• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Another Blow is dealt to the Global Warming Theory

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.


<< I never said anyone thought pollution wasn't bad, nor was I attacking anyone. >>



Did I say you were?



<< I was merely stating the fact that despite the seemingly joyous reaction that the Global Warming Theory is slowly being shot down, we need to still be mindful of the effect we have on our environment. >>



But not taken to the extreme.



<< It seems to me that this news could possibly make the less educated among us think that pollution isn't bad, or that we haven't done any damage to the environment. >>



I completely disagree. If anything, it will reinforce people that don't read carefully that their enviromental contributions are paying off.
 
This thread is direct evidence in support of the theory of global warming. Like the evolution threads, there's so much hot air in here you could heat a small city.



😀
 
I don't get why it really matters. Like say tomorrow they completely disprove Global Warming:

"Okay guys Global Warming is no longer an issue, lets increase pollution 50%! Don't worry the worst we can do is kill ourselves, mutate the wild life, and destroy the planet from the inside out... but at least we won't raise the global temperature that much!"

Regardless of whether it is a real theory or not, it won't change the need to practice cleaner more efficient ways of living.
 


<< Regardless of whether it is a real theory or not, it won't change the need to practice cleaner more efficient ways of living. >>

Of course...that goes for both polution (health hazards) and fuels...which weren't created by millions of years of animals dying in the swamps 😛

Oh, nice sig 😉
 


<< This thread is direct evidence in support of the theory of global warming. Like the evolution threads, there's so much hot air in here you could heat a small city. >>



...and such is the Environmentalist argument...totally devoid of fact.
 
The press feels that they have to report both sides of every story even in a case like global warming. There is general consensus among scientists that global warming is underway. Some wackass scientist still don't believe it ( in this case the man is reporting on a single region that is cooling) and the press reports it and gives it the same emphasis as reports that the globe is warming. tens of thousands of scientist agree about global warming and when 10 come out and say it may not be happening you believe them?

you are dumb
 
Global Warming/Cooling or whatever, pumping tons of toxic materials into the air cannot be a good thing.
 


<< There is a huge debate on its existance. I'll point out a basic argument against it. >>

hehe, no. There is not "huge" debate on its existance, unless you consider a noisy handful of quacks to represent any sizable portion of the scientific community. The vast concensus among academics is that the globe is warming. The debate is NO LONGER about whether the earth is or isn't warming, the debate is how much it is warming, how fast, and what the causes are.

There are still people who think we didn't land on the moon, that it was done on some Hollywood sound stage. The world has pretty much left those baffoons behind, as they have deniers of global warming, or holocaust deniers for that matter.

<< People who argue that global warming exists claim that the rise in city temperatures means that the whole world is warming. This is without ever taking temperatures of rural areas. >>

All debunked, time and time again.
 
Gee, one weather station in a remote part of the world that's largely unaffected by humans is enough to "deal a blow" to the "theory" of global warming?

The effect of global warming is that the weather patterns in the world are being destabilized. Therefore, some places will get warmer, and some will get cooler. The average temperature is rising. There is no denying this in the scientific community. Precipitation patterns are also being affected.
 
The Global Climate Change theories predict that temperatures will fall in some areas of the world and temperatures will rise in others. Where the Global Warming part of the theory comes into play is that the net effect of all these weather changes will be an average temperature increase throughout the world.

Texmaster you're penny wise pound foolish yet again.
 


<< The Global Climate Change theories predict that temperatures will fall in some areas of the world and temperatures will rise in others. Where the Global Warming part of the theory comes into play is that the net effect of all these weather changes will be an average temperature increase throughout the world.

Texmaster you're penny wise pound foolish yet again. >>


Yes, agreed that is what they are saying Now.................but what about 15 - 20+ years ago?????? I think the point was, they Did do an almost complete switch on their therories! I don't have any idea how old you are now, and it's none of my business, but, I was in H.S. when this whole thing initially became a concern and believe me, I sat through many discussions and read plenty of articles in "Study Hall" that clearly stated that the Earth would be pushed into a global human induced iceage due to the pollutants from factories and vehicle emissions...........and what they said then made sense...........the pollutants would prevent the sun's heat from entering the earth's atmosphere and the result would be radical cooling! There were even graphs (as there are today) which depicted much of the U.S.covered with ice and mean yearly average temps. in the below freezing range throughout!

