mrcoolboy15
New member
- Awards
- 0
I am curious to see how many people believe that global warming is actually our faul or is it just something that is ment to happend? Or is it a myth?
Those that are in a position to know because they are scientists and have studied it for decades say it is true.Is global warming true?...is it a myth?
If you're in the US then El Nino likely played a role in that. Someone in another forum posted an article about this years warm US winter (for some) as proof positive of global warming. Meanwhile in the article itself it said climate scientists don't know how much man made global warming can be blamed for this winter as opposed to cyclic weather a la El Nino, which is known to affect US winters and make them much milder.I don't know if it that crazy warming stuff is real but SOMETHING'S keeping my heating bill low this winter. Probably the thermogenics I get from a certain planet
If you're in the US then El Nino likely played a role in that. Someone in another forum posted an article about this years warm US winter (for some) as proof positive of global warming. Meanwhile in the article itself it said climate scientists don't know how much man made global warming can be blamed for this winter as opposed to cyclic weather a la El Nino, which is known to affect US winters and make them much milder.
Global warming is real. Man made global warming is likely real, though the extent of it isn't really known most scientists do agree the average temperature increase over the last century is due to man made green house emissions. The models in my mind prove very little. They are designed with the assumption that man made green house emissions are the main driver in forcing temps up, then they run scenarios through them and find man made green house gasses will raise global temperature. Hardly surprising since that's what the models are designed to show.
I personally think the proponents have just as much to gain from hyping global warming as ExxonMobile does in downplaying it. You don't get grants to study the climate if you come to the conclusion nothing big is going on. You don't get endowed chairs to this or that university or appointed to this or that government committee on climate change by persuing a line of study likely to be contrarian in such a politicized issue. Government grant money is just as dirty as oil money in my mind. And I think the debate over possible solutions has been hijacked by extremists on the left.
CDB,I personally think the proponents have just as much to gain from hyping global warming as ExxonMobile does in downplaying it. You don't get grants to study the climate if you come to the conclusion nothing big is going on. You don't get endowed chairs to this or that university or appointed to this or that government committee on climate change by persuing a line of study likely to be contrarian in such a politicized issue. Government grant money is just as dirty as oil money in my mind. And I think the debate over possible solutions has been hijacked by extremists on the left.
NY weather has been great. We had one day almost hit 70 I believe. Got a lot colder since then of course, but overall I'm loving it.Man I don't know what the hell you're all talking about mild winters but it's freaking cold in the Bay Area this winter and my heating bill is higher than last year. Had a streak of days in that dipped to the mid 20's. However, the rain has been unusually low this year.
I hear you mate I really do, but unless you live close to one of the poles most do not think about it or see it. Antartica has had record ice breakage in recent months, the Artic is melting at an alarming rate. Is this normal to have a melt, it sure is, it is a cycle of the Earth, to say the Humans are not acceleratiing is an understatment to say the least. The hotest recorded years are what like 11 in the last 15.
I am currently in Iraq and for the last two years rain fall has barely happened even during the three months of rainy season when it used to pour here. This is the warmest winter out here that I have seen.
I think the world will kill itself before global warming does, populations are out of controll, resources are being depleted and our pollution is wild. War may just be the end of us all.
Actually they can tell weather patterns for about a million years or more back. Air trapped in ice (the one that is currently melting) will give an exact temp, they can also tell the century based on the different ice ages that the world has had. Yes warming up and then an ice age has been going on forever, it is a proven fact the GHG trap in a lot for of the suns heat, which in turn is melting the ice more quickly, which in turn cause mositure in the ground to evaporate too. We cut down the trees that will help with GHG, we need more planted. When the time comes and our population takes over all of the suface, we shall be doomed for certain.the problem with that though is every climatologist except the extremists say they can' predict weather conditions. They can predict more energy in the system overall, but how that will manifest in terms of climate is not predictable, nor will they say that any current short term warming can be reliably or even unreliably attributed to man made GHG emissions. The climate is a complex system and so for any given energy level can have many different equillibrium states depending on initial conditions.
Unfortunately that's not going to happen. Most people who study population growth think we'll hit a maintenance level of population at which point growth or shrinkage will be insignificant. Alarmist like Paul Ehrlich have never been right. Ever.Actually they can tell weather patterns for about a million years or more back. Air trapped in ice (the one that is currently melting) will give an exact temp, they can also tell the century based on the different ice ages that the world has had. Yes warming up and then an ice age has been going on forever, it is a proven fact the GHG trap in a lot for of the suns heat, which in turn is melting the ice more quickly, which in turn cause mositure in the ground to evaporate too. We cut down the trees that will help with GHG, we need more planted. When the time comes and our population takes over all of the suface, we shall be doomed for certain.
