Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is The World Getting Better Or Worse?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 376 of 762 (863778)
09-30-2019 11:11 AM


Al Gore's film
I'm only sixteen minutes into it and so far I don't have a problem with most of what he's said. I don't doubt the warming trend, I doubt its causes and whether there is really anything we can do to affect it. So his documenting the wwrming trend is not a problem.
But now at 16.33 on the counter he's got this chart up showing the warming trend over the last thousand years and I'm having a horrible time figuring it out.
Overall it looks like a general trend over that thousand years, but more noticeably since about 1350, all of it before human industrialization. The most recent rise probably includes the Asian increases but so far he hasn't differentiated any of it. There's a lot of bouncing around in the recent era. Well maybe he'll get around to breaking it down.
I can't post it because it's a film on Amazon but maybe I'll be able to find the chart somewhere.

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 377 of 762 (863779)
09-30-2019 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by jar
09-30-2019 11:04 AM


Re: Leaf decay huge percentage of CO2 in atmosphere
Stop with the empty assertions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by jar, posted 09-30-2019 11:04 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 378 by jar, posted 09-30-2019 11:38 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 378 of 762 (863781)
09-30-2019 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 377 by Faith
09-30-2019 11:13 AM


Re: Leaf decay huge percentage of CO2 in atmosphere
A report directly from the US EPA is not really an empty assertion.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by Faith, posted 09-30-2019 11:13 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 379 of 762 (863785)
09-30-2019 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by jar
09-30-2019 11:04 AM


Re: Leaf decay huge percentage of CO2 in atmosphere
You added the quote after I'd responded.
All you do is assert blindly that our input is "major" and the quote you post about how it's human activities that are responsible for the increase over the last 150 years is also a bare assertion.
Gore's chart in his film that shows the warming trend over the last thousand years shows that it's been pretty general over that time. There's an increase in most recent times but I'm still trying to figure out what it means.
And there is nothing in the EPA quote that connects our emissions to the warming trend, and it says nothing comparing us to other nations.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by jar, posted 09-30-2019 11:04 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 380 by jar, posted 09-30-2019 11:55 AM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 380 of 762 (863786)
09-30-2019 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 379 by Faith
09-30-2019 11:49 AM


Re: Leaf decay huge percentage of CO2 in atmosphere
It's not a bare assertion Faith, it's a summary meant for the population unwilling to actually read the tens of thousands of pages of data.
Again, the only parts the US can control are the parts we produce.
If other nations do produce more that simply means we must reduce our contributions even more.
The effects Faith will not stop at borders and will be universal.
The US could do more by actually approving the international treaties and then ratifying them.
Sorry Faith but what you believe really is simply irrelevant.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Faith, posted 09-30-2019 11:49 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 381 by Faith, posted 09-30-2019 12:07 PM jar has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1445 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 381 of 762 (863790)
09-30-2019 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 380 by jar
09-30-2019 11:55 AM


Re: Leaf decay huge percentage of CO2 in atmosphere
What I believe probably isn't relevant because you're all going to cram your interpretation down our throats no matter what the truth is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 380 by jar, posted 09-30-2019 11:55 AM jar has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(2)
Message 382 of 762 (863791)
09-30-2019 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 375 by ICANT
09-30-2019 11:10 AM


Re: A Couple Clarifications
The last numbers I can find says the earth will not be able to support life after 1 billion years. That means the temperature has to be rising now. But they will rise faster as time progresses.
All very true, almost. In about 500m years this orb will be a bit toasty for human comfort as the oceans begin to evaporate from the increased solar gain. From there it gets worse while this beautiful blue ocean world of ours becomes a Venus v.2.0. Add another 6b years and our long dead planet may be orbiting well within the corona of a red giant star, but not for too long as the Earth is stripped layer by layer like an onion of all its matter.
Of course we have looked at sun cycles and the sun's properties to see if this is in any way responsible for the warming we see today. Here is a good article.
The sun's influence is too variable. The variations do affect our planet's climate but we have to look over a span of hundreds of millennia to see even the slightest effect. And we can see the effects both up and down.
Right now, and for many millions of years in the future, so the science indicates, solar radiation is a negligible player and is as apt to lessen our solar heat gain as increase it over spans of hundreds of thousands of years.
So, no, solar activity is not/will not be a contributor to our global warming problem in the next 10,000 years and, yes, solar activity will burn us up bad ... eventually.
In the meantime the question is whether we do anything to lessen our coming man-made apocalypse or if we just kill so much more of our future population.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 375 by ICANT, posted 09-30-2019 11:10 AM ICANT has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 383 by xongsmith, posted 09-30-2019 1:34 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


