Global Warming......

[SlickSnake]

WARNING! MARS IS WARMING UP TOO! STOP MARS POLLUTION NOW!

Seriously, it is. This warming trend may be related to the variable solar output as much as man made causes.

There was a good 2 hour show on global warming on the History channel about a week ago I watched.

A Global Warning Programing Schedual on the History Channel

They showed an old quarry in Florida that is about in the center of Florida and the significant thing was that this abandonded quarry had coral exposed about 20 feet above the current ocean level. I guess that's BAD NEWS for those Florida real estate tycoons! Hope they have good properties in Colorado to retreat too!

They also pointed out some of the earliest observations of sun spots in the 1500s showed that while Europe had one of the periods called the little ice age the sun had no sunspots for many decades. So there are obviously solar forces at work that can determine the earths climate as much as a super volcano or a gigantic asteroid can.

Links to No Sunspots Being A Possible Global Freeze Trigger: Ice Age Now

And there is also a crap load of stored methane all over the earth, including below the water and even below the permafrost that when thawed out because temps rise a few degrees can make the amount of pollution man can add into the atmosphere look like a small fart by comparison.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Rubycon

Originally posted by: Amused

Your belief in causation is based on faith too. No one has proven causation which is why there is still debate.

The irony of your post is simply amazing.

Some people still think it never takes off...

:laugh:

Actually, I am agnostic, do not fall for the 9/11 conspiracies because I had the ability to see how they were obviously contrary to the evidence, have no valid evidence to believe in alien visitations or mythical beasts.

And from the beginning, I argued that it was obvious the plane would take off.

I am a skeptic by nature. If I find no valid direct evidence, I remain neutral and do not "believe."

 

[YOyoYOhowsDAjello]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
The fact that so many people on this forum think global warming isn't anthropogenic is only an indication of how well a vocal minority with no scientific backing can influence public opinion. You see the same thing with creationism/intelligent design, UFOs (IIRC almost half of Americans believe in alien visitations), alternative medicine (acunpuncture, chiropracty, ineffective herbs), Da Vinci conspiracies, etc etc. Otherwise intelligent people hear something contrarian that sounds good to them, and they run with it.

I never saw Gore's movie, but the science is out there, and all you have to do is go and look at it yourself. You'll just have to wade through all the bullsh!t to get to it.

Fact: We know how much carbon humans have released from fossil fuels + deforestation.
Fact: We have a temperature and CO2 record going back 800,000 years.
Fact: The recent drastic increase in temperature is correlated exactly withthe industrial revolution. You can parrot "correlation is not causation", but you'd have to believe in miracles (not math) to think that such a correlation with the industrial era is coincidence.

Indeed.

This video

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Text

Manages to show us a graph of temperature change over the last 2000 years but for some reason levels off nicely right at the end to imply that things are leveling off rather than increasing at an incredible rate.

Here's everyone's favorite source 😉
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...erature_Comparison.png
Including the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age from the video. Their graph conveniently left off the huge spike right at the end that is heavily based on actual recorded instrument temperature and what is actually providing most of the evidence on this issue.

Add to that projections
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...arming_Predictions.png
and even with the tame predictions, things aren't looking too good. Just look at the scales of the two graphs 😛

They also were saying that temperature / climate has changed in the past due to factors other than CO2? Well yeah, a bunch of stuff can cause temperature change and the current evidence shows that the incredible increase in rate correlates to our emissions.

I have also not seen Gore's movie...

 

[Injury]

I look at it this way...

IF Global Warming is real AND we don't do anything about it, we're screwed.
IF Global Warming is real AND we change our ways, we're A-Okay.

IF Global Warming is total crap AND we don't do anything about, we're fine.
IF Global Warming is total crap AND we change our ways, we're only out a little time and effort.


3 of the 4 possible outcomes aren't bad. 1 results in the devastation of the Earth.

