Author Topic: Man made Global Warming  (Read 2674 times)

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #90 on: April 11, 2007, 10:37:03 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad

How can you casually and totally disregard what the actual climatologists are saying?


LOL..

Isn't that exactly what you are doing.. only in your case the numbers are much more "significant".

Quote
She analyzed 1,000 research papers on climate change selected randomly from those published between 1993 and 2003. The results were surprising: Not a single study explicitly rejected the idea that people are warming the planet.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002549346_globewarm11.html

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #91 on: April 11, 2007, 10:50:23 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Angus
Okayokay, maybe in TEXAS!!!!!


LOL You getting in doomsday mode because some ice is melting............and only will considser one cause------------------> DOOMSDAY. Even if it is not supported or proven.
Never come to Texas. You would stay scared to death. The experts can`t predict, with any accuracy, what the weather will be from morning till night. Seems like that would be a good starting point. When they get that down in the next thosand years or so, then maybe long term predictions might be worked on.


For the impaired........

Quote
Curval when you have something to say just let us know.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2007, 10:52:36 AM by Jackal1 »
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #92 on: April 11, 2007, 10:54:03 AM »
I can actually accept the idea that there may be something to this man-made global warming craze while simultaneously understanding that we are routinely subjected to these end of the world scenarios that continually crop up.

I will say that with the history of the end of the world scares and the credentials of those who say this is an overwrought, overstated crisis, I do lean towards the we'll survive this one too side of the argument.

What I'd like to see is the we're all gonna die crowd at least admit there is clear disagreement in the scientific community on this and there are some pretty expert people out there that say it is all BS.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline SteveBailey

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2409
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #93 on: April 11, 2007, 10:59:11 AM »
Quote
There's a welter of data out there on the web, on sites dedicated to the subject. Why come here asking for it? Can you say "troll"?



Really?  Show me some proof.

Offline Angus

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10057
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #94 on: April 11, 2007, 11:03:13 AM »
To avoid further misunderstanding, I'll give you my opinion on global warming.
The globe is warming and mankind has some part (maybe quite some part) to do with it.
However, most of these debates only take place on the denialism stage, i.e. "The globe is warming", "No" "Is too", "No it isn't" etc.
That's my camp, and I'm not sure Gore is in it ;)
It was very interesting to carry out the flight trials at Rechlin with the Spitfire and the Hurricane. Both types are very simple to fly compared to our aircraft, and childishly easy to take-off and land. (Werner Mölders)

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9805
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #95 on: April 11, 2007, 12:22:20 PM »
Note that some oil companies are starting to publicly agree with the science behind global warming:

ConocoPhillips backs greenhouse gas regulation

Quote

Mulva said no particular event caused ConocoPhillips to step forward. "We believe that the science is quite compelling," he said. "Human activity, including the burning of fossil fuels, is contributing to climate change. Now is the time we need a national mandated framework to deal with climate change."


I'm not naive enough believe CP doesn't have some business strategy behind this declaration, but there it is on public record, nevertheless.

Offline Curval

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11572
      • http://n/a
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #96 on: April 11, 2007, 01:06:36 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Angus, would you like a list of actual climatologists that dispute the whole man made global warming scare?

What I am asking is, with lots of climatologists on both sides of the issue, how is it you totally disregard those that disagree with you? In other words, how can you be so certain your side is correct?


Angus has already addressed this, but I'll throw my $0.02 in.

I don't disregard either side Toad.  I read the links and I read all of the comments.

The thing that makes me "lol" though is that you have put anyone who doesn't buy into your SIDE of the debate into Al Gore's camp and make us out to be.....well all the names you see us being called in this thread, from chicken littles to just plain stupid.  Then you accuse Angus and I of completely ignoring climatologists.  It's quite incredible.

YOUR side completely ignores your own Environmental Protection Agency's writings on the topic of global climate change which I have posted many times and demonises them as liberal al gore types.  Well, unless an alternative energy source to fossil fuels is presented....then the calls for assesments by the EPA come out in full force.