(1)
Message 383 of 762 (863797)
09-30-2019 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 382 by AZPaul3
09-30-2019 12:10 PM


Re: A Couple Clarifications
AZPaul writes:
All very true, almost. In about 500m years this orb will be a bit toasty for human comfort as the oceans begin to evaporate from the increased solar gain. From there it gets worse while this beautiful blue ocean world of ours becomes a Venus v.2.0. Add another 6b years and our long dead planet may be orbiting well within the corona of a red giant star, but not for too long as the Earth is stripped layer by layer like an onion of all its matter.
But couldn't the humans gently tug it out of the way by orbit disturbances from large asteroids? Make it a museum? Then after the sun finishes and shrinks back to a small dwarf, tug it back?

"I'd rather be an American than a Trump Supporter."
- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 382 by AZPaul3, posted 09-30-2019 12:10 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 384 by AZPaul3, posted 09-30-2019 2:17 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(4)
Message 384 of 762 (863799)
09-30-2019 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 383 by xongsmith
09-30-2019 1:34 PM


Re: A Couple Clarifications
Physically, it could be done. A largish asteroid on a 10k year orbit passing about 30k km from the Earth could be used to gently nudge the planet out into a farther orbit from Sol over many millions of years.
The problem is the investment of time and technology required to keep the asteroid on path and not, like, crash into us, would need to be constant over those millions of years and you just know the System Interplanetary Senate would cut off funding in favor of capital gains tax cuts for the 1% when the Inner Planet Republican Party came to power.
Besides, Earth would by then just be a useless chunk of hot rock with a dwindling population when all that hydrocarbon on Jupiter was just sitting there waiting to be mined and sold to the Asteroid communities.
Gotta have priorities, xongsmith.

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 383 by xongsmith, posted 09-30-2019 1:34 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 385 of 762 (863802)
09-30-2019 4:08 PM


Big Carbon Frustrated By Trump
Even though they have a friend in the Oval Office the folks at Big Carbon are upset because the agenda that bought and paid for is not being implemented in the administration.
Seems the Trump folks are too incompetent to implement the Big Carbon policies properly and keep getting the regulatory hurdles all wrong.
Oil industry ripping into Trump administration

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 386 of 762 (863805)
09-30-2019 4:53 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by jar
09-04-2018 6:30 PM


Re: A Couple Clarifications
The challenge is to stop the madness that is current Conservatism and Neo-Fascism and spend our wealth on improving the general quality of life.
Really? How are you gonna do it? More taxes? That will go over like a lead balloon. the people are in debt enough as it is. We don't want to spend more on anything that puts us in long term debt beyond where we already are. I don't care if it saves the planet or not...if it costs too much, we won't vote for it.
This wealth that you claim we have has already got a lien on it.

Chance as a real force is a myth. It has no basis in reality and no place in scientific inquiry. For science and philosophy to continue to advance in knowledge, chance must be demythologized once and for all. ~RC Sproul
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes." ~Mark Twain "
~"If that's not sufficient for you go soak your head."~Faith
You can "get answers" by watching the ducks. That doesn't mean the answers are coming from them.~Ringo
As the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, so the denial of God is the height of foolishness.
? R.C. Sproul, Essential Truths of the Christian Faith

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by jar, posted 09-04-2018 6:30 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 388 by Taq, posted 09-30-2019 5:28 PM Phat has not replied
 Message 390 by jar, posted 09-30-2019 9:43 PM Phat has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 387 of 762 (863808)
09-30-2019 5:26 PM
Reply to: Message 371 by Faith
09-30-2019 10:14 AM