Now, we can't control the first part of those statements at all. If Global Warming is real then it's too late to completely reverse the damage we've already done in a short amount of time. It didn't take a year to get us here, it's not going to take a year to turn it all around.
But we CAN do something about the second part of the statement. "Going Green" or reducing fuel usage, recycling, etc. all have benefits other than just making the planet a better place. To top it off, you'd be surprised how much money you save when you become conscious of how wasteful you are of energy and such. I dropped my energy bill 40% in a month just by changing my bulbs over and being more conscious of leaving the TV on... stopped leaving my computer running... I programmed my thermostat... The bulbs paid for themselves in less than a month. I've reduced my non-recyclable trash to less than a bag a month. I compost excess foods and make some decent soil out of it. I now walk to every place within a fair distance that I need/want to go. I'm now filling up my gas tank once every two weeks... if that. I'm gonna give the bus a whirl in the Spring since riding the bus to and from work for a day is less than a gallon of gas now. If the "going green" can't appeal to your sense of environmentalism, it should at least be able to appeal to your wallet. The cost is minimal and even if it turns out to be a bunch of bullshit, you've at least saved some money, right?

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
The fact that so many people on this forum think global warming isn't anthropogenic is only an indication of how well a vocal minority with no scientific backing can influence public opinion. You see the same thing with creationism/intelligent design, UFOs (IIRC almost half of Americans believe in alien visitations), alternative medicine (acunpuncture, chiropracty, ineffective herbs), Da Vinci conspiracies, etc etc. Otherwise intelligent people hear something contrarian that sounds good to them, and they run with it.

I never saw Gore's movie, but the science is out there, and all you have to do is go and look at it yourself. You'll just have to wade through all the bullsh!t to get to it.

Fact: We know how much carbon humans have released from fossil fuels + deforestation.
Fact: We have a temperature and CO2 record going back 800,000 years.
Fact: The recent drastic increase in temperature is correlated exactly withthe industrial revolution. You can parrot "correlation is not causation", but you'd have to believe in miracles (not math) to think that such a correlation with the industrial era is coincidence.

Your belief in causation is based on faith too. No one has proven causation which is why there is still debate.

The irony of your post is simply amazing.

So what you are saying is that you believe in miracles? You really would have to, in order to believe that the warming that has coincided exactly with our emission of CO2 during the past 200 years is only a coincidence

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Res...Img/100896/0026316.gif

The data supports my position. All you have supporting yours is anti-science rhetoric.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Amused
Actually, I am agnostic, do not fall for the 9/11 conspiracies because I had the ability to see how they were obviously contrary to the evidence, have no valid evidence to believe in alien visitations or mythical beasts.

And from the beginning, I argued that it was obvious the plane would take off.

I am a skeptic by nature. If I find no valid direct evidence, I remain neutral and do not "believe."

Sorry if you thought I was implying that *you* were one of the believers (no take off).

IMHO what people need to spend resources (money ultimately) on is not finding a cure for this "problem" but how to cope with it. Taxing people by their so called "carbon footprint" (ever walk on a piece of carbon btw? I bet an elephant could not leave a footprint on it and they weigh more than a hummer!) is going to do nothing but give large irresponsible governments more money that they cannot spend responsibly. I don't want to turn this into a P&N debate but surely one can see this from 20 miles away like one of those 1,6kW Xenon lighthouses.

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Res...Img/100896/0026316.gif

The data supports my position. All you have supporting yours is anti-science rhetoric.

Problem is that graph plot only covers 10% of an interglacial cycle. Move the zoom out and you will see the big picture. It's a NORMAL cycle. Nothing more.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
The fact that so many people on this forum think global warming isn't anthropogenic is only an indication of how well a vocal minority with no scientific backing can influence public opinion. You see the same thing with creationism/intelligent design, UFOs (IIRC almost half of Americans believe in alien visitations), alternative medicine (acunpuncture, chiropracty, ineffective herbs), Da Vinci conspiracies, etc etc. Otherwise intelligent people hear something contrarian that sounds good to them, and they run with it.

I never saw Gore's movie, but the science is out there, and all you have to do is go and look at it yourself. You'll just have to wade through all the bullsh!t to get to it.