Even the oil companies have information out there on global climate change:

http://www.bp.com/subsection.do?categoryId=4529&contentId=7014604

or are beginning to alter their stance on the topic:

"Exxon, the world's largest publicly traded oil company by market value, long has been a lightning rod in the global-warming debate. Its top executives have openly questioned the scientific validity of claims that fossil-fuel emissions are warming the planet, and it has funded outside groups that have challenged such claims in language sometimes stronger than the company itself has used. Those actions have prompted criticism of the company by environmentalists and by Democrats in the U.S., who now control the Congress."
...
"Exxon has stopped funding the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based think tank that last year ran television ads saying that carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, is helpful. After funding them previously, Exxon decided in late 2005 not to fund for 2006 CEI and "five or six" other groups active in the global-warming debate, Kenneth Cohen, Exxon's vice president for public affairs, confirmed this week in an interview at Exxon's headquarters in Irving, Texas. He declined to identify the groups beyond CEI; their names are expected to become public in the spring, when Exxon releases its annual list of donations to nonprofit groups."
"Myron Ebell, director of CEI's energy and global-warming program, declined to comment about why Exxon didn't fund CEI last year. But he added: "Like any company, they are concerned about both policies and image."
...
"More significant are the meetings between executives from Exxon and other companies to discuss the potential structure of a U.S. carbon regulation."
...
"The changes in Exxon's words and actions are nuanced. The oil giant continues to note uncertainties in climate science. It continues to oppose the Kyoto Protocol, the international global-warming treaty that limits emissions from industrialized countries that have ratified it. It also stresses that any future carbon policy should include developing countries, where emissions are rising fastest."
"Still, the company's subtle softening is significant and reflects a gathering trend among much of U.S. industry, from utilities to auto makers. While many continue to oppose caps, these companies expect the country will impose mandatory global-warming-emission constraints at some point, so they are lining up to try to shape any mandate so they escape with minimum economic pain."


But...no.  It is Angus and I who are ignoring stuff.

LOL

Jackal is unable to answer some very specific scientific questions on the topic and is trying to say that explaining it to me would be (searches back):

"equal to trying to teach a rock about gravity"

This implies he does know but isn't telling.  I wish he'd at least try as maybe I can learn something.  Unlike all of the experts here I don't have the qualifications to determine that global warming is real or not.

My mind is open.

Unlike many here.
Some will fall in love with life and drink it from a fountain that is pouring like an avalanche coming down the mountain

Offline FastFwd

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #97 on: April 11, 2007, 01:44:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
fastfwd..  the chicken littles of the planet are bombarding us with this scare every day... are you afraid of debate?    Perhaps you can tell us what is causing the warming...  
I thought I did, but here's a link that pretty much says what I said in my previous post.

Source: http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/physical_science/chemistry/carbon_dioxide.html&edu=high

Quote
Carbon dioxide is an important greenhouse gas that helps to trap heat in our atmosphere. Without it, our planet would be inhospitably cold. However, a gradual increase in CO2 concentrations in Earth's atmosphere is helping to drive global warming, threatening to disrupt our planet's climate as average global temperatures gradually rise.


Some CO2 is essential, for the reasons given in that link. But the level will double in the next 60 years, with concomitant adverse effects on the planet, unless we switch to other fuels and drastically reduce carbon emissions. Nuclear energy for electricity generation will come to be seen as a "green" alternative.

Offline RASTER

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 76
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #98 on: April 11, 2007, 04:59:18 PM »
I'm surprised no one has asked how C02 captures heat energy.  The reason the moon is cold is because there is nothing to capture the heat energy. The atmosphere is very thin,  by 10000 ft things are getting chilly. Not sure what colour C02 is? However, when I was young a person could look at the horizon and it was clear blue all the way down to the water. These days there is a layer of brown/blue about 4000 ft from the horizon that simply wasnt there 40 years ago.

That brown layer is not C02, its more probably unburnt hydrocarbons. Those particles are almost black and we know that black absorbs a lot more energy than a few transparent molecules of gas. Certainly the brown cloud prevents radiation from hitting the ground but I dont see it getting any warmer at higher altitudes. If anything is warming the earth it would more probably be this thick opaic layer of particles and not a few thousand feet of transparent gas.

CO2 from forest fires liberates carbon which is used in photosythesis to lock carbon back into the plant life again. Its a very dynamic process and fluctuations are going to be evident from blue moon to blue moon.

Certainly it's time to take a good look at our atmosphere but I really dont think anyone has the details to make any scientificly accurate statement for or against C02 being the monster that its claimed to be. Too simple. Wait I recall saying that before on another topic. Simple, no its not. Easy it aint. Understandable occasionally.

RASTER

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #99 on: April 12, 2007, 06:00:43 AM »
Some quotes from the SF Chronicle I found interesting.................