It's definitely real, it's happened before. Just how much we're contributing to it though is debatable.I don't think global warming is real. I am for cleaning up the air etc. Countries like china are polluting up their country so bad, the effect on it's people and other countries won't be good unless they make some major changes. I read somewhere that some of their air pollution is carried over to the US, scary...
Good post. Yes, it's a natural cycle but there is much evidence to show the it is happening WAY faster than it should right now.Global warming is happening, it is a cycle of Mother Nature that has happen throughout Earth's life. Are we causing it to accelerate, Yes! Humans have caused the cycle to happen much faster than expected. To say it is not real always makes me laugh.
The ice shelf that collapsed there recently was not supposed to happen for another 25 yrs according to scientist.Good post. Yes, it's a natural cycle but there is much evidence to show the it is happening WAY faster than it should right now.
BTW, I was just readin gin Discover magazine, the ozone hole over Anarctica is worse than ever possibly as a result of global warming. Maybe someone can scan in the article?
See I dont understand this whole statement. If the one thing you CANNOT predict is the weather... how can you predict a result of the weather?The ice shelf that collapsed there recently was not supposed to happen for another 25 yrs according to scientist.
Why do we rely on weatherman to give us our weekly weather if it cannot be predicted? Most the shelf was thought to be going to give out in 25 years due to the photos of the giant pools of water that were all over the shelf, those pools acted as a drill and went straight down to the sea which in turn split the ice. All of which happened because of the missing ozone over the Antartic.See I dont understand this whole statement. If the one thing you CANNOT predict is the weather... how can you predict a result of the weather?
Adams
I think the "Weatherman" proved me right. How many people here has been upset cause the "Weatherman" was wrong?Why do we rely on weatherman to give us our weekly weather if it cannot be predicted? Most the shelf was thought to be going to give out in 25 years due to the photos of the giant pools of water that were all over the shelf, those pools acted as a drill and went straight down to the sea which in turn split the ice. All of which happened because of the missing ozone over the Antartic.
the ice pools do freeze and remelt over and over, that is what acts as the drill. To be mad at a weatherman because it was 92 instead of 88 is trival mate. You can try and pick it apart, only every scientist agrees that the GHG are causing a gloabl warming much faster then the normal rate as it happens. To what extent no one is certain nor can we be about most things that we as humans are causing to change daily. We pollute the air with our cars more everyday ( I am guilty of that), we cut down the trees that help filter the carbon dioxide. Funny how most of the worlds vegitation is in the Northern hemisphere and there is a gaping hole over the Southern side. Make me wonder if more of the Amazon were around how the south would look.I think the "Weatherman" proved me right. How many people here has been upset cause the "Weatherman" was wrong?
And you also confirm my sentiment on not being able to predict the result of weather. The Ice shelf collapsed "Early", when it just could have easily refroze if the weather cycled as such. There is to much "Couldism" with this topic, way to much use of the "Slippery Slope Argument."
Adams
You say trivial, but you are way off... Im not talking about 92 vs. 88. My home town was put into a state of Emergency for a ice storm this year, when the weather man said a slight chance of snow that day.the ice pools do freeze and remelt over and over, that is what acts as the drill. To be mad at a weatherman because it was 92 instead of 88 is trival mate. You can try and pick it apart, only every scientist agrees that the GHG are causing a gloabl warming much faster then the normal rate as it happens. To what extent no one is certain nor can we be about most things that we as humans are causing to change daily. We pollute the air with our cars more everyday ( I am guilty of that), we cut down the trees that help filter the carbon dioxide. Funny how most of the worlds vegitation is in the Northern hemisphere and there is a gaping hole over the Southern side. Make me wonder if more of the Amazon were around how the south would look.
Either way we are all entitled to our way of thinking and contribution to our planet. Cheers
You'll actually find most of the scientists are reasonable. It's the media and left wing environuts who are the hysterics for the most part. You're right on the weather though. Weather can be predicted a few days out, but once you go beyond a certain point the variances in the system make prediction impossible. Weathermen can tell the weather for the next few days, not what the weather will be 489 or 10265 days from now. The climate system is too complex to allow for such a prediction.Yes we are entitled to our own opinions, no doubt, there was no hostility here. I believe Global Warming, has been happening since the Ice Age (Thank God), just that our part in the whole process has nothing to do with it. Weather is Cyclical. Just all the the argument and said scientific data is all really aimed at one end game... Fear.
Adams
You'll actually find most of the scientists are reasonable. It's the media and left wing environuts who are the hysterics for the most part. You're right on the weather though. Weather can be predicted a few days out, but once you go beyond a certain point the variances in the system make prediction impossible. Weathermen can tell the weather for the next few days, not what the weather will be 489 or 10265 days from now. The climate system is too complex to allow for such a prediction.
Most of my problems with global warming are with the hysterics and the paleoclimatologists, and the way people exonerate government funding of these scientists from any bias but yet when critics arise the first thing they do is look at who is funding them.