I realize they may have refined and changed their outlook, all I'm saying is, is it not possible they will again??????????😉
 
I like global warming 🙂 it's january 14th, and we have almost no snow in winnipeg, MB, Canada, and it's been above freezing for most of january 🙂 Whoopeee!
 
yea, been the same here in MD. We've had like 60 degree days recently, and its the middle of january. WTF? Its making for some sh*tty sh*tty skiing weather.
 


<< So your whole point is that because they've made a mistake in the past, that nullifies their current theory? >>


LOL! Point me to exactly where I said that?????????😉 What I'm saying is, if they did a 180* turn from Iceage to Warming in say 15 - 20 years............whose to say they won't decide it's gonna' be the Iceage therory again in another 15 years or so????????😉 IMHO they, and most everyone knows pollution is bad and can cause a multitude of harm...........I just don't think they know what the effects will be!😉 I mean look, they have uncovered evidence that before the last Iceage the Earths mean temp. was around 120*F so how can they be positive any warming is not just cyclical???????😉
 


<< yea, been the same here in MD. We've had like 60 degree days recently, and its the middle of january. WTF? Its making for some sh*tty sh*tty skiing weather. >>


And parts of the Southern U.S. have had more snow than they've had for years............😉 I can recall 1983 here in Missouri, we never had even 1" of snow from Nov. through April and the Temps. never did get to what anyone around here considered "cold". A lot of people were comparing this year with '83 until about 4 weeks ago when we got about 2 weeks of highs in the low 20's................but still no more than a few flurries so far all winter...........😉
 


<< I just don't think they know what the effects will be! I mean look, they have uncovered evidence that before the last Iceage the Earths mean temp. was around 120*F so how can they be positive any warming is not just cyclical >>

That is the debate, what is causing the earth to warm, and to what degree, exactly. Those who continue to deny the evidence iof global warming is overwhelming and compelling remind me of flat-earthers.
 


<< LOL! Funny thing is..........when I was in H.S. & College, this whole argument was just beginning................with one minor detail changed, they were then preaching that our pollution was COOLING the Earth and that it would eventually lead to another Iceage..............😉 Who knows what they will say 20 years from now..........😉 >>




ToBeMe

You said it right. How can we realy know with 30 or 40 years worth of data. Come on the earth will be around long after we are nothing but worm food and the worms are gone and to think that man can realy have that much of an impact is to presume that we are truly gods.

Just my $.02
 


<< Those who continue to deny the evidence iof global warming is overwhelming and compelling remind me of flat-earthers. >>



Once again, where is your proof?

The consensus is that climatic change does occur....but most scientist will tell you that there is not enough data to come to any concrete conclusions.
 
shazbot is clearly missing the point.

It seems that a global warming is happening now. In the 70's it was a global cooling. If anything air pollution was worse then than now. The point is that climate change takes hundreds and thousands of years not 2 or 3 decades. Temps go up. Temps go down. Thats the way it is. In another 20 years these scientists may be reporting a comming ice age due to global cooling. Who knows?

I have had enough of the global warming "the sky is falling" chicken little scientists and their pseudo-science.
 
Okay, here's my extent of knowledge on the subject (sorry if it's a repost, but I'm lazy).


CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and traps heat. Cars and other sources of combustion release CO2. Thus the worlds temperature should be rising due to CO2 emissions.

However, the earth naturally goes through heating/cooling cycles (ice ages etc). These temperature changes are so strong that the CO2 emission effect goes largely unnoticed with the exception of over areas of concentrated CO2 emission (read: cities). However, this effect of rising temperature around cities is highly localized, and cannot be applied on a global scale.

The earth will probably be fine, barring a full out nuclear war, but, we should be careful anyways, in case we are causing some unseen damage to the earth. Fuel cell tech and related alternative energy sources should definitley be researched.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top