"Hurricane expert William Gray of Colorado State University believes the Earth will start to cool within 10 years. Neil Frank, former director of the National Hurricane Center, told the Washington Post that global warming is "a hoax." Climate scientist Robert Lindzen of MIT believes that clouds and water vapor will counteract greenhouse-gas emissions."


"Scientists acknowledge contradictory data. But the faith-driven Gore argues that all scientists agree with him -- well, except for those who are bought and paid for by big polluters.

Because this is a crusade -- and not about science -- Gore is drawn, not to the most reasoned scenarios, but the most apocalyptic. "


"Consider this exchange with ABC's George Stephanopoulos -- formerly of the Clinton/Gore administration -- who questioned Gore's prediction that global-warming could cause sea levels to rise 20 feet. "But the consensus is several inches over the next century. Right?" asked Stephanopoulos on June 4. "Not 20 feet?"

"Not at all," Gore replied. He added that the scientists he talks to -- his disciples, if you will -- see it his way. He ignores the less catastrophic theories, which predict a rise of an inch per decade, or three feet over the next century. To Gore, the worst-case scenario is the only scenario. "

"Global warming has become so politicized that scientists must believe in it. If they predict dire consequences, they win praise from true believers and grants for their important research. Scientists who question the prophecies of doom can expect to be marginalized."

"Oddly, Gore begins "An Inconvenient Truth" discussing a young classmate who wondered if South America and Africa once had been connected. Their teacher ridiculed the friend, who turned out to be right. Sometimes the know-it-alls are wrong."


"Now Gore is the know-it-all teacher -- and woe to any scientist who does not agree with him, not just on global warming, but on a 20-foot rise in sea level. It is this alarmism -- this extremism -- that has led many a thinking person to question global warming. It's hard to trust those who believe only the most extreme scenario.

Besides, whenever the establishment says you have to believe something, you want people who question the establishment. Or as global cooling guru Gray once said, "Consensus science isn't science." "
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #100 on: April 12, 2007, 08:23:52 AM »
If man is contributing to the natural global warming cycle we are in... even in the tinniest bit...

What are the solutions?  So far... the solutions call for starving millions in poverty stricken nations and.....

buying carbon credits from algore to offset riding around in jets on vacation or having a limo full of bodyguards.

If we do nothing except study the whole thing...  In a few years the earth will go into a global cooling cycle and we can study why that is happening or....

we can get hysterical and blame that on man too.

fastfwd has one "solution" that I agree should be done... not because of man made global warming but because it is a good thing to do...  nuke power plants... we are way behind in getting them up and running...  

Cheap, clean power should be the goal.   reducing dependency on oil is a good thing so long as it does not involve radical regulation of vehicles and lifestyles.

lazs

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #101 on: April 12, 2007, 08:51:31 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by lazs2
 nuke power plants... we are way behind in getting them up and running...  
 


the last plant in the USA was built in 1973.

Offline FastFwd

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 134
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #102 on: April 12, 2007, 10:00:23 AM »
Some folks here are fond of citing global warming and climate change as a "political issue". It may be true that in the political structure of SOME countries, certain organizations stand to gain financially, if their cause can be linked to addressing the problems of global warming.

But this is not the case in every country in the world, and far from it.

For example, in the middle eastern state of Oman, the English version of the Tribune newspaper reported this story:

http://www.omantribune.com/index.php?page=news&id=4313&heading=News%20in%20Detail

 
Quote
US admits to climate change

WASHINGTON Long sceptical about climate change and its causes, the US administration on Friday finally acknowledged the "global challenge" facing the planet and called for international solutions.

"Climate change is clearly a global challenge and we all recognise that it requires global solutions," said Sharon Hays, leader of the US delegation at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).


Is the Oman Tribune a newspaper driven by politics? Did the editorial staff stand to gain financially from any political party by reporting this story? Hardly. Oman is an absolute monarchy, and does not have any political parties. The political situation is described in Wiki:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_Oman
Quote
Oman does not allow political parties and only holds elections with limited suffrage for a consultative assembly. Though Oman is developing into a constitutional monarchy, political parties are not yet allowed in Oman.

Offline midnight Target

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15114
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #103 on: April 12, 2007, 10:02:17 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
the last plant in the USA was built in 1973.


Look up Diablo Canyon.

Started operating in 1985.

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Man made Global Warming
« Reply #104 on: April 12, 2007, 11:07:50 AM »
the permit was approved in 73, but because of the anti-nuke protests it took 10 years to build.