Global Warming... is THIS how we'll perish?

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
the last two posts are almost always the same thing

-to be expected when some people don't read what's been written to them, and it ends up having to be repeated.

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Maverick

Frankly given the sorry results of weathermen for next weeks weather at any given specific spot I shudder to think how accurate a prediction covering 100 years will be.

Here is food for thought, Nation-wide, even WITH doppler advanced radar, national weathermen(persons) are 51% accurate with their forecasts for any given 24 hour period.

Might as well flip a coin.

Back to the Global warming rant that its all America's fault....

[lazs2]

ok beet... so you say that banning SUV's will stretch out the supply of oil another 20 years?

Can I see the math on that one?

angus... I think that my example of the house and fire is more to the point.   A fire is something anyone could see... I would not need to convince anyone..

What you suggest is that I turn off all my electricity and gas and pull out everything that might burn and sleep on the concrete floor just in case there might be a fire.   You can't tell me that any of this will prevent me from having my house burned and you admit that the forest round here burns every few years and takes everything with it but.....

Sooo..... what are the solutions?   beet is the only one with any answers and as soon as we get the math from him we will know why it is good to ban SUV's and pick up 20 years of oil (how that will stop global warming is still unclear tho).

zorch at least admits that he isn't gonna do a damn thing unless it is someone else doing the suffering but he claims the global warming is real...

so zorch... You get to be in the panel... What should we do?   What do you suggest?

lazs

[Hangtime]

Can I be on the panel too?

[beet1e]

Originally posted by lazs2
ok beet... so you say that banning SUV's will stretch out the supply of oil another 20 years?

Can I see the math on that one?

No, I didn't say that, so no - you can't. Can't be arsed to repeat what I said.

[BigGun]

Originally posted by lazs2

Sooo..... what are the solutions?   beet is the only one with any answers and as soon as we get the math from him we will know why it is good to ban SUV's and pick up 20 years of oil (how that will stop global warming is still unclear tho).

Maybe should do opposite, give big tax incentives to encourage big SUV & dry up that oil problem sooner rather than later.

So if I have suburban with 5 kids & wife driving down that highway with 20 mpg, am I much better conserving that the guy riding solo in his new 40 mpg hybrid?

[indy007]

[Staga]

Originally posted by Skuzzy
This thread is amazing.  I check it once a day, and the last two posts are almost always the same thing, yet the thread keeps growing.

Damnedest thing I have ever seen.

Oh, AND WE ARE ALL GONNA DIE!!!!  EEEEEEEKKKKKK!!!!

Some day we all smell bad 6ft under or go up with flames but question is what do we leave for the future generations.
IIRC you have at least one son; have you ever thought what kind of world is he living in 50 years? How about his childrens?

Skuzzy You clearly have an opinion...
Do you think global warming is A) actually happening or B) a hoax?
If it's former should we try to control it or just push the pedal further and enjoy the ride?
If it's latter... Can you be 100% sure?

[Angus]

Oh, Mav:
"Can you specify what the predictions were for the previous 2 cycles and the actual rates as occured?"

Those were so slow, and long ago, that there were no predictions.

I grew up with predictions of:

1 Large earthquake in my area within 30 years tops (1975, - the quake happened in 2000 well, normal stuff)

2. Reduced ozon layer, especially near to the poles. Consequences unknown. While this possibility and the cause was debated for years it finally turned out to be true, and with us humans to be blamed, -  sadly so I must say, and measures are being taken to minimize the reduction (to allow nature a little more chance to balance it, if possible) of the ozon layer.

3. Global warming due to  greenhouse effecting gases being exhausted.
This is basically due to us mankind digging up charbon and burning it up therefore sending the base chemical into the athmosphere, as well as reducing the binding of CO2 through less forests and more deserts for instance.
 The first calculated prediction of the effect is more than a 100 years old, - the question being something like "what if mankind populates increasingly for some 100 years at the current or logical rate and keeps up the usage of coal and oil with the same increase, - how is the atmosphere going to be??"
Allright. Effects predicted in the last years are such as polar caps melting, and basically more energy in the atmosphere. While this was booed at in the beginning, it actually is occuring at a very measurable level. Some places on earth didn't warm, but the whole effect still remains as it is, - the globe is warming as predicted and calculated, and actually faster.
A few years ago, the main debate about global warming was whether it was happening at all. Today it is beyond that. Now we are debaiting whether it is our fault and if there is something we can do about it. The Western civilization is split into two about this, with the bigger belly on the consumption side playing as the denialist.
Strange, isn't it?

[indy007]

Originally posted by Angus
2. Reduced ozon layer, especially near to the poles. Consequences unknown. While this possibility and the cause was debated for years it finally turned out to be true, and with us humans to be blamed, -  sadly so I must say, and measures are being taken to minimize the reduction (to allow nature a little more chance to balance it, if possible) of the ozon layer.  

You can find monthly average ozone graphics here. Stratospheric ozone is not a fixed and finite resource, but is constantly created and destroyed by solar radiation. The more ozone (O3) is destroyed, the more free oxygen radicals (O1) are available to bind with free oxygen (O2) to create ozone (O3), the same applies with free oxygen (O2).

[Skuzzy]

Originally posted by Staga
Some day we all smell bad 6ft under or go up with flames but question is what do we leave for the future generations.
IIRC you have at least one son; have you ever thought what kind of world is he living in 50 years? How about his childrens?

