|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,915 Year: 4,172/9,624 Month: 1,043/974 Week: 2/368 Day: 2/11 Hour: 1/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Global warming - fact or conspiracy? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3992 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.5 |
Just when you think the ideas couldn't get any dumber The feds are being sued by about a quarter of the states over the policy. It's recent news.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
subbie writes: Perhaps you can link all of the scientists who doubt the human connection to the Bush administration in some way, but I kind of doubt it. Point taken.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LudoRephaim Member (Idle past 5114 days) Posts: 651 From: Jareth's labyrinth Joined: |
hey Ragged
Is Global warming fact or fiction?? I was born in Texas and raised in Texas. I lived most of my life in Texas. It's not a theory or fiction there-We live with it every single day ROFLMAO!!! While I grew up there, the winters in Texas seemed to get milder and shorter over time, with a few strong winters now and again coming in. I've listened to people in their 70's and 80's as they told me how it used to get only in the 90's and 80's during summer. Now its 90's to 100's. Last winter, Texas was buring with numerous fires. it was HOT from december to Februrary. And along with heat and humidity: POIllution. I've personally have witnessed waves of orange/yellow clouds going across the sky, nothing but pollution. I've lived in Missouri (I like to say "MIzzorah" LOL)and we really experienced REAL winters. But it seems that even up here the winters are getting less rough than normal. I really dont want Global warming. I want global COOLING! I dont want Texas wheather in Alaska. "The Nephilim where in the Earth in those days..." Genesis 6:4
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1497 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
I've lived in Missouri (I like to say "MIzzorah" LOL)and we really experienced REAL winters. I moved down to Missouri from Minnesota. You all don't know from winter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EZscience Member (Idle past 5184 days) Posts: 961 From: A wheatfield in Kansas Joined: |
I happen to be currently wrting an invited book chapter on certain specific ecological impacts of global warming, so I have been doing a bit of research on the subject. Here is one of the most interesting recent references I am citing:
Fu, Quiag, C.M. Johanson, J.M. Wallace and T. Reichler. 2006. Enhanced mid-latitude tropospheric warming in satellite measurements. Science 312:1179. Fu et al. (2006) used 27 years of satellite data to demonstrate a global expansion of semi-arid tropical circulation by about 2 latitude over this period as a function of tropospheric warming between the latitudes of 15 and 45 that is equally pronounced during warm and cool seasons. The authors predicted rising air pressures at sea level around 30 latitude, a prediction that has been independantly confirmed. The results indicate that the arid subtropical regions are expanding and shifting the high altitude jetstream currents pole-ward. The implications for the central Great Plains are longer, hotter summers and reduced rainfall - like we get that much now. Have fun in Texas, Ludo The so-called 'controversy' over whether or not such effects are a function of human activity is just so much blather. We know what chemicals we are releasing into the atmosphere, we know their effects on the physics of the planet, its just a matter of connecting the dots. Anyone who says otherwise is just a shill for big business and industry that wants 'business as usual' for long enough that they can retire rich - future generation be damned. The truth is, it's going to cost us a lot more long term if we don't take some action soon. I highly recommend this site. Be sure to watch the trailer of Al Gore's movie, An Inconvenient Truth. You might also want to calculate your own 'carbon footprint' - mine came out at 21,000 pounds of CO2 annually - and I only have a 5 minute commute! So if the AVERAGE American releases 11 tons of Co2 annually, that's araound 2.8 billion tons of CO2 a year for the American population - without considering industry. Anyone going to try and tell me that's not going to make a difference to atmospheric chemistry? Also consider the rate of deforestation in the tropics - those forests are one of the biggest sponges for removing the CO2.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ThingsChange Member (Idle past 5956 days) Posts: 315 From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony) Joined: |
Omnivorous writes:
What makes you think there isn't just as much if not more money going to global warming research? You don't think there isn't bias on both sides? I suspect one could more likely connect doubting scientists to industry-funded research... I don't think there is enough human contribution to global warming to warrant drastic economy-crippling, family-sacrificing measures so that the third world, China and India can skip the sacrifices and prosper at our expense and the environment's expense. Anyway, I am looking forward to my beach-front property in a couple of million years, and the new species that will evolve. And, don't worry, there will be another ice age. Earth has its 4 seasons, too. 'Liberalism is a mental disorder' - Michael Savage
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EZscience Member (Idle past 5184 days) Posts: 961 From: A wheatfield in Kansas Joined: |
