Global Warming

[arby]

Global Warming. For: C02 is causeing the warming. I think we all know the details. Would have liked to find a link to An Inconvenient Truth but couldn't find it..... Against: Its a myth and there is no actual evidence to back it up. Discuss.

[bluefinger]

(Just as a rebuttal to the Against bit) Myth? How is a huge chunk of the Larson ice shelf breaking off because of melting not due to something out of the ordinary like Global Warming? One can argue its just variable solar output on the increase, or just the natural cycle of the Earth's climate... but things are just happening too quickly for it to be natural. You hardly see snow in the South of britain during winter, and when you do, it doesn't stay for long any more. Summers are getting hotter on average, weather patterns are changing or becoming more extreme... it just seems a bit ignorant not to think something's wrong. But I reckon once scientists figure out how to fully harness the power of nuclear fusion and create a functioning reactor (not just some experimental one), then we will see a big change.

[arby]

I really suggest watching the video in its entirety before posting like that in this thread. Every single issue you addressed is talked about in the film. For those of you who don;t have the time and simply want the meat/big arguments.. start watching at about 19/20 mins in. Right now i'm sitting on the fence. Both sides have decent defense. and remember.. the issue isn't that the temperatures are rising. In fact, Everybody agrees that they are rising. The issue is if its caused by man-made CO2 or other.

[Universal Mind]

The other side of the argument... http://www.answers.com/topic/list-of-scien...rming-consensus

[bluefinger]

I really suggest watching the video in its entirety before posting like that in this thread. Every single issue you addressed is talked about in the film. For those of you who don;t have the time and simply want the meat/big arguments.. start watching at about 19/20 mins in. Right now i'm sitting on the fence. Both sides have decent defense. and remember.. the issue isn't that the temperatures are rising. In fact, Everybody agrees that they are rising. The issue is if its caused by man-made CO2 or other.[/b] When CO2 are at an all time high.... then, its obvious. Deforestation, Pollution, hell, its not just CO2, its methane as well (which is an even stronger greenhouse gas). There's tonnes and tonnes of methane locked within the tundra of the world, and if the world heats up a little more and causes the permafrost to melt, then we are in even bigger trouble, because then its not just deposits within the tundra, but also on the sea bed around the oceans. The video does make a good argument, however, there's more to just Global Warming than just CO2. There's other greenhouse gases involved and not as much study has been done with them. The climate does change over time, however, at the moment, one can't say we are not at least having some influence in the way the world is changing. EDIT: Meh... I'm not so sure anymore... smeg it... I'll just keep my hopes up for nuclear fusion (i would love to see a working reactor within my lifetime).

[Universal Mind]

I'm still celebrating how we took care of that "global cooling" crisis of the 1970's. Maybe we will have another one in about 30 years. http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm Here is a history of the wishy washy back and forth on world temperature scares.... http://www.businessandmedia.org/specialrep.../fireandice.asp

[Patrick]

Since no one is still absolutely certain about the precise relationship between CO2 and a change in temperature - so the relationship may be the opposite of what we think. However, even if global warming is happening the way they say it is, I really don't think it's worth doing anything. Humans produce such a teeeeeny tiiiny percentage of carbon dioxide that it wouldn't be worth it. Plus, it's human nature to be selfish and not care about future generations. And lastly, with our fuel resources running out, hopefully we'll be using nuclear (and even more hopefully, fusion) power soon-ish, and it shouldn't be a 'problem' anymore. Let's be lazy people!

[arby]

The thing that really bother me though... Remember whats happened over the centuries? People get suduced into thniking one way then everything goes down the shit hole and war breaks out. WEllo, we've presumed that can't happen nowadays because theres so much communication and education. But this proves it worng. That scares me on so many levels.

[Neruo]

I don't see how all of a sudden, CO2 in the atmosphere wouldn't directly relate to temperate (with a certain lag, yes). It has for the last millions of years, probably it will now.

[Elwood]

The planet goes through changes. It doesn't stay the same all the time. If humans werent here it would be exactly the same. Remember the Colorado incident? Or maby the New york one. YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH Global warming= Shat

[arby]

I don't see how all of a sudden, CO2 in the atmosphere wouldn't directly relate to temperate (with a certain lag, yes). It has for the last millions of years, probably it will now.[/b] But which the cause and which is the effect?

[blade5x]

The planet goes through changes. It doesn't stay the same all the time. If humans werent here it would be exactly the same. Remember the Colorado incident? Or maby the New york one. YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH Global warming= Shat[/b] But why take a chance?

[Universal Mind]

Wake me up when we go back to the global cooling panic. By the way, did you know that scientists have discovered global warming on Mars? http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.h...5c7f723&k=0 Its southern ice cap is melting away. Damn that Bush! I just thought of something. Every time we kill an Iraqi insurgent, less CO2 will be produced.

