Discussion: Global Warming and Other Environmental Issues

[SuBe]

Cap America can beat global warming, I think that is where he was going with it.

Yes, but Cap is Dead, then so are we.

 

[Steve Rogers]

Yes, but Cap is Dead, then so are we.

Thanks for reminding me. How 'bout Superman? He can push the sun a little farther away from Earth, restoring some cooler temperatures to the planet.

 

[LexCorp]

Thanks for reminding me. How 'bout Superman? He can push the sun a little farther away from Earth, restoring some cooler temperatures to the planet.

Man I am sad now....he lives on in my head.

 

[SuBe]

Thanks for reminding me. How 'bout Superman? He can push the sun a little farther away from Earth, restoring some cooler temperatures to the planet.

Superman can't push the sun as it is not solid, but he can do a push up on the earth and push it back a bit. Just a suggestion Kal-el, Just a suggestion.

 

[Steve Rogers]

Superman can't push the sun as it is not solid, but he can do a push up on the earth and push it back a bit. Just a suggestion Kal-el, Just a suggestion.

He could also use his breath to cool down the sun. Geeze, how strong would Superman be if he actually flew into the sun?

 

[SuBe]

He could also use his breath to cool down the sun. Geeze, how strong would Superman be if he actually flew into the sun?

He would either become a god, or die. They think that his "batteries" would get full and explode.

 

[SuBe]

But if he blew out the sun, it would get very cold.

 

[LexCorp]

Superman in a sun equal Superman Prime.

 

[Steve Rogers]

Okay so, global warming and Superman warming are equally bad. Got it.

 

[Zoken]

I mean accidental, as in people come to excavate land in the future and find waste, but are then exposed to it.

Then they contain it and cover it back up. Being exposed to it for a couple minutes won't kill you. It takes months, even years, of constant exposure to really suffer any ill effects.

Why a debate? Around 90% of the scientific community say global warming is a reality 10% say no, The majority of the scientific community believes in global warming, a small percentage does not. Majority wins, case closed.

Cite your source for those figures.

What are you trying to say here?

It's fairly obvious. Science evolves and tellsus new things about the world every day.

 

[LexCorp]

Okay so, global warming and Superman warming are equally bad. Got it.

Indeed.

 

[SuBe]

Lex: I miss your old Avatar. The Fly.

 

[SuBe]

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/365463.html

It's raining iguanas in South Florida.
A remarkable cold snap that brought temperatures in the mid-30s to the Miami area Thursday morning also brought lizards falling out of trees at Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park on Key Biscayne, the Miami Herald reported.
"We have found dozens on the bike path after a major cold snap," said park manager Robert Yero. "When they warm up in the sun, they come back to life."
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/naturalscience/
At least three iguanas in suspended animation could be found under trees in the park, which lies on the southern tip of Key Biscayne, a barrier island just south of Miami Beach and across Biscayne Bay from the city of Miami.
Yero had little sympathy for the frozen iguanas, explaining that they were an invasive species devastating to native plant life.
"They really are taking over," he lamented.

Global Warming Strikes again!

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Global Warming Strikes again!

you DO understand that Global warming is not some made up concept right?
you do understand that the vast majority of the scientific community agrees that there is a climate change and that man is accelarating it?
you do understand that a Global warming doesn't mean that it's going to be warm all the time right?

 

[SuBe]

you DO understand that Global warming is not some made up concept right?
you do understand that the vast majority of the scientific community agrees that there is a climate change and that man is accelarating it?
you do understand that a Global warming doesn't mean that it's going to be warm all the time right?

What? Only warm when it is convenient to the cause?

 

[Mr Sparkle]

What? Only warm when it is convenient to the cause?

do you even know what " climate change" entails?
why do you think the vast majority of scientists are for it and only goverment and industry are against it?
think about that.

 

[bell110]

Global Warming Strikes again!

Stupid iguanas. Serves them right for being cold blooded.

Seriously though, global warming causes wierd weather patterns, it's not just hot all the time.

 

[SuBe]

do you even know what " climate change" entails?
why do you think the vast majority of scientists are for it and only goverment and industry are against it?
think about that.

What about the 400 scientists that came out a couple of weeks ago saying that they are against the "Climate Change Consensus" and the Owner of the Weather Channel out against Man-Made Global Warming. What about all the scientists that say they had to say something about global warming being man made just to keep their jobs? What about the hokey science saying that 2007 was the warmest year in history like it was gospel, when NASA says that their computer models were inaccurate and actually 1934 was the warmest year in recorded history. What about the other planets in our solar system are getting warmer also? Why is it that the Nations that signed the Kyoto Treaty are on average 21% worse off in their Carbon Emmissions since the signing, but the United States, whom didn't sign the treaty, is on average of only 6% over? Man-Made Global Warming is a farce. It is called natural weather patterns.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

