Discussion: Global Warming and Other Environmental Issues

[SuBe]

no, you happen to be making an unnacurate parallel.
see, with religion you have to have faith in what people tell you, in the stories they give you, and you must do so without asking for evidence.
I'm going to be honest with you, if 80% of the world scientists had Proof, concrete proof and studies that there is INFACT a God.
I'd pray daily.
but there isn't is it? there's no scientific proof of God or Gods for that matter, so your religion argument falls appart right there.
plus, it sounds more like you joined a cult, were people who don't agree with you fit into little niches and even have a cute easy to remember name like " global warmers " , it's almost unnaceptable how you in this case choose to ignore scientific evidence.
that's what's " stupid " on your side of the argument, not that you refuse to " believe" because no " belief" is involved, that's why you are in denial.
because simply put, when you cling to a dissenting opinion, one that's marginal in the scientific community, you are either of two things.
a.- a maverick, whose findings will be hailed as visionary and " before your time"
b.- wrong
but , since the earth is running out of Oil, the effect of certain man made chemicals on earth is proven ( CFCs remember?) and the impact of man on a given environment is a FACT, not made up, not belief but a FACT it's terribly ignorant to assume that climate change " isn't happening" because you don't like the people involved in it.
seriously, the changes involved, the stuff that you can do RIGHT NOW to help the environment is actually really simple, it baffles me how people can complain that " the global warmers want me to spend money " when you already spend money for stuff you don't need.
it's not about spending money, not about that at all, there will be a component to that but there's changes that can be made by you and others to actually aid in having a better environment.
side effects?
cleaner air from lesser amounts of pollution, healthier populace, less traffic, more open spaces and green areas.

wow, how distopian.
why you choose to ignore the evidence is beyond me, it's really baffling that most of the people here taling about how this doesn't exist are in other threads talking about " personal responsibility" that's just odd to me.

I see nothing wrong at all with people being cleaner at all. Believe me, when I go to the beach, I hate seeing people putting cigarette butts in the sand, or finding plastic cups being carried out into the water. I hate driving down the highway and seeing crap on the side of the road. I hate the idea of people ruining the world around me through forestation, etc.

But, to believe that we are so significant that we can affect something as big as the the Climate, and ruin the entire world, I just can't. Research will show that Temperature goes up and down constantly. Ice Ages come and go. When those Ice Ages are going, temperature goes up. There is even evidence that shows other planets in our solar system has risen steadily up until 2 years ago where they started cooling down. There are studies to show that the global average in Temperature has actually decreased since 1998, but peaking in 1994. There are studies that actually show that the temperture is actually decreasing since 1998. Other Studies show that Termperture has leveled off, to a sort of Plateau, all the while when all countries have higher Carbon Emmissions since the signing of the Kyoto Treaty.

I can't believe that we have so much power. We are insigificant. We are dust. We are not so important. The Earth has billions of year before us, the Earth will have Billions more after us.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

But, to believe that we are so significant that we can affect something as big as the the Climate, and ruin the entire world, I just can't. Research will show that Temperature goes up and down constantly. Ice Ages come and go. When those Ice Ages are going, temperature goes up. There is even evidence that shows other planets in our solar system has risen steadily up until 2 years ago where they started cooling down. There are studies to show that the global average in Temperature has actually decreased since 1998, but peaking in 1994. There are studies that actually show that the temperture is actually decreasing since 1998. Other Studies show that Termperture has leveled off, to a sort of Plateau, all the while when all countries have higher Carbon Emmissions since the signing of the Kyoto Treaty.

I can't believe that we have so much power. We are insigificant. We are dust. We are not so important. The Earth has billions of year before us, the Earth will have Billions more after us.

hahaha! without a doubt, that's doesn't mean it will be able to sustain human life will it?
research also shows that climate change is being accelerated by us, and affecting thing on a global scale?
isn't it as hard to believe as man-made products affecting layers of atmosphere? and that's a fact.

 

[sinewave]

I see nothing wrong at all with people being cleaner at all. Believe me, when I go to the beach, I hate seeing people putting cigarette butts in the sand, or finding plastic cups being carried out into the water. I hate driving down the highway and seeing crap on the side of the road. I hate the idea of people ruining the world around me through forestation, etc.