Skuzzy You clearly have an opinion...
Do you think global warming is A) actually happening or B) a hoax?
If it's former should we try to control it or just push the pedal further and enjoy the ride?
If it's latter... Can you be 100% sure?

Sure, I have an opinion.  For me, it is not a question as to whether or not it is happening.  Earth goes through cycles which cannot be hindered by man.   The cycles do not stop.  The only question I have to answer is, will mankind's apathy kill us before Earth does or vice-versa?  

In the overall scheme of things, anything we do is petty compared to the whole picture.

I see no point in discussions like this one, given my opinion.

[Jackal1]

Originally posted by Angus
Jackal, you really don't get this:
"Rotting vegatation also PRODUCES CO2"

Where did they get the CO2 from??????????????????

From the bloody atmosphere. If they completely rot, leaving nothing behind, then they have delivered what they had absorbed before in the first place.

C doesn't get produced. It's just the matter about WHERE it is stored.

I get it just fine Angus, but thanks for your concern.
Yes, rotting vegetation produces CO2 and it is released into the ...atmosphere.
As a matter of fact, in "your side" of theory experts are saying that some of the rotting marshs are a culprit. Go figure.
I`m seriously beginning to feel that you believe in fairy tales Angus.
There are no magic wands. You can`t start from point D,E or F..so on and so on.
OK, you claim plant forests. In order for any even minimum effect they would have to be MASSIVE. They would have to be planted. You would have to have a few million acres to do so on. It would take equipment,(since no ancient Eygyptians have voulunteered so far). They would have to be maintained, thinned and cultivated to avoid setting you back to a place before point A.
To start with, you need to get all the world leaders to agree on something, as brought up before. We`re to busy right now trying to figure out how to wipe each other out. How in the H do you plan on or suggest this gets done? You can`t answer that, as has been shown here, because-------> It Ain`t Gonna happen.
It`s simple. Fairy tales.

I`ll tell ya what. You line up a few spare million acres and get it agreed upon to use these for earth saving forests, then get me a few thousand ancient Eygyptian volunteers and I`ll get on board. Please get back to me on this when  it has been accomplished.

I do hope Beet has the Discovery channel. There is an upcoming program dealing with the Megawave that is proposed to wipe out London in the future. I know Beet, being the person he is, will want to get in on the ground floor of the building of a GIANT seawall to prevent this.
Maybe they can buid the fictional seawall with the fictional lumber from your fictional  forests.

I`m not sure which program airs first...the upcoming Iceage or the Megawave. Have to check listings I guess in between planting and ancient Eygyptian recruiting.

[Maverick]

Angus,

Ozone layer and earthquakes are beyond the scope of the conversation. In otherwords they have no bearing on it.

Since there is no data, no measurements and no one from the previous ice / warming eras I think it's safe to say that it is impossible to tell if there has been any change whatsoever in the warming cycle timing. If the warming cycle is proceding faster than predicted the rational person would suspect the predictions are in error, not try to bend reality to your pre conceived notion.

In short from what I see this is a wonderful example of chicken little running in circles screaming the sky is falling. There is no test yet that can determine the time of the eras of temperature cycles.

I don't have a bit of a problem with people saying the earth is warming. I have a big problem with people saying man is responsible for it or even that we have tilted the cycle to a much increaded rate of warming. It's nothing but supposition and scare mongering.

[Angus]

Well, yes, but yet we have holes in the layer, and they weren't there before.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Charlotte
I do hope Beet has the Discovery channel. There is an upcoming program dealing with the Megawave that is proposed to wipe out London in the future. I know Beet, being the person he is, will want to get in on the ground floor of the building of a GIANT seawall to prevent this.
Maybe they can buid the fictional seawall with the fictional lumber from your fictional  forests.  

Charlotte, do try to keep up. The flooding of London was recognised long ago as a potential hazard, and so the Thames Barrier was built, and opened by HM the Queen in 1984. If you'd actually been here, you might even know about this. Do a Google search on Thames Barrier, or see this link: http://www.thamesbarrierpark.org.uk/thebarrier.htm I do not get the Discovery Channel - what's that? A US channel? Is it broadcast here? Probably not... If it has an archive for programmes that have been aired, I'll gladly download it on my 1MB connection. Poor Lotty - always so far behind - thinks that Britain is an absolute monarchy, no idea about our flood defences, still using dialup...

We must surely be getting to the end of this thread by now, so here's what I think as of today.

• The earth is warming, and glaciers and polar icecaps are melting, so sea levels are rising.
• I accept that the warming is partly as a result of natural cycles.
• Man made carbon emissions greatly exacerbate the problem.
• I don't honestly know the ratio of responsibility between natural cycle and man made carbon emission, but...
• studies of arctic ice have determined that it contains more CO2 than at any time in the last 650,000 years.
• Oil has already started running out in places. In the next 20 years it will become much more expensive, and therefore alternatives (like nuclear which produces zero atmospheric emissions) will become viable.
• Lazs is right in saying that Man will go to the brink before starting to develop a new energy source - I expect the same thing.
• LNG reserves around the world will act like a buffer in the transition from oil to nuke/hydrogen technology.
• We'll all be dead by the time this transition is complete.