Fact: We know how much carbon humans have released from fossil fuels + deforestation.
Fact: We have a temperature and CO2 record going back 800,000 years.
Fact: The recent drastic increase in temperature is correlated exactly withthe industrial revolution. You can parrot "correlation is not causation", but you'd have to believe in miracles (not math) to think that such a correlation with the industrial era is coincidence.

Your belief in causation is based on faith too. No one has proven causation which is why there is still debate.

The irony of your post is simply amazing.

So what you are saying is that you believe in miracles? You really would have to, in order to believe that the warming that has coincided exactly with our emission of CO2 during the past 200 years is only a coincidence

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Res...Img/100896/0026316.gif

The data supports my position. All you have supporting yours is anti-science rhetoric.

How is that a miracle? You are the one making an assumption, not me. In fact, you are making lots of assumptions.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Rubycon

Originally posted by: Amused
Actually, I am agnostic, do not fall for the 9/11 conspiracies because I had the ability to see how they were obviously contrary to the evidence, have no valid evidence to believe in alien visitations or mythical beasts.

And from the beginning, I argued that it was obvious the plane would take off.

I am a skeptic by nature. If I find no valid direct evidence, I remain neutral and do not "believe."

Sorry if you thought I was implying that *you* were one of the believers (no take off).

IMHO what people need to spend resources (money ultimately) on is not finding a cure for this "problem" but how to cope with it. Taxing people by their so called "carbon footprint" (ever walk on a piece of carbon btw? I bet an elephant could not leave a footprint on it and they weigh more than a hummer!) is going to do nothing but give large irresponsible governments more money that they cannot spend responsibly. I don't want to turn this into a P&N debate but surely one can see this from 20 miles away like one of those 1,6kW Xenon lighthouses.

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Res...Img/100896/0026316.gif

The data supports my position. All you have supporting yours is anti-science rhetoric.

Problem is that graph plot only covers 10% of an interglacial cycle. Move the zoom out and you will see the big picture. It's a NORMAL cycle. Nothing more.

Find a wider graph and post it. I know I've seen one for the past 10k years but I can't find it now

current warming is obviously within the normal RANGE but it's not occuring at the normal rate and it's not due to the Milankovich cycle or the sun radiating more energy. The graph makes it obvious that CO2 has increased because of the industrial era, and that temperature has trended up ward along with it. Even within the past 1000 years, what are the odds of a coincidence like that happening? And what else could be causing the accelerated warming if not CO2?

Edit: http://www.cotf.edu/ete/images...s/climate/Figure10.gif
www.cotf.edu/ete/modules/climate/GCremote3.html

 

[DT4K]

My mom took Airborne and didn't get sick.
I guess that proves that Airborne is the reason she didn't get sick!

Clearly, some people have not yet grasped the fundamental fact that correlation does not equal causation.

 

[IEC]

Just wait until we hit the next Ice Age. Fun times.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Injury
I look at it this way...

IF Global Warming is real AND we don't do anything about it, we're screwed.
IF Global Warming is real AND we change our ways, we're A-Okay.

IF Global Warming is total crap AND we don't do anything about, we're fine.
IF Global Warming is total crap AND we change our ways, we're only out a little time and effort.


3 of the 4 possible outcomes aren't bad. 1 results in the devastation of the Earth.

Now, we can't control the first part of those statements at all. If Global Warming is real then it's too late to completely reverse the damage we've already done in a short amount of time. It didn't take a year to get us here, it's not going to take a year to turn it all around.
But we CAN do something about the second part of the statement. "Going Green" or reducing fuel usage, recycling, etc. all have benefits other than just making the planet a better place. To top it off, you'd be surprised how much money you save when you become conscious of how wasteful you are of energy and such. I dropped my energy bill 40% in a month just by changing my bulbs over and being more conscious of leaving the TV on... stopped leaving my computer running... I programmed my thermostat... The bulbs paid for themselves in less than a month. I've reduced my non-recyclable trash to less than a bag a month. I compost excess foods and make some decent soil out of it. I now walk to every place within a fair distance that I need/want to go. I'm now filling up my gas tank once every two weeks... if that. I'm gonna give the bus a whirl in the Spring since riding the bus to and from work for a day is less than a gallon of gas now. If the "going green" can't appeal to your sense of environmentalism, it should at least be able to appeal to your wallet. The cost is minimal and even if it turns out to be a bunch of bullshit, you've at least saved some money, right?