But, to believe that we are so significant that we can affect something as big as the the Climate, and ruin the entire world, I just can't. Research will show that Temperature goes up and down constantly. Ice Ages come and go. When those Ice Ages are going, temperature goes up. There is even evidence that shows other planets in our solar system has risen steadily up until 2 years ago where they started cooling down. There are studies to show that the global average in Temperature has actually decreased since 1998, but peaking in 1994. There are studies that actually show that the temperture is actually decreasing since 1998. Other Studies show that Termperture has leveled off, to a sort of Plateau, all the while when all countries have higher Carbon Emmissions since the signing of the Kyoto Treaty.

I can't believe that we have so much power. We are insigificant. We are dust. We are not so important. The Earth has billions of year before us, the Earth will have Billions more after us.

you don't think humanity has effected the earth or its ecosystem? at all? whuzza huh?????

 

[SuBe]

you don't think humanity has effected the earth or its ecosystem? at all? whuzza huh?????

What is going to have more influence, Us or the Sun?

 

[sinewave]

What is going to have more influence, Us or the Sun?

are you for real?

 

[SuBe]

No, I'm for Un-Real

 

[sinewave]

as far as i know, the sun doesn't cut down trees and replace them contributors to pollution like factories and roads to drive polluting cars on. so yeah, i'd say man has done more to hurt the environment and climate than the sun has.

 

[SuBe]

as far as i know, the sun doesn't cut down trees and replace them contributors to pollution like factories and roads to drive polluting cars on. so yeah, i'd say man has done more to hurt the environment and climate than the sun has.

So you are saying the sun has little to no affect to how warm it is?

 

[sinewave]

So you are saying the sun has little to no affect to how warm it is?

i know you're trying to be cute, but you know that's not what we're discussing.

 

[Carcharodon]

But, the effects of that evidence is still debatable. So, it is still just a theory.

Where's the, "Captain Obvious," picture when you need it?

My point was that G.W. is backed by scientific evidence....which, you know, it is. In fact, all scientific theories are backed by scientific evidence, by the very definition of a scientific theory.

 

[Carcharodon]

What is going to have more influence, Us or the Sun?

While it's a cute little point you're trying to make, it doesn't mean that we have no effect whatsoever.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

and the fact that we have an projected 25% impact on the process pretty much says something strong doesn't it?

 

[lazur]

No. Just saying that its very visable. I mean....we should have a meter of snow out there....but no...I see grass.

Meanwhile, there are record snow fall recordings in much of the U.S.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence of anything.

There's no such thing as 'global warming' - at least not that we as a species are causing. Earth works on a natrually cyclic basis. Over the last fifty years, no change in air temperature has been recorded, and in the last 200 years, the temperature of the oceans has increased by only half a degree.

If anything, there's an Ice Age on the way given that the sun is completely absent of sun spots, and has been for a significant period of time (one of the tell tale signs, btw).

If you want a FACT, here's one: Humans haven't been on the planet long enough to know even remotely just what the hell is going on with Nature and all she has in store. It's 2008 and we're still surprised by Nature's arsenal of natural phenomenon. It's all guess work, and most of it is conjecture and speculation at best.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

it's Ironic to discredit "anecdotal evidence" with anecdotal evidence AND assumption.

 

[ANTOINE X]

Meanwhile, there are record snow fall recordings in much of the U.S.

Anecdotal evidence is not evidence of anything.

There's no such thing as 'global warming' - at least not that we as a species are causing. Earth works on a natrually cyclic basis. Over the last fifty years, no change in air temperature has been recorded, and in the last 200 years, the temperature of the oceans has increased by only half a degree.

If anything, there's an Ice Age on the way given that the sun is completely absent of sun spots, and has been for a significant period of time (one of the tell tale signs, btw).

If you want a FACT, here's one: Humans haven't been on the planet long enough to know even remotely just what the hell is going on with Nature and all she has in store. It's 2008 and we're still surprised by Nature's arsenal of natural phenomenon. It's all guess work, and most of it is conjecture and speculation at best.

I think they re using the wrong word it s not really a global warming issue but more of a chaos! The fact that were polluting is causing inconstancy in the weather in general. Its like the default settings of the planet is set to 'customize'. So as a result some country get cold weather others warm weather. Like where I leave in Canada in June it was unusually cold and in January really hot like i could wear a T-shirt.