Re: Leaf decay huge percentage of CO2 in atmosphere
Would it be possible for you to quote the most relevant parts of that site?
Why not, I've got a few minutes.
This site
Greenhouse Gasses
quote:
CO2, CH4 and N2O are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes as well as human activities (use of fossil fuels, industrial production, etc). The fluorinated gases on the other hand, are created and emitted almost exclusively through human activities.
Since the Industrial Revolution, which began in the 18th century, human activities have been a major source of all forcing greenhouse gases. Human activities have led to a sharp and dangerous increase of these gases within the Earth's atmosphere, so much so that the growth of all forcing greenhouse gas (GHG) concentrations is now directly controlled by humans.
Carbon Dioxide
quote:
Human sources of carbon dioxide emissions are much smaller than natural emissions but they have upset the natural balance that existed for many thousands of years before the influence of humans.
This is because natural sinks remove around the same quantity of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere as are produced by natural sources.4 This had kept carbon dioxide levels balanced and in a safe range. But human sources of emissions have upset the natural balance by adding extra carbon dioxide to the atmosphere without removing any.
quote:
42.84 percent of all naturally produced carbon dioxide emissions come from ocean-atmosphere exchange. Other important natural sources include plant and animal respiration (28.56%) as well as soil respiration and decomposition (28.56%).4 16 A minor amount is also created by volcanic eruptions (0.03%).17 18
87 percent of all human-produced carbon dioxide emissions come from the burning of fossil fuels like coal, natural gas and oil. The remainder results from the clearing of forests and other land use changes (9%), as well as some industrial processes such as cement manufacturing (4%).1
Methane
quote:
The methane produced by natural sources is completely offset by natural methane sinks. This has been so for thousands of years. Before the influence of humans, methane levels were quite steady because of this natural balance. Today, human-related sources create the majority of total methane emissions. This has upset the natural balance that existed before the Industrial Revolution.
The main natural sources include wetlands, termites and the oceans. Natural sources create 36% of methane emissions. Human sources include landfills and livestock farming. But the most important source being the production, transportation and use of fossil fuels. Human-related sources create the majority of methane emissions, accounting for 64% of the total.1
quote:
Methane levels have more than doubled over the last 150 years. This is because of human activities like fossil fuel use and intensive farming.2 Before the Industrial Revolution, natural sinks kept methane levels in a safe range.
Humans are creating methane emissions a lot faster than the Earth can remove them. Which has increased global methane levels. During the last 800,000 years, methane concentrations have always varied between 350-800 ppb. Since the Industrial Revolution, methane levels have become much higher. So much so that they are now 2.5 times larger.3 4
The real scientific evidence is in the notes. Too much for this treatment. If you want them they are in the document.
Edited by AZPaul3, : added site

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by Faith, posted 09-30-2019 10:14 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 393 by Faith, posted 10-01-2019 11:54 AM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(2)
Message 388 of 762 (863809)
09-30-2019 5:28 PM
Reply to: Message 386 by Phat
09-30-2019 4:53 PM


Re: A Couple Clarifications
Thugpreacha writes:
Really? How are you gonna do it? More taxes? That will go over like a lead balloon. the people are in debt enough as it is. We don't want to spend more on anything that puts us in long term debt beyond where we already are. I don't care if it saves the planet or not...if it costs too much, we won't vote for it.
Republicans have voted for $20 billion in subsidies for big oil companies. That's 20 billion of your tax dollars going to oil companies right now, per year. Do you still vote for Republicans that support these subsidies?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Phat, posted 09-30-2019 4:53 PM Phat has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 389 of 762 (863813)
09-30-2019 6:16 PM
Reply to: Message 367 by Faith
09-30-2019 8:57 AM


Re: Somewhat More Than 30 Seconds
estimated percentages of atmospheric gasses the human factor can be very shaky.
Only to those who do not understand the science, do not want to understand the science or have some ulterior motive against the science.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Eschew obfuscation. Habituate elucidation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 367 by Faith, posted 09-30-2019 8:57 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 390 of 762 (863817)
09-30-2019 9:43 PM
Reply to: Message 386 by Phat
09-30-2019 4:53 PM


Re: A Couple Clarifications
Phat writes:
Really? How are you gonna do it? More taxes? That will go over like a lead balloon. the people are in debt enough as it is. We don't want to spend more on anything that puts us in long term debt beyond where we already are. I don't care if it saves the planet or not...if it costs too much, we won't vote for it.
Very likely.
Yet Phat, the debt WILL get paid.

My Sