Discussion: Global Warming and Other Environmental Issues

[UA-Archangel]

Agreed. We keep thinking about the present, and what's beneficial for the economy. But the problem is, we never think about the future. Consumption is working for us now, but where will we be in fifty years, when oil reaches peak production, we have degraded many of our rain forests, we have mined minerals and elements which were once in abundance but no longer will be?

People declare those of us who actually care about the environment to be "anti-capitalistic" or "tree-hugging hippes." But that isn't the reality of the situation. When I look at the small crises we are facing now, and put it into a future perspective, I am dead afraid of what will happen. I predict an economic crisis so large by the year 2050 that our entire country will fall apart.

Even if we only isolate the issue to one aspect of our environment-- oil-- I predict this scenario will unfold. If the Middle East reaches peak oil production by 2040, and we have yet to utilize alternative energies as our primary source of fuel, our entire infrastructure will collapse. You think gas prices are bad now? How bad will they be when there isn't enough oil left for everyone to consume? How bad will they be when the international community decides to step in and halt oil production in the Middle East?

What then? Will we be able to survive such a devastating blow?

I don't think so.

That doesn't even get into climate change, which is a real problem (especially now that India and China's middle classes are expanding and they too are consuming at insurmountable rates).

We need to reverse course soon.

Then we'll just find some other ways of generating energy.

Like we did when whale oil or coal went up too high in price.

 

[UA-Archangel]

This thread needs to be bumped.

I was thinking about the potential for nuclear power, but I remembered that fissionable material is actually pretty rare. So is nuclear power that reasonable a choice?

I did read in an article in my national post today that it is estimated, that if we built as many reactors as needed, we'd have about 80 years of uranium based on current estimated supplies.

So, no.

 

[The Senator]

Then we'll just find some other ways of generating energy.

Like we did when whale oil or coal went up too high in price.

Sigh.

Again, your ignorance of the issues is deafening.

This country didn't have an expansive infrastructure which survived solely on whale oil or coal. Cars, buses, planes, boats-- these four methods of transportation survive SOLELY because of the oil industry. If the Middle East reaches peak oil production and we have not replaced at least half of our existing infrastructure with vehicles which run on alternative energies, we will NOT survive the economic crash we will experience as a result. And that's being optimistic about the situation.

I remember reading about fuel cell vehicles in 2000, for the first time... the magazine said that we would see fuel cell vehicles on the road by 2007 en masse... yet, that has not happened. The Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress who controlled committees dealing with energy and the environment sided with the oil industry and put measures into place which derailed many fuel cell projects. So eight years later, we are in the same place we were in 2000: Hoping we can get fuel cell vehicles on the road, hoping we can have a true nationwide alternative energy revolution.

We need to. Energy technology is going to be the next stage in the industrial revolution, and countries in Europe are beating us to the punch. If we fail to invest in alternative energies, the U.S. will no longer be a superpower, countries such as China and India which NEED alternative energies to sustain their growing middle classes will surpass us in the ET sector.

We have a chance to explore and implement alternative energies on a nationwide scale, not only to save the environment, but as a good economic investment. Yet, we are too focused on the current economy to give a damn about the future economy. And that's a shame, really.

 

[SuBe]

Global warning: We are actually heading towards a new Ice Age, claim scientists
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...lly-heading-new-Ice-Age-claim-scientists.html

But, but, I thought that we were heading toward Global Warming?

I guess everyone was just wrong before then.

 

[chaseter]

But, but, I thought that we were heading toward Global Warming?

I guess everyone was just wrong before then.

Ice Ages come after a period of global warming to correct itself. Globally, the Earth has gotten warmer...that is a fact. Whether it was man made or not was up for debate.

 

[Heretic]

I believe Mars is also dealing with higher than normal temperatures, proving that our selfish use of fossil fuels can not only destroy earth, but other planets as well!

Either that or the sun is getting hotter.

 

[sinewave]

people are seriously still trying to debate whether humans have had a significant impact on the climate? weirdsville.

 

[Carcharodon]

I believe Mars is also dealing with higher than normal temperatures, proving that our selfish use of fossil fuels can not only destroy earth, but other planets as well!

Either that or the sun is getting hotter.

You're aware that the atmosphere of Mars is around 95% carbon dioxide, right?

 

[Tyrinus]

The fact of the matter is, scientist don't know one way or another. Weather prediction is nothing more than speculation, educated speculation, but speculation none the less.

 

[Franklin Richards]

What isn't speculation is the degradation of the ice shelves and the caps.