It happens. Oddly enough you know why I am skeptical of Global Warming? Economics. That is a field I am familiar with, and it too is a complex system that people have tried to model and predict, with nothing but failure of varying degrees. While it's somewhat easier, relatively speaking, to model systems based on more quantifiable physical variables than one based on subjective values, the problems that arise from the complexity of the system are still there. I'm skeptical of anyone who says they can predict the future, no matter the computing power at their disposal.I think this is the first time we agree on something!!!
Adams
Highly Agree.... that is why I brought up the Slippery Slope Argument you find in philosophy. Its what people fall back on when there isnt anything to quantifiable on their side to debate with. The "What Ifs"It happens. Oddly enough you know why I am skeptical of Global Warming? Economics. That is a field I am familiar with, and it too is a complex system that people have tried to model and predict, with nothing but failure of varying degrees. While it's somewhat easier, relatively speaking, to model systems based on more quantifiable physical variables than one based on subjective values, the problems that arise from the complexity of the system are still there. I'm skeptical of anyone who says they can predict the future, no matter the computing power at their disposal.
I was going into a long winded explanation..... no need its all summed up here. The problem about opinions is were all entitled to them, educated, ignorant the truth is in your ability to make your own decisions.Those that are in a position to know because they are scientists and have studied it for decades say it is true.
Those that stand to profit from the status quo assert that it is a myth.
I dont think the argument is in Global Warming itself.... Its been happening since the last Ice Age.... The argument is Mans impact on global warming.I was going into a long winded explanation..... no need its all summed up here. The problem about opinions is were all entitled to them, educated, ignorant the truth is in your ability to make your own decisions.
The problem with the above is that it ignores any potential agenda on the proponent's side of the argument. No one bites the hand that feeds them, and any study or line of study that suggests man's contribution to global warming isn't that significant isn't going to be well received by most government grant orgs, universities, etc. The idea that 'Big Oil' is the only group capable of having an agenda that affects research funding choices etc. is kind of naive. And this is demonstrable in our world of 'supplementation.' Don't see many studies using real world dosages/cycles of steroids do we? And the few that do are played down while uncontrolled case studies and studies with rats taking a trillion times the recommended dose for their entire lives are passed off as a relevant base of evidence for human use.I was going into a long winded explanation..... no need its all summed up here. The problem about opinions is were all entitled to them, educated, ignorant the truth is in your ability to make your own decisions.Those that are in a position to know because they are scientists and have studied it for decades say it is true. Those that stand to profit from the status quo assert that it is a myth.
Like those scientists who routinely expose rats to several lifetime's worth of human use of certain unapproved drugs to support prohibition? Interestingly enough scientists might be good at collecting data, the climatology crowd isn't too good at sharing it though.Just seeing what others views are, as i have armed myself with enough knowledge to make my own decisions but like many, lack the ability to change others opinions.
Scientist know about collecting data, bodybuilders know about themselves. Not to be taken as is.
No one knows. Global warming can be affected by anything from pollutants to solar output to land usage over time.well maybe some people are having winters that are not so bad...but i am from texas and we never have winters as bad as we are having this year...so i dont understand, since it is only warming in some areas.
Yeah, but then again "the end times" predicted by any religion aren't likely to be goose feathers and easy, risk free sex, you know?Yeah, well i know that volcanos put out a huge amount of polution, and if you read in the bible all the things that global warming supposable causes...doesnt it say that these things like many natural disasters, volcanos, and famine are going to happend in the end days???
Exactly... Me.... I'm praying for rain... Im praying for tidal waves.... I want to see the ground give way.... I want to watch it all go running down!!!!Yeah, but then again "the end times" predicted by any religion aren't likely to be goose feathers and easy, risk free sex, you know?
I smile when I read your post because I see that you have an intelligent mind and that you appear not to swallow pre-digested opinions/conclusions and adopt them as your own. Your points are well made.The problem with the above is that it ignores any potential agenda on the proponent's side of the argument. No one bites the hand that feeds them, and any study or line of study that suggests man's contribution to global warming isn't that significant isn't going to be well received by most government grant orgs, universities, etc. The idea that 'Big Oil' is the only group capable of having an agenda that affects research funding choices etc. is kind of naive. And this is demonstrable in our world of 'supplementation.' Don't see many studies using real world dosages/cycles of steroids do we? And the few that do are played down while uncontrolled case studies and studies with rats taking a trillion times the recommended dose for their entire lives are passed off as a relevant base of evidence for human use.
The government is by nature political. It's an inherrent part of the system, and it does affect the choices of who gets research grants, what lines of research get funded and pursued, etc. In 1999 the IOM commissioned a report on marijuana as medicine. They came to the reasonable conclusion that it was moderately effective, should be researched further and possibly offerred to patients for whom other options weren't effective. Not too long after its release the researchers had to give a press conference and essentially say the report didn't say what it said and apologized for sending the wrong message to kids and what not. Perfect example of how government 'science' operates.