What about the 400 scientists that came out a couple of weeks ago saying that they are against the "Climate Change Consensus" and the Owner of the Weather Channel out against Man-Made Global Warming. What about all the scientists that say they had to say something about global warming being man made just to keep their jobs? What about the hokey science saying that 2007 was the warmest year in history like it was gospel, when NASA says that their computer models were inaccurate and actually 1934 was the warmest year in recorded history. What about the other planets in our solar system are getting warmer also? Why is it that the Nations that signed the Kyoto Treaty are on average 21% worse off in their Carbon Emmissions since the signing, but the United States, whom didn't sign the treaty, is on average of only 6% over? Man-Made Global Warming is a farce. It is called natural weather patterns.

and what about 30 of those sicentists being funded by Exxon mobil?
all the rest has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, I never even spoke about the Kyoto accord,
and explain to me if 2,500 scientists are on the IPCC much less that 400 of those voice oposition and 30 of those are funded by oil companies you can call Man Made climate change a " farce" by any strech of the imagination?
how exactly? it still means that more than 2,200 scientists out of 2,500 say than man made climate change is a fact.
it's ridiculous for you to say it's a "farce"

 

[Memphis Slim]

This whole thing has really become cultic!

This planet is fine. It's 15 degree outside where I live. It's bit warmer down south.........just like always.

 

[Steve Rogers]

Come on SupermanBeyond, why are you so against believing in a phenomon taking place in a time where the Nortwest Passage is open for the first time in recorded history?

 

[Memphis Slim]

Hey!! What about all the grant money given to the scientists who agreed to climb onboard the the Gore express???? That money door flips both ways.

 

[Memphis Slim]

and what about 30 of those sicentists being funded by Exxon mobil?
all the rest has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, I never even spoke about the Kyoto accord,

The guy said 400 scientists..........so I guess that leave us 370 ?? t:

 

[Memphis Slim]

I have to keep going back to this.... we just never learn from history....

The Cooling World

Newsweek, April 28, 1975



[FONT=Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]www.denisdutton.com[/FONT]

Here is the text of Newsweek’s 1975 story on the trend toward global cooling. It may look foolish today, but in fact world temperatures had been falling since about 1940. It was around 1979 that they reversed direction and resumed the general rise that had begun in the 1880s, bringing us today back to around 1940 levels. A PDF of the original is available here.
A fine short history of warming and cooling scares has recently been produced. It is available here. — D.D.

[SIZE=+2]T[/SIZE]here are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.
The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars’ worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.
To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world’s weather. The central fact is that after three quarters of a century of extraordinarily mild conditions, the earth’s climate seems to be cooling down. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.”
[SIZE=+2]A[/SIZE] survey completed last year by Dr. Murray Mitchell of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reveals a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968. According to George Kukla of Columbia University, satellite photos indicated a sudden, large increase in Northern Hemisphere snow cover in the winter of 1971-72. And a study released last month by two NOAA scientists notes that the amount of sunshine reaching the ground in the continental U.S. diminished by 1.3% between 1964 and 1972.
To the layman, the relatively small changes in temperature and sunshine can be highly misleading. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin points out that the Earth’s average temperature during the great Ice Ages was only about seven degrees lower than during its warmest eras – and that the present decline has taken the planet about a sixth of the way toward the Ice Age average. Others regard the cooling as a reversion to the “little ice age” conditions that brought bitter winters to much of Europe and northern America between 1600 and 1900 – years when the Thames used to freeze so solidly that Londoners roasted oxen on the ice and when iceboats sailed the Hudson River almost as far south as New York City.
Just what causes the onset of major and minor ice ages remains a mystery. “Our knowledge of the mechanisms of climatic change is at least as fragmentary as our data,” concedes the National Academy of Sciences report. “Not only are the basic scientific questions largely unanswered, but in many cases we do not yet know enough to pose the key questions.”
[SIZE=+2]M[/SIZE]eteorologists think that they can forecast the short-term results of the return to the norm of the last century. They begin by noting the slight drop in overall temperature that produces large numbers of pressure centers in the upper atmosphere. These break up the smooth flow of westerly winds over temperate areas. The stagnant air produced in this way causes an increase in extremes of local weather such as droughts, floods, extended dry spells, long freezes, delayed monsoons and even local temperature increases – all of which have a direct impact on food supplies.
“The world’s food-producing system,” warns Dr. James D. McQuigg of NOAA’s Center for Climatic and Environmental Assessment, “is much more sensitive to the weather variable than it was even five years ago.” Furthermore, the growth of world population and creation of new national boundaries make it impossible for starving peoples to migrate from their devastated fields, as they did during past famines.
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.

—PETER GWYNNE with bureau reports​

 

[Mr Sparkle]

The guy said 400 scientists..........so I guess that leave us 370 ?? t:

wow! out of a scientifical community composed of thousands and thousands, 370 sounds oh-so impressive.

well, not really.