 

[Carcharodon]

The fact of the matter is, scientist don't know one way or another. Weather prediction is nothing more than speculation, educated speculation, but speculation none the less.

Climate and weather are two very, very different things. Climate affects weather, but the two are still separate in definition. Weather is far more variable.

In fact, climate patterns are normally very predictable, at least to an extent that we've been able to map it historically, finding the same patterns typically over and over again with occasional instances of variation. Climate changes leave their mark such that they can be studied well into the future.

"Weather," consists of typically isolated instances driven by almost countless factors that are generally too short-lived to leave marks of significance. This, along with the fact that weather tends to be highly variable under a more stable "umbrella" of climate make the two incomparible in this instance.

 

[Heretic]

You're aware that the atmosphere of Mars is around 95% carbon dioxide, right?

I that a new occurence? If so, then maybe we did cause it! If not, then Mars shouldnt be getting hotter now because their atmosphere is the same as always...which means that theres another reason...not involving planet earth...as to why Mars is getting hotter.

 

[SuBe]

What isn't speculation is the degradation of the ice shelves and the caps.

Did you read the article? There is MORE ice than before.

 

[Franklin Richards]

"Making matters worse, the missing ice has left the Chukchi Sea largely wide open, a situation that has threatened several Native villages with erosion during storms."

did you bother to read that from the " real news" site?

"This adds new evidence of potential asymmetry between the two poles, and may be an indication that climate change processes may have different impact on different areas of the globe"

seriously, do you read them at all?

Did you read the article? There is MORE ice than before.

Did you?

 

[Carcharodon]

I that a new occurence? If so, then maybe we did cause it! If not, then Mars shouldnt be getting hotter now because their atmosphere is the same as always...which means that theres another reason...not involving planet earth...as to why Mars is getting hotter.

It's not new, but it could certainly be subject to fluctuation. It doesn't take much (relative to other atmospheric components) to have a potential effect.

 

[The Senator]

I that a new occurence? If so, then maybe we did cause it! If not, then Mars shouldnt be getting hotter now because their atmosphere is the same as always...which means that theres another reason...not involving planet earth...as to why Mars is getting hotter.

This post is an example of anti-intellectual thought at its best.

We're pumping more and more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. The temperature of the earth is getting warmer on average. Yeah, some people here can point to record lows in Minnesota and say "wow, that means there's no such thing as climate change!" Never mind that other parts of this country alone-- Georgia, for instance-- are experiencing record droughts and water shortages.

Carbon dioxide TRAPS heat in the atmosphere, making planets warmer. It is no surprise to me that Mars is getting warmer, considering its atmosphere is mostly made of Carbon Dioxide. Its warming cycle most likely has to do with the orbit of the planet and the angle at which the sun is hitting the planet, allowing for more heat than usual to be trapped within the atmosphere.

Our planet's atmosphere is NOT made primarily of carbon dioxide. We shouldn't be getting warmer at the rate at which we are. The amount of CO2 we have released into the atmosphere has altered the natural warming cycles our planet experiences, and has actually expedited the warming process from where it should be.

Your comparison of mars and earth's warming phenomenons is the same sort of conservative mockery and nonsensical comparisons which have prevented us from actually doing something to reverse this problem:

"Let's compare two planets which have different atmospheric make ups even though they are not mutually exclusive to one another! And while we're at it, let's compare homosexuality to bestiality, because both involve sex, and welfare to stealing, because both involve taking something from somewhere!"

And you wonder why it becomes progressively difficult to take people like you seriously...

 

[SuBe]

This post is an example of anti-intellectual thought at its best.

No need to be insulting Jman.

 

[SuBe]

Did you?

Here, I'll post it in the Thread, so you don't have to Click anything.

Global warning: We are actually heading towards a new Ice Age, claim scientists


By Cher Thornhill
Last updated at 5:06 PM on 13th November 2008



It has plagued scientists and politicians for decades, but scientists now say global warming is not the problem.
We are actually heading for the next Ice Age, they claim.
British and Canadian experts warned the big freeze could bury the east of Britain in 6,000ft of ice.

A taste of the future: Plunging temperatures around Britain created dramatic 2-ft icicles over Sleightholme River in County Durham
Most of Scotland, Northern Ireland and England could be covered in 3,000ft-thick ice fields.
The expanses could reach 6,000ft from Aberdeen to Kent – towering above Ben Nevis, Britain’s tallest mountain.