Devastation of Earth? I don't think many other life forms than humans will notice the climate change as anything unusual, in the grand scheme of things. We're not looking at an extinction-level event here. Massive asteroid impacting = extinction-level event. Slight increase in global temperatures = climate weirdness, but not extinction-level.

Something to add to my previous post: Let's suppose that this is part of a natural warming cycle, which it very well may be. Is it a good idea to help along a natural event that could cause problems in the future? If a volcano is erupting nearby, do you torch your garage just to help the advancing lava?

Originally posted by: DT4K
My mom took Airborne and didn't get sick.
I guess that proves that Airborne is the reason she didn't get sick!

Clearly, some people have not yet grasped the fundamental fact that correlation does not equal causation.

However, this doesn't mean that you can automatically ignore anything where there appears to be causation from correlation. It's a good old double-edged sword.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Originally posted by: Injury
I look at it this way...

IF Global Warming is real AND we don't do anything about it, we're screwed.
IF Global Warming is real AND we change our ways, we're A-Okay.

IF Global Warming is total crap AND we don't do anything about, we're fine.
IF Global Warming is total crap AND we change our ways, we're only out a little time and effort.


3 of the 4 possible outcomes aren't bad. 1 results in the devastation of the Earth.

Now, we can't control the first part of those statements at all. If Global Warming is real then it's too late to completely reverse the damage we've already done in a short amount of time. It didn't take a year to get us here, it's not going to take a year to turn it all around.
But we CAN do something about the second part of the statement. "Going Green" or reducing fuel usage, recycling, etc. all have benefits other than just making the planet a better place. To top it off, you'd be surprised how much money you save when you become conscious of how wasteful you are of energy and such. I dropped my energy bill 40% in a month just by changing my bulbs over and being more conscious of leaving the TV on... stopped leaving my computer running... I programmed my thermostat... The bulbs paid for themselves in less than a month. I've reduced my non-recyclable trash to less than a bag a month. I compost excess foods and make some decent soil out of it. I now walk to every place within a fair distance that I need/want to go. I'm now filling up my gas tank once every two weeks... if that. I'm gonna give the bus a whirl in the Spring since riding the bus to and from work for a day is less than a gallon of gas now. If the "going green" can't appeal to your sense of environmentalism, it should at least be able to appeal to your wallet. The cost is minimal and even if it turns out to be a bunch of bullshit, you've at least saved some money, right?

Devastation of Earth? I don't think many other life forms than humans will notice the climate change as anything unusual, in the grand scheme of things. We're not looking at an extinction-level event here. Massive asteroid impacting = extinction-level event. Slight increase in global temperatures = climate weirdness, but not extinction-level.

Something to add to my previous post: Let's suppose that this is part of a natural warming cycle, which it very well may be. Is it a good idea to help along a natural event that could cause problems in the future? If a volcano is erupting nearby, do you torch your garage just to help the advancing lava?

Tell that to the animal and sea life at the artic and antarctic circles.

 

[Excelsior]

3 of the 4 possible outcomes aren't bad. 1 results in the devastation of the Earth.

I love how people talk about saving the Earth. Its never been about that. The Earth does not care about us or even know we exist. Its humanity that needs the saving should some massive catastrophe happen due to global warming.

 

[Wheezer]

Originally posted by: PHiuR
the question is, why did you watch it for COMPII?

because so many teachers have a political agenda to push regardless of the courses they instruct.

 

[Injury]

Originally posted by: Excelsior

3 of the 4 possible outcomes aren't bad. 1 results in the devastation of the Earth.

I love how people talk about saving the Earth. Its never been about that. The Earth does not care about us or even know we exist. Its humanity that needs the saving should some massive catastrophe happen due to global warming.