Now this doesn't mean all government science is tainted, just that it is quite obviously not agenda free anymore than research promoted by ExxonMobile or Shell etc. Research should be taken for what it is and reviewed on its own merits, not those of its funding source. Plus the behavior of some of the paleoclimatology field strikes me as more than a bit odd. They seem to conveniently lose data, or simply don't make it available until finger nails are pulled, anytime anyone outside their little circle wants to review/replicate their results.
An honest price for oil is all we need really. It's impossible to know what it should cost, but massive amounts of resources are used to subsidize its deliver in the form of military expenditures, tax breaks and incentives given to companies, distortions in production due to property rights violations etc. But basically it would cost a lot more than it does now or a little less. Likely the former. That being the case alternative energy sources become much more viable and R&D money gets a lot easier to get hold of. Pretty soon no more oil.I do know that changing my personal behavior will not reduce China’s total emissions nor will my taking a position and voicing it vociferously persuade the U.S. to sign an international accord. But even if it could I can’t be for certain that global climate change for the better would be the result. Neither can anyone else.
Anything we do impacts the environment. All species of animal manipulate and transform their environments. That's not the point. The point is whether or not what we are doing is appreciably adding to any changes in the environment that will be negative for us in the long term, and then more importantly why are these things happening and how can they be stopped? The why is not as simple as CO2 release, it also involves the social and political context in which such pollution is made possible.So when we over fish an ocean, dump oil, chemicals, sewer spill, drop bombs were not impacting our environment?
Exactly. However, since the climate is a dynamic complex system answers are not always simple.When we harvest billions of trees, introduce "foreign" plant species, introduce foreign animals, cause forest fires were not impacting our environment? When we pump billions of tonnes of ... about "normal" weather patterns, and if at some point this place we call home can nolonger support life then sobeit. But the issue is were either accelerating the process exponentially or were causing the problem. PERIOD. How can so many people desire so badly to believe "its goona be ok" The world is changing and to say we have no impact is to say weve never existed.
For me? It'd be nice if liberals would acknowledge the government's hand in screwing the environment up and stop promoting solutions that will also have us back living in caves. I proposed a deal to a few liberals on another board in a similar debate. Sarcastically, I said I'd acknowledge global warming as legitimate and true when they acknowledged marginal utility as legitimate and true. My problem is not with the science of global warming for the most part, though some of it seems a bit fishy and people might want to look into past scientific 'consensuses' that didn't turn out so well. My problem is its inevitable that the 'solutions' people propose involve destroying the economy. Nordo they acknowledge the government's hand in making our current situation what it is. For example:As far as i can tell we've been here, were still here and every breath you take you should be greatfull for and atleast consider making a PoSITIVE change on the simple basis that it ... its not our fault, animals die because of our pollution and destroying their habitat. The ice melts where it hasnt melted, the snow falls where it doesnt fall, the garbage piles up, the air gets hard to breathe........ Whats it goona take?
One idea: let people own things. Air, for example. Simple form plan. On a state basis, all registered voters receive equal, nontransferable shares in the atmosphere. This is the begining and end of the government's involvement in this plan. They, as any stock holders who own somthing, hire a board of directors, which they can fire any damn time they feel like it. They set their own standards and prices for the use of the air. Companies have to then pay the share holders, in other words us, to pollute, and they can only pollute to the level people in the areas they affect will accept. The money raised goes to the share holders, in other words, us. This will at least allow some kind of pricing system to develop so the air is treated as what it is, a valuable resource that people have to pay to use. Same with bodies of water. Now obviously not all pollution will stay in one state, but that is natural and to be expected. All property has limits, and as people work out how to deal with the issue of pollution cross over you start getting a legally defined technical unit of property. As the system developed we could even make the shares transferable and then you have a true property based system.You have very valid points, now how does one go about handing out accountability and finger pointing. My point was in the short term to acknowledge the potential to make small individual changes. Big industry, big money, big political influence, big problems....
Not sure where you gathered the "end of days" connection.^^^
It's a little bit worrisome in that it starts out with "when God put it here". I have a problem trusting anyone's opinion who thinks we're in the "end days" right now...Not to mention that's a government site. Looks like the guy is telling you straight away not to trust it: "I would not listen to anyone that is a politician..." Funny.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Global Warming!!!!!!!!!!!!!! | Politics | 150 | ||
"The Great Global Warming Swindle." | General Chat | 2 | ||
Article - Media Shows Irrational Hysteria on Global Warming | Politics | 22 | ||
Global Warming | General Chat | 80 | ||
Global Warming Causes Stronger Hurricanests | Politics | 70 |