And what's more, the experts blame the global change on falling - rather than climbing - levels of greenhouse gases.



Lead author Thomas Crowley from the University of Edinburgh and Canadian colleague William Hyde say that currently vilified greenhouse gases – such as carbon dioxide – could actually be the key to averting the chill.
The warning, published in the authoritative journal Nature, is based on records of tiny marine fossils and the earth’s shifting orbit.

The Big chill: Experts warn that 3,000ft ice sheets could cover most of Britain



The Earth has seen dramatic climate fluctuations – veering between cold and warm extremes - over the past three million years, the researchers say.
And changes in the Earth’s orbit and slowly falling levels of carbon dioxide are the cause.
The team says we are approaching a turning point, in the next 10,000 to 100,000 years, which will lead to the new ice sheets smothering much of Europe, Asia and South America.
The theory, which is based on computer models, suggests ice sheets will also slash sea levels by up to 300m, so Russia and Alaska will be connected by land.

The North Sea will become part of a huge glacier stretching from Holland and Scandinavia to the Russian Far East.

Stark: Computer modelling suggests 'a rapid transition into the glacial state,' the researchers say
Professor Crowley said the stark findings do not mean we should stop fighting warming.
But he urged: ‘Don’t push the panic button.’
‘There’s no excuse for saying “we’ve got to keep pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere,”’ he told Reuters.
‘Geologically it’s tomorrow, but we have lots of time to argue about the appropriate level of greenhouse gases.’

It's a good thing I kept my gas guzzling truck, now I can help save the planet with it.

 

[The Senator]

No need to be insulting Jman.

What's insulting to me, someone who has actually worked a lot with this issue, is when someone compares two different planets with two different atmospheres in an attempt to debunk climate change. That is an example of anti-intellectualism and I do not feel as though it is "insulting" to point that out.

 

[SuBe]

What's insulting to me, someone who has actually worked a lot with this issue, is when someone compares two different planets with two different atmospheres in an attempt to debunk climate change. That is an example of anti-intellectualism and I do not feel as though it is "insulting" to point that out.

Can I ask, what if they are wrong, then what?

I mean, these scientists are saying we are on our way to Global Cooling. What's so hard to believe that Climate Changes all by itself?

 

[Carcharodon]

Can I ask, what if they are wrong, then what?

Then we still have shifted away from a source of energy that is bad for the environment and that will have otherwise run out in the relatively near future. This will ultimately lead to advances in technology that could have far-reaching applications and could open the doors to a renewed, vibrant economy.

It's a pretty simple principle, even without the whole climate change aspect.

What's so hard to believe that Climate Changes all by itself?

I don't know ANYONE who doesn't believe that climate can and does fluctuate by itself. You've been talking to some really, really dumb people.

 

[The Senator]

Can I ask, what if they are wrong, then what?

I mean, these scientists are saying we are on our way to Global Cooling. What's so hard to believe that Climate Changes all by itself?

For one, who knows if what these scientists are saying is actually true. Oil companies and other corporations which have been against legislation which would set carbon emissions standards have actually paid scientists in the past to present reports which refute man-made climate change.

Second, why has the global temperature spiked so dramatically in the past one hundred and fifty years? There seems to be a correlation between industrialization and climate change, and considering 94% of scientists agree that this is a man-made problem, I find it fairly difficult to believe 6% who say that this is a "hoax" or a completely different problem.

 

[SuBe]

For one, who knows if what these scientists are saying is actually true. Oil companies and other corporations which have been against legislation which would set carbon emissions standards have actually paid scientists in the past to present reports which refute man-made climate change.

Second, why has the global temperature spiked so dramatically in the past one hundred and fifty years? There seems to be a correlation between industrialization and climate change, and considering 94% of scientists agree that this is a man-made problem, I find it fairly difficult to believe 6% who say that this is a "hoax" or a completely different problem.

And there was a time when "94%" of scientists thought the Sun revolved around the earth.

I'm just saying, we can have cleaner fuel, alternative fuels, what have you. But, to say that Global Warming is the reason to have these is wrong. We need them because, like Car said, we will be running out of Fuel. Let's be honest about it. Not Scare-Monger people.

 

[Franklin Richards]

And there was a time when "94%" of scientists thought the Sun revolved around the earth.

That was during the Dark Ages when free speech was quashed because the church wanted The Tree of Knowledge burned to the ground so they could control the world with their religion.

 

[Carcharodon]

We need them because, like Car said, we will be running out of Fuel.

...and to mitigate the impact on the environment.