Maybe you fail to realize that without the resources we rely on from the Earth, we're screwed.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman
Tell that to the animal and sea life at the artic and antarctic circles.

They've probably had to put up with drastic changes before. Species do go extinct regularly. If it turns out that it's our fault, it's another addition to a long list of things we've killed off. Unfortunate, yes. "Devastating" to the planet? No. Life will adapt. It's survived truly devastating blows, where something like 90% of all life was exterminated. It might be a setback in progress, but it's transitory. Life will find a way.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
We need a Yoyo-style mass-listing of links to previous threads on this subject. 😀

Originally posted by: IGBT
..it's a great money making racket. It's the con of the century. the carbon-con.

I knew I could count on seeing this here. 🙂

I've moved a bit more toward the middle on this matter in the past decade.
I prefer to think of it for what the title calls it - an inconvenient truth. Not cataclysmic, but inconvenient. Global warming could bring about changes in climate, which could push us outside of the reasonably predictable patterns we're used to, which could be inconvenient on a larger scale. For some individuals, it will be bad; the "Dust Bowl" problem in the US awhile ago was one example. On the large scale, it was a hiccup. Life goes on. Same with now. Yes, we're releasing ancient carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Is it enough to cause an increase in temperatures? Yes. A significant increase? Maybe.

Reducing pollution, such as from old style coal plants, and from gasoline-powered cars, should still be a priority. Breathing in gooey air like that over a major Los Angeles highway isn't healthy. Alternative electrical sources are still a good idea to look into, partly for this reason. Oil will run out, simply by virtue of the planet's finite size, and the time it takes for the stuff to form. When? Who knows. Drilling technology keeps improving, as does our ability to look beneath Earth's surface. It is certainly a volatile resource though, and the cost of extraction seems to be facing a continuing increase. A clean means of producing electricity will likely be needed, whether it be to charge advanced batteries, or possibly for hydrogen production. In time, nuclear fusion will likely provide this power. Until then, solar, wind, and tidal are things to look for.


I will say this though, if it does come to pass that our various gaseous emissions are the cause of global warming, and it does come to pass that this has a detrimental effect on people, those in power will deny responsibility. The popular defenses - "No one could have possibly seen this coming," or, "Why didn't those worthless scientists ever warn anyone that this would be a problem?"

Excellent response. :thumbsup: And in regards to your last paragraph, of that, there is zero doubt.

 

[edro]

I have heard that we are actually helping mask the results of global warming, because our pollution acts like a shield, blocking out some of the sun's rays.
Once we clean up the atmosphere, we will get the full force of the sun.

 

[Acanthus]

FACT: This year we have recorded the fastest global cooling in recorded history 😉

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: edro
I have heard that we are actually helping mask the results of global warming, because our pollution acts like a shield, blocking out some of the sun's rays.
Once we clean up the atmosphere, we will get the full force of the sun.

Think of co2 in the atmosphere like a plate of food covered with plastic wrap.
Place that under a strong light.
The way the food reacts is the way the earth reacts.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Fact: The recent drastic increase in temperature is correlated exactly withthe industrial revolution. You can parrot "correlation is not causation", but you'd have to believe in miracles (not math) to think that such a correlation with the industrial era is coincidence.

Then explain why the temperatures in 2007 all but erased "global warming". Why then are the Environmentalist nut jobs changing the terminology to "climate change" to account for the cooling trend the earth is seeing.

Fact: Temperatures were rising before the increases in carbon output.

Fact: Water is a much more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Fact: Plant life on the earth consumes the majority of the carbon dioxide humans produce.

Fact: The "hockey stick" used by Owl Gore has been debunked and is no longer used.

Fact: Many scientist are now disputing man made global warming including former supporters.

Fact: Scientific evidence points to solar activity as the main culprit in both climate warming and cooling.

Fact: The middle ages were actually warmer than it is today.

Fact: 2007 saw the polar ice caps starting to replenish themselves.

Fact: Polar bear populations are rising, not shrinking as the alarmist have been claiming.

