Author Topic: Global Warming (Read 16555 times)

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #555 on:** March 11, 2007, 05:47:20 PM »

Dowding why dont you start a speech in front of all those blind idiots
who are working 24h the day to find the truth, this people called "Scientists".
But this forum here have more armchair.youtube.google.pedia-Scientists
then any other forum on this earth,

sorry but ...LOL!

Angus · « **Reply #556 on:** March 11, 2007, 07:21:02 PM »

Carbon is just a part of it. You have to add methane and other gases (sadly, human related) to the equation, before you get chilled by the vast changes of forests etc.
However, since the effect of carbon can be replicated in a lab, and it's a measurable factor, it's been sticking as the core of the game.
BTW, increased carbon in the atmosphere encourages the vegetation in the neighborhood to grow more, thereby picking more up.
BTW, Just read quite an accurate article about warming and the contribution of various factors. It does basically NOT agree with the channel 4 programme.

FastFwd · « **Reply #557 on:** March 11, 2007, 07:26:00 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Angus
BTW, Just read quite an accurate article about warming and the contribution of various factors. It does basically NOT agree with the channel 4 programme.

Do you have a link?

Dowding · « **Reply #558 on:** March 11, 2007, 07:33:24 PM »

Thanks Gh0stFT, but given I have Masters degree in Applied Physics I'm pretty sure I know what scientists are.

Quote

You have to add methane and other gases (sadly, human related) to the equation...

You mean like water vapour? The biggest contributor to global warming?

Perhaps we should start talking about our 'sweat footprint' and introduce new taxes to curb our wanton and unashamed production of perspiration?

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #559 on:** March 11, 2007, 07:38:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding

But now? After seeing the documentary and looking at the science behind it through a few online scientific journals I'm convinced CO2 and the production of it by man is simply a geo-political tool.

Now, every time I hear 'carbon footprint' or 'carbon neutral' I feel a barely controllable desire to yell 'bollocks' at a very high volume. It's utter rubbish. We're being duped by perhaps the most ridiculous hoax mankind has ever devised.

OK
Lets assume this statement is correct.
Im not so sure it is but for arguements sake lets assume so anyway.

That would have to bring forth the next logical question.

Why?

For what reason would such a "hoax" be put out there?

seems to me the only ones who have anything to loose by the manmade global warming arguement is pollutant contributing industry, the oil companies and those who have a vested monetary interest in either, or both

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #560 on:** March 11, 2007, 07:43:25 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dowding
Thanks Gh0stFT, but given I have Masters degree in Applied Physics I'm pretty sure I know what scientists are.

You mean like water vapour? The biggest contributor to global warming?

Perhaps we should start talking about our 'sweat footprint' and introduce new taxes to curb our wanton and unashamed production of perspiration?

Curious.

what do you do for a living?

moot · « **Reply #561 on:** March 11, 2007, 11:14:45 PM »

Quote

For what reason would such a "hoax" be put out there?

Like there's no precedent for that sort of thing?

GhostFT - it's true if you guess one side of the debate is right, but wrong if anyone else guesses otherwise?
What're your ecological credentials?

john9001 · « **Reply #562 on:** March 12, 2007, 12:06:41 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by DREDIOCK

Why?
For what reason would such a "hoax" be put out there?

saw a show about your scientists who spent three years and multi millions drilling into the two mile thick greenland ice cap, i'm sure they were well paid for this work.

but now, they have to study the ice cores, that could take 10-15-20 years, at salary of course , scientists don't work for free.

of course they will write papers, publish books , lecture at universities, a good scientist could create a life time career out of "climate change".

what a unique position, they can create their own jobs and live off of grant money.

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #563 on:** March 12, 2007, 01:25:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
saw a show about your scientists who spent three years and multi millions drilling into the two mile thick greenland ice cap, i'm sure they were well paid for this work.

but now, they have to study the ice cores, that could take 10-15-20 years, at salary of course , scientists don't work for free.

of course they will write papers, publish books , lecture at universities, a good scientist could create a life time career out of "climate change".

what a unique position, they can create their own jobs and live off of grant money.

Same thing can be said abvout scientists that dispute it.
So its a wash.

Me personally I dont buy into your explination.
There would have to be a better reason.

moot · « **Reply #564 on:** March 12, 2007, 01:45:50 AM »

You just can't make any conclusions not already made without studying the matter in any less depth than all the specialists and professionals already on the case.

A politician's dream come true.

JB88 · « **Reply #565 on:** March 12, 2007, 02:00:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by moot
You just can't make any conclusions not already made without studying the matter in any less depth than all the specialists and professionals already on the case.

must be hell to be at the table when you are ordering dinner in a restaurant moot.

moot · « **Reply #566 on:** March 12, 2007, 02:11:53 AM »

hehe.. It might seem that way, but culinary hell to me, is a recipe I meant to get spot-on gone fubar. And dirty kitchens.

I'm fortunate enough to only care that the plates delivered are those I asked, and that the middle men delivering it respected their integrity... others can binge on raw oysters-stuffed pigs' feet and steaming hot boiled maggot juice for all I care, so long as it doesn't spill or splatter to my plate.

But you're not really wrong.. I actually have great plans for the kitchen in the house I'm building.
Nothing will stand in my way to get it done as I plan.

Angus · « **Reply #567 on:** March 12, 2007, 03:50:46 AM »

Ice cores. Yes what a waste of time trying to look into what the air was like hundreds of thousands of years ago.
And as for the link from channel four, note that clouds are referred to as having a cooling effect, while that one works both ways, as well as what Dowding referred to, water moisture in the air is a greenhouse gas, which is the core of the theory from the camp that is scared about that acceleration of heat.
Volcanoes are referred to as heating, while their immediate impact is cooling.
It's all sort of complicated, and I'll try to find that link I mentioned. (it's on a weather man's blogsite, - his main hobby being the weather).
But meanwhile, my hat goes off for what EagleDNY promoted. Brazil and others that keep up to the same business are a huge part of the whole equation. (Mind you, there is only 1 continent on the globe where forests are in the whole, growing). It will still bring us cheaper coffee and burgers, so Drediock has a good point.

$$$

Jackal1 · « **Reply #568 on:** March 12, 2007, 08:21:42 AM »

No worries. IKEA has saved the planet. "No more free plastic bags".........Thank you IKEA. I feel so much more secure now.

"Money, its a crime.
Share it fairly but dont take a slice of my pie."

Angus · « **Reply #569 on:** March 12, 2007, 08:32:20 AM »

huh?
you have too realize that nothing is free.....