[arby]

Haha... I say we play along with "CO2 heats the earth" then when the global cooling copmes we all go and say "Not enoguh CO2, Build more!"

[Neruo]

Wake me up when we go back to the global cooling panic. By the way, did you know that scientists have discovered global warming on Mars? http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/story.h...5c7f723&k=0 Its southern ice cap is melting away. Damn that Bush! I just thought of something. Every time we kill an Iraqi insurgent, less CO2 will be produced.[/b] So 9/11 was a great event for the world? 3000 less people producing CO2! Yeah I see how that logic holds up. But which the cause and which is the effect?[/b] Since CO2 levels are Ahead of temperature (with the whole lag thing), I would say CO2 is the cause, temperature rising the effect

[arby]

Actually, Temperature leads CO2 by about 800 years.... It has to do with temperature and the solubility of CO2 into the oceans. REALLY basic stuff.

[Universal Mind]

So 9/11 was a great event for the world? 3000 less people producing CO2! Yeah I see how that logic holds up.[/b] No, that wasn't really good enough. Since we have killed 400 trillion Iraqis (Is that the latest figure you like to use?) after having Bush torture them with a kinky whip, we have put a big dent in what a volcano will do in a day.

[Neruo]

lol. Besides that, I just read in Times magazine of (April 9th) about global warming. I was shocked, shocked with joy, to see not in any way all Americans are as stubborn and foolish as Universal Mind on this topic. Some nice quotes: "It is getting pretty hard to deny it." "10 of the 11 hottest years on record were between 1996 and 2006." (records go back like some 400 years, if I am right). Anyhow. What saddens me most is not just that you are denying the clear facts global warming is true, as much as religious fundamentalists are denying the facts about evolution, but that you (or the population as a whole) never Ever learns from such things. Just a few decades ago people argued for Years and Years weather cigarette smoke was really causing lung cancer, while studies proven it was multiple times. If you lives back then, UM, you would probably be one of those people that said "Nahhh it doesn't cause lung cancer" while happily smoking. Such mass-denial syndromes happen quite a lot in society, quite fascinating actually. - Anyhow, CO2 levels are higher then they have been in 600.000 years (if measurements from arctic ice are correct, -but isn't it convenient to all of a sudden question such things?-). There really is no denying that mankind has a certain effect on the worlds climate and CO2 levels, causing either small or large changes. Just don't forget even a relatively small change might change the flow of a single sea-current, causing gigantic effects on specific locations.

[bluefinger]

lol. Besides that, I just read in Times magazine of (April 9th) about global warming. I was shocked, shocked with joy, to see not in any way all Americans are as stubborn and foolish as Universal Mind on this topic. Some nice quotes: "It is getting pretty hard to deny it." "10 of the 11 hottest years on record were between 1996 and 2006." (records go back like some 400 years, if I am right). Anyhow. What saddens me most is not just that you are denying the clear facts global warming is true, as much as religious fundamentalists are denying the facts about evolution, but that you (or the population as a whole) never Ever learns from such things. Just a few decades ago people argued for Years and Years weather cigarette smoke was really causing lung cancer, while studies proven it was multiple times. If you lives back then, UM, you would probably be one of those people that said "Nahhh it doesn't cause lung cancer" while happily smoking. Such mass-denial syndromes happen quite a lot in society, quite fascinating actually. - Anyhow, CO2 levels are higher then they have been in 600.000 years (if measurements from arctic ice are correct, -but isn't it convenient to all of a sudden question such things?-). There really is no denying that mankind has a certain effect on the worlds climate and CO2 levels, causing either small or large changes. Just don't forget even a relatively small change might change the flow of a single sea-current, causing gigantic effects on specific locations.[/b] Actually, what about before 400 years? If anything, I've read up about GW a lot since my last post here, and to be honest, the evidence is flaky. And the fact that GW is being used to try to stop developing countries from developing is just morally wrong. Besides, it isn't just CO2, its methane, solar output, levels of SO2 (which cool the atmosphere), and the worst greenhouse gas of them all... water vapour. There's too many points of weakness in the argument for Global Warming, and the fact that CO2 lags behind temperature rise by 800 years means its that temperature is the cause, and CO2 the effect... why? Because temperature directly effects the CO2 solubility in the world's oceans. The warmer the oceans become, the more CO2 is released into the atmosphere, and considering how huge the oceans are, I doubt even we could equal the CO2 output of the oceans if their temperatures rose by half a degree on average. Plus, solar output has a huge effect on the weather, and if anything, GW scientists fails to take into account how solar output is also at an all time high in 400 years... GW is not a threat any more... its an enterprise... whoop-di-doo...

[Neruo]

Wow. And EVERYONE at the UN missed what you read up in a weekend? Darn gosh! I bet it was those assholes communist, mislead everyone, since the Russian enterprise benefits from stricter laws on pollution because... it will cause them to get more... caviar?