Fact: The earth was in a minor ice age from the end of the middle ages to 1850.

Fact: The so called scientist who are the biggest proponents of man made global warming are bought off by ant-capitalist politicians or are anti-capitalist themselves.

I could keep going, but these are just some of the inconvenient truths that the global warming crowd just keep ignoring.

 

[lokiju]

Why does everyone keep saying that it won't cost much to "fix" even if it's not a real issue?

What about the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations?

That's going to cost car companies untold amounts of money to develop and then those cost will have to be built into the cost of a car.

Then there's things like McCain's or other presidential candidates plans for "fixing" the issue which will include more taxes and billions in tax payers dollars.

It WILL cost money and a lot of it over something that may or may not be a real issue.

The more this goes on the more I personally think it's all just about money.

 

[K1052]

There are so many variables at work in out planet's climate system and we understand very few of them well. The pro-man made GW side has been politicized and popularized to the status of a cult.

I think it is going to be quite a while longer before our sciences are able to paint a complete picture of if/how human activity effects the planet's climate or really how the whole system interacts for that matter.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Fact: The recent drastic increase in temperature is correlated exactly withthe industrial revolution. You can parrot "correlation is not causation", but you'd have to believe in miracles (not math) to think that such a correlation with the industrial era is coincidence.

Then explain why the temperatures in 2007 all but erased "global warming". Why then are the Environmentalist nut jobs changing the terminology to "climate change" to account for the cooling trend the earth is seeing.

Fact: Temperatures were rising before the increases in carbon output.

Fact: Water is a much more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Fact: Plant life on the earth consumes the majority of the carbon dioxide humans produce.

Fact: The "hockey stick" used by Owl Gore has been debunked and is no longer used.

Fact: Many scientist are now disputing man made global warming including former supporters.

Fact: Scientific evidence points to solar activity as the main culprit in both climate warming and cooling.

Fact: The middle ages were actually warmer than it is today.

Fact: 2007 saw the polar ice caps starting to replenish themselves.

Fact: Polar bear populations are rising, not shrinking as the alarmist have been claiming.

Fact: The earth was in a minor ice age from the end of the middle ages to 1850.

Fact: The so called scientist who are the biggest proponents of man made global warming are bought off by ant-capitalist politicians or are anti-capitalist themselves.

I could keep going, but these are just some of the inconvenient truths that the global warming crowd just keep ignoring.

Love to see links to all of these facts. Plenty of evidence out there refute them as facts.

 

[soonerproud]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: soonerproud

Originally posted by: Throckmorton
Fact: The recent drastic increase in temperature is correlated exactly withthe industrial revolution. You can parrot "correlation is not causation", but you'd have to believe in miracles (not math) to think that such a correlation with the industrial era is coincidence.

Then explain why the temperatures in 2007 all but erased "global warming". Why then are the Environmentalist nut jobs changing the terminology to "climate change" to account for the cooling trend the earth is seeing.

Fact: Temperatures were rising before the increases in carbon output.

Fact: Water is a much more effective greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.

Fact: Plant life on the earth consumes the majority of the carbon dioxide humans produce.

Fact: The "hockey stick" used by Owl Gore has been debunked and is no longer used.

Fact: Many scientist are now disputing man made global warming including former supporters.

Fact: Scientific evidence points to solar activity as the main culprit in both climate warming and cooling.

Fact: The middle ages were actually warmer than it is today.

Fact: 2007 saw the polar ice caps starting to replenish themselves.

Fact: Polar bear populations are rising, not shrinking as the alarmist have been claiming.

Fact: The earth was in a minor ice age from the end of the middle ages to 1850.

Fact: The so called scientist who are the biggest proponents of man made global warming are bought off by ant-capitalist politicians or are anti-capitalist themselves.

I could keep going, but these are just some of the inconvenient truths that the global warming crowd just keep ignoring.

Love to see links to all of these facts. Plenty of evidence out there refute them as facts.

This stuff is all over the news and you want links? Pay attention to the news, because this is exactly where I got all of this information.