TC writes: You don't think there isn't bias on both sides? No, I don't think so.The bias againstbelief in GW is created by business interests that don't want to see their profit margins shrink. There is no direct profit motive or material gain to be had for publicly funded scientists for pointing out that our current activities are changing the planet for the worse. TC writes: I don't think there is enough human contribution to global warming to warrant drastic economy-crippling, family-sacrificing measures so that the third world, China and India can skip the sacrifices and prosper at our expense and the environment's expense. So you admit that China is currently prospering at the environment's expense? Kind of like we have for the last 70 years? When is it going to become incumbent on us to lead by example? You would have us continue as usual because others are doing the same? This is precisely the mind-set that leads to a 'tragedy of the commons' scenario. In case you are not familiar with it, it derives from medeival England where the townsfolk all grazed their animals on shared lands, or 'commons'. There were no rules of use for the commons, and very soon it became overgrazed and far less productive. The townsfolk saw this happening, slowly at first, but did nothing on the grounds that if they reduced their own herd, they would only be leaving more grass for their neighbor. Soon there were no useful pastures left for anyone, and only noxious weeds grew in the commons. Your argument is a typically conservative one and merely a shallow justification for selfish behavior and disregard for environmental stewardship and the quality of life that future generations will inherit. Let me say this. If you want to see something 'economy-crippling' just watch us stay the present course, because the American economy won't just be crippled by the consequences of global warming, it will eventually collapse to a mere shadow of its former self.
TC writes: ...and the new species that will evolve You're thinking birds of paradise and lemurs, perhaps?As a proponent of evolution, you have a pathetically poor perspective on the consequences of human influences on its processes. See any desirable species evolving in human-modified ecosystems?What wildlife do you see in cities? Filthy rats, starlings, and rock doves (=flying rats). No, human-modified ecosystems provide opportunity for evolution of some of the most undesirable species imaginable. For example, the range of malaria and many other dangerous tropical diseases are predicted to spread northward as a consequences of global warming. Already in northern Europe, tropical plant disease vectors are being monitored that are causing serious agricultural problems much further north than they were ever reported before. Also, indigenous aphid viral vestors are forgoing sexual reproduction and reproducing asexually year-round because of the warm winters, causing increasingly serious disease problems in cereal production. Here is another recent report all you 'head-in-the-sand', 'please don't harm the economy' conservatives should read.And keep in mind, without a habitable planet, there will be no economy at all within a few generations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
EZ writes: Anyone who says otherwise is just a shill for big business and industry that wants 'business as usual' for long enough that they can retire rich - future generation be damned. Bang on the money mate. I've gone as far to get rid of my car and cycle into work. Except when it rains Edited by Larni, : the bit about the bike
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Larni Member Posts: 4000 From: Liverpool Joined: |
ThingsChange writes: I don't think there is enough human contribution to global warming to warrant drastic economy-crippling, family-sacrificing measures so that the third world, China and India can skip the sacrifices and prosper at our expense and the environment's expense. How can you think that way?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
EZscience Member (Idle past 5184 days) Posts: 961 From: A wheatfield in Kansas Joined: |
I did not even own a car as long as I was a student in Canada.
I cycled everywhere - even hundreds of miles a day. Now I live in American 'car culture' and there are few provisions for cyclists here. As a professor now, the demands on my time are such that it's really hard to budget the extra time to cycle to work, but I really need to do it more often. I think that more human-powered transport could be part of the solution to global warming (and our obesity problem }, but it will probably take $10 a gallon gas for it to take off in America. PS: Some good rain gear can make all the difference on those wet days. In Vancouver, we used to say there was no bad weather - only improperly equipped cyclists . Edited by EZscience, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Omnivorous Member Posts: 3992 From: Adirondackia Joined: Member Rating: 7.5 |
Excellent reply, EZ.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 5902 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Preach the Gospel, cuz.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
riVeRraT Member (Idle past 446 days) Posts: 5788 From: NY USA Joined: |
We have lost some 40% or so of the northern ice cap. I was under the impression if the ice caps melted completely, that the oceans would rise 20feet. If the caps have melted 40%, where is the 8 feet of water?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
The northern ice cap won't affect the ocean depth, because it is floating anyway. Or to put it differently, because it is floating, it affects the ocean depth about the same whether frozen or melted.
The big concern is with the antarctic ice, which is on land. If it melts, it will enter the oceans.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Also Greenland.
AbE: In addition, the Northern Ice Cap is considerably smaller in volume and area than the Southern Ice Cap. Edited by jar, : No reason given. Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024