[bluefinger]

Wow. And EVERYONE at the UN missed what you read up in a weekend? Darn gosh! I bet it was those assholes communist, mislead everyone, since the Russian enterprise benefits from stricter laws on pollution because... it will cause them to get more... caviar?[/b] ... okay... I'll just say this. The evidence behind Global Warming is flaky... very flaky, and now because it has become more of a political issue rather than a scientific one, people will naturally push scientists to bring out reports in favour on certain results all because of one thing... money. Yes, some economies will benefit from stricter laws on pollution control, whilst others won't. Russia is an industrialised nation, it can afford to make the commitments and still get something out of it. What about the majority of Africa though? Are we going to restrict them to only using solar and wind power for providing a whole infrastructure it's energy? Both forms of energy generation are unreliable, and should only be used to supplement an existing power grid, not form the backbone of it. Yes, the drive for energy efficiency is good, but if anything, only developed countries can afford to do so... developing nations don't have the necessary funds to do so, so why should we force them to hamstring their economies just so to keep a bunch of hippies happy? The world is warming, yes, but I doubt its us that are the sole cause behind it. Those words you replied back at me have just reinforced the fact that is issue has become too political. The whole Global Warming thing has become an enterprise in which people are making money out of it, and since there is investment potential in it, people will do anything to prevent people thinking otherwise. If the world suddenly starts cooling again, what will happen then? Do we declare victory? Most won't, because they will lose their investment, and with it, loads of jobs.

[Neruo]

lol you actually took the whole Russia stuff seriously, I just picked a random country. Also, the UN or NATO or something, or the Kyoto stuff or something: They set a certain CO2 a country is allowed to produce, based on population. Poor countries could actually make money off it, selling the CO2 rights they don't use. You don't actually think people's plan against global warming is shooting everyone that burns fossil fuels? Anyhow, America, with it's overheated economy, sodomized the Kyoto agreements because they want money now. In the long run, it will just rape them back in the ass. Being economic, preserving fossil fuels and such, actually pays of economically in the long run. The political issue with global warming is mostly people that are buying the 'oh my god saving the environment will be bad for our economy'-hype.

[bluefinger]

lol you actually took the whole Russia stuff seriously, I just picked a random country. Also, the UN or NATO or something, or the Kyoto stuff or something: They set a certain CO2 a country is allowed to produce, based on population. Poor countries could actually make money off it, selling the CO2 rights they don&#39;t use. You don&#39;t actually think people&#39;s plan against global warming is shooting everyone that burns fossil fuels? Anyhow, America, with it&#39;s overheated economy, sodomized the Kyoto agreements because they want money now. In the long run, it will just rape them back in the ass. Being economic, preserving fossil fuels and such, actually pays of economically in the long run. The political issue with global warming is mostly people that are buying the &#39;oh my god saving the environment will be bad for our economy&#39;-hype.[/b] Sure, there can be an economy still be sustained and allowed to developed around CO<sub>2</sub> trading, without really digging into its long term development, but it still builds on the assumption that we are the sole cause of Global Warming, in which we actually aren&#39;t. I think its an issue that needs to be debated, instead of being accepted as a fact. There&#39;s too many ifs and buts in the argument for Global Warming (at least when its concerning our influence in it), because in the end of the day, nature dwarfs us in the production of CO<sub>2</sub>. I doubt all the factories in the world can even equal the amount of CO<sub>2</sub> production when compared to the amount still stored within the world&#39;s oceans. And again, the Kyoto agreement doesn&#39;t take into account other gases that have an effect on the world&#39;s climate, such as Sulphur Dioxide, Methane, and Water Vapour, simple gaseous H<sub>2</sub>O. If anything, its not a reliable investment. But as long as we can preserve fossil fuels and try to get to more abundant alternative fuels, then maybe...

[Universal Mind]

lol. Besides that, I just read in Times magazine of (April 9th) about global warming. I was shocked, shocked with joy, to see not in any way all Americans are as stubborn and foolish as Universal Mind on this topic.[/b] I posted an article about the history of the back and forth. Do you deny its truth? Do you deny that there was a "global cooling" crisis of the 70's and that there have been other ones in the past 100 years? It's a fact. Liberalism is a hysterical religion rooted in creating problems and acting like nut cases. The temperature of Earth is always changing. If things are a tiny bit warmer now than they were a hundred years ago, why is that such a big shock? You fundamentalist liberals are not going to be happy until we can invent a supermachine that makes temperature in every city stay exactly the same always. Maybe you're the person who should invent that. Let me know how it works out.

[arby]

The thing about global warming. Its not just an "issue" anymore. Our moral system has become based upon it now. CO2 is now almost treated as the "sinner's gas" "I'm made of CO2, you're made of CO2. We're all made of CO2. Its terrible that we're thinking of it as a pollutant" People will pick up immoral morals really quickly if its the popular thing... Jeez, try to make your own values!