn't mean we should just throw our hands up and say "it's expensive, so why bother?". New technologies take a lot of money and time to develop. If we don't start now, then when?
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdeus
Sorry, I meant to reply to this as well. I do agree with the points made in that article, but that doesn't mean we should just throw our hands up and say "it's expensive, so why bother?". New technologies take a lot of money and time to develop. If we don't start now, then when?
Well, I didn't say "so why bother", I just meant that the technology needs to be continuosly studied and not pushed on us. Also, we have started and are continuing to work on it.
-
Re: Global Warming
To be honest I suspect spending money on anythng apart from fusion is an expensive mistake.
-
The global warming "debate" within the scientific community is akin to the one over intelligent design. Its disconcerting that validity of theories is now based upon public opinion and so deeply ingrained within politics.
Whether or not the masses accept global warming tho is inconsequential. Until bio/renewable energy is the only option or somehow able to effectively compete with the established monopoly oil industry nothing will significantly change.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetiredJedi
Well, I didn't say "so why bother", I just meant that the technology needs to be continuosly studied and not pushed on us. Also, we have started and are continuing to work on it.
That's kind of a tricky one in a capitalist society. Right now fossil fuel technologies are making some people a lot of money. It will take a lot of time, money and research before alternative energy technologies can compete with fossil fuels. We can either push it on the population and force development, or subsidize research/development with taxes. If we do neither, we will just have to wait until gas/oil is quite a bit more expensive than it is before the alternative energy technology becomes feasible for the private sector to develop and produce.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by xdeus
That's kind of a tricky one in a capitalist society. Right now fossil fuel technologies are making some people a lot of money. It will take a lot of time, money and research before alternative energy technologies can compete with fossil fuels. We can either push it on the population and force development, or subsidize research/development with taxes. If we do neither, we will just have to wait until gas/oil is quite a bit more expensive than it is before the alternative energy technology becomes feasible for the private sector to develop and produce.
Getting a little off track so this will be my last post on this subject but, I disagree because a capitalist society is about the entreprenuer, competition, and American ingenuity. I realize that fossil fuels make people money but so did Apple and there are still other cell phone makers in the world. Matter of fact Apple is valued around $90bn more than ExxonMobile...Apple joins exclusive $500bn club.
It's not the governments job to force ANYTHING on people.
-
Re: Global Warming
Quote:
Originally Posted by RetiredJedi
Getting a little off track so this will be my last post on this subject but, I disagree because a capitalist society is about the entreprenuer, competition, and American ingenuity. I realize that fossil fuels make people money but so did Apple and there are still other cell phone makers in the world. Matter of fact Apple is valued around $90bn more than ExxonMobile... Apple joins exclusive $500bn club.
It's not the governments job to force ANYTHING on people.
That was kind of my point about a capitalist society and having to be forced to develop alternative energy technologies. There won't be any innovative progress until there is a profit to be made, in the mean time we will continue to deplete the supply of fossil fuels until it becomes feasible for entrepreneurs to invest time, money and resources for a product that can make more of a profit than fossil fuel technology.
The problem with that is there are other countries that are ahead of us in developing those technologies. When the fossil fuel supply is depleted, we will be sending our money overseas to buy their products or use their patents. It's already happening and will only get worse unless we invest in developing those technologies now.
You can use Apple and the silicon valley in general for that example. American companies developed most of the electronics technology and you can see how much we benefited to this day. Without research and development, we will be dependent on other countries for that technology.
The US did have a 51% increase in investments in 2010 thanks to the Obama policies, but we're still 3rd in the world behind China and Germany. If it wasn't for government subsidies and tax incentives, we would be considerably lower on that list. As a conservative, I'm not sure how you feel about that. If we invest tax dollars now it will give us a leg up in the world and we will reap the benefits down the road paving the way for entrepreneurs and companies to flourish, or we can just let the free market take care of itself and hope entrepreneurs can catch up later on down the road when the rest of the world is ahead of us.
-
Re: Global Warming
Go to Exit Glacier park in Alaska and tell me that climate change isn't happening.
Ever measure the temperature of a bowl of ice water? Pretty stable until all the ice is gone. We're a much bigger and more complex system, but melting glaciers and ice caps are a HUGE HUGE HUGE deal regardless of the cause.
This isn't about saving the furry animals, "the environment", or planet earth. The planet will be fine without us and life will go on. This isn't about the "evils" of big oil or red states, nor is it about the blue guys trying to falsify scientific data to run the government the way they want to.
This is about making a future for our species. If current trends continue, we're going to see drought, famine, and more extreme weather in coming centuries. We probably can't do anything to stop it, but recognizing it and preparing for it will be necessary.
The human race is having more negative impacts on the resources we rely on than just global warming. Pollution of all sorts is wrecking havoc on our waterways, our oceans, our farmlands, and more.
The biggest factor of my thoughts on the matter come from my dad. I'm not anti-big-oil, heck that industry is responsible for giving my dad a career as a petroleum geologist. However, as a geologist in his academics and as an oil guy in his career, he is pretty well versed in the modern data that supports the theory of climate change.
When you have someone who works in the energy industry for decades and is pretty sure that yeah, humans are significantly impacting the climate because of our energy use, that's got to be a convincing source.
-
A few further thoughts:
the biggest problem that the human race has right now with regards to ALL of the "environment" issues we will be facing in coming years is overpopulation.
There are simply too many people for this world to support, and we are fast running out of resources. Food, housing, health care, energy, and clean water aren't infinite, and if we keep reproducing the way that we are, we're going to run into "deer herd without natural predators" syndrome.
It's not going to be fun a few decades from now when billions of people across the globe look to Canada, the US, and Brazil, and ask themselves "what gives THEM the right to those resources?". It's going to be even less fun when neighbors are doing the same thing at home, because as a nation we are already surpassing sustainable capacity, but still growing. Mass famine, thirst, disease, and death will undo thousands of years of social progress in a very short time. A group of people that can't feed themselves won't be able to have any kind of health care or education for future generations, and will doom them without any kind of outside intervention.
I'd like to be able to ask everyone in the world to please consider that issue before having that second, third, or nineteenth child. It's not only irresponsible and greedy, but potentially damaging to the future of our species. However, that doesn't seem to be very PC these days.
|