 

[Anguissette1979]

Earth works on a natrually cyclic basis.

True, but humans are enhancing this natural effect.

Over the last fifty years, no change in air temperature has been recorded, and in the last 200 years, the temperature of the oceans has increased by only half a degree.

False. The graph below is average global air temperature:

Water will always heat up slower than air because water has a higher specific heat capacity than air. This means it take more energy (heat) to change the temperature of water by one degree than it takes to change the temperature of the air by one degree.

If anything, there's an Ice Age on the way given that the sun is completely absent of sun spots, and has been for a significant period of time (one of the tell tale signs, btw).

Sunspots fluctuate on an 11 year cycle. Below is a graph of sunspot activity from 1750 to the present. Note that we are at the low point in the cycle but the number of sunspots will steadily increase over the next 11 years.

 

[Anguissette1979]

I think they re using the wrong word it s not really a global warming issue but more of a chaos! The fact that were polluting is causing inconstancy in the weather in general. Its like the default settings of the planet is set to 'customize'. So as a result some country get cold weather others warm weather. Like where I leave in Canada in June it was unusually cold and in January really hot like i could wear a T-shirt.

As I described a few pages back, golbal warming introduces a large quantity of fresh water from melting glaciers into an otherwise warm, salty ocean. This effect disrupts the normal thermohaline circulation of the oceans which transports heat from equatorial regions to polar regions. One of the side effects of this slowing of heat transport is that weather patterns become messed up causing some areas to be drier *cough*the southeast*cough*, some to be wetter. Some to be colder *cough*70 degrees in Chicago in January*cough* and some to be warmer. We have shattered many meteorological records in the past 10 years or so especially...

 

[SuBe]

First snow for 100 years falls on Baghdad

3 hours ago
BAGHDAD (AFP) — Light snow fell in Baghdad early on Friday in what weather officials said was the first time in about a 100 years.
Rare snowfalls were also recorded in the west and centre of Iraq, plunging temperatures to zero degrees Centigrade (32 degrees Fahrenheit) and even colder, an official said.
The snow in Baghdad, which melted as it hit the ground, began falling before dawn and continued until after 9 am, residents said.
"Snow has fallen in Baghdad for the first time in about a century as a result of two air flows meeting," said a statement by the meteorology department.
"The first one was cold and dry and the second one was warm and humid. They met above Iraq."
The director of the meteorology department, Dawood Shakir, told AFP that climate change was possibly to blame for the unusual event.
"It's very rare," he said. "Baghdad has never seen snow falling in living memory.
"These snowfalls are linked to the climate change that is happening everywhere. We are finding some places in the world which are warm and are supposed to be cold."
Snow was also reported in the mountainous Kurdish north of the country, where falls are common.

Snow in Badhdad, first in 100 years! Global warming strikes again!

 

[Mr Sparkle]

Snow in Badhdad, first in 100 years! Global warming strikes again!

I thought you read wikipedia?
you apparently don't even know what this process entails.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

plus, you completely ignored anguissette's posts.
you're reaching Celldog level quickly....which consists of

1.- having a preset opinion on a topic.
2.- engaging people on said topic.
3.- ignoring contrary evidence at first discussing the topic
4.- complete denial
5.- article, often not proof of anything cited as proof, with a brief one liner at the end , smiley face.

lather, rinse, repeat.

 

[moraldeficiency]

False. The graph below is average global air temperature:

Water will always heat up slower than air because water has a higher specific heat capacity than air. This means it take more energy (heat) to change the temperature of water by one degree than it takes to change the temperature of the air by one degree.


Sunspots fluctuate on an 11 year cycle. Below is a graph of sunspot activity from 1750 to the present. Note that we are at the low point in the cycle but the number of sunspots will steadily increase over the next 11 years.

Ok, I do believe in global warming but I also believe those graphs are total bs. We haven't recorded planetary temp. nearly long enough to have an average. It's just an average of recent events. The same goes for sunspots though the sun would probably take far longer to get anything near an acceptable average for any events.

Can't we just say, yes humans impact the envirnment but we're not sure how much. It makes sense not to @uck things up more when we can do something less destructive with relative ease. We can still do this without trying to say we know exactely what's going on with the planet (cause we don't really have much of a clue) and sounding like self-righteous, know-it-all @ssholes. I think that's a big part of the problem, many environmentalists try to shame or talk down to others and that can never work, it only makes people want to tear you and your beliefs down.

 

[Mr Sparkle]

We can still do this without trying to say we know exactely what's going on with the planet (cause we don't really have much of a clue) and sounding like self-righteous, know-it-all @ssholes. I think that's a big part of the problem, many environmentalists try to shame or talk down to others and that can never work, it only makes people want to tear you and your beliefs down.

I don't think any of the scientists involved have claimed to know exactly what's going with the planet, nor the extent of the impact of man on global warming, but the impact of man on the environment?
that's a certainty, so it's obvious that anyone faced with a person claiming that we do not know if man affects the environment is going to get a little upset, given the fact that this statement is contrary to ALL evidence presented.
and hey, you know what? I had friend that studied Medicine, and he told me once that almost all of the good doctors were morons and had no bedside manner.
and I was a little puzzled at this, he went on to continue that every time a good doctor gave a diagnosis their colleagues and sometimes their patients questioned them, and they became so defensive that they overcompensated.
the moral of the story is that regardless of the attitude of the doctor, the prognosis is correct.
and I rarely **** with my heath, so, if you consulted 25,000 doctors and out of those 400 gave a different diagnosis...which diagnosis would YOU trust?

 

[moraldeficiency]

I don't think any of the scientists involved have claimed to know exactly what's going with the planet, nor the extent of the impact of man on global warming, but the impact of man on the environment?
that's a certainty, so it's obvious that anyone faced with a person claiming that we do not know if man affects the environment is going to get a little upset, given the fact that this statement is contrary to ALL evidence presented.
and hey, you know what? I had friend that studied Medicine, and he told me once that almost all of the good doctors were morons and had no bedside manner.
and I was a little puzzled at this, he went on to continue that every time a good doctor gave a diagnosis their colleagues and sometimes their patients questioned them, and they became so defensive that they overcompensated.
the moral of the story is that regardless of the attitude of the doctor, the prognosis is correct.
and I rarely **** with my heath, so, if you consulted 25,000 doctors and out of those 400 gave a different diagnosis...which diagnosis would YOU trust?

It's not that someone claims to know everything, but I've yet to hear any of them say, "look humans mess up the planet. We don't know exactely how bad or how much of what's going on is natural, but we know we're not helping. So let's all just try and not @uck everything up and we'll keep studying to learn more about all the @hit we don't know." Honest, real and I would think effective, but I've been around enough intellectuals to know they don't think or speak in these terms. Dry, somewhat condescending, and extremely hard for a layman to interpret is their norm. It makes it very easy for an oil company to hire some guy to come on after the scientist and say, "they don't know @hit, their just talking out their @ss to scare you", and that works on a lot of people because they've already made up their mind about how they feel about the intellectual.

I agree about the doctor analogy, but I'll put it to you like this. If your doctor had some bedside manner and didn't mind you questioning him or her because it is your health and you should get to question all you want, you wouldn't feel the need to get a second opinion. You would trust the doctor, and that would save precious time. See what I mean?

 

[Mr Sparkle]

It's not that someone claims to know everything, but I've yet to hear any of them say, "look humans mess up the planet. We don't know exactely how bad or how much of what's going on is natural, but we know we're not helping. So let's all just try and not @uck everything up and we'll keep studying to learn more about all the @hit we don't know." Honest, real and I would think effective, but I've been around enough intellectuals to know they don't think or speak in these terms. Dry, somewhat condescending, and extremely hard for a layman to interpret is their norm. It makes it very easy for an oil company to hire some guy to come on after the scientist and say, "they don't know @hit, their just talking out their @ss to scare you", and that works on a lot of people because they've already made up their mind about how they feel about the intellectual.

I agree about the doctor analogy, but I'll put it to you like this. If your doctor had some bedside manner and didn't mind you questioning him or her because it is your health and you should get to question all you want, you wouldn't feel the need to get a second opinion. You would trust the doctor, and that would save precious time. See what I mean?

I also agree with YOUR doctor analogy.
as for the part in bold, that's been the stance of most scientists, they claimed Human impact IS a certainty, the extent or degree of it is what's debated.

 

[SuBe]

^ I'll say this. I need more evidence before I believe in it fully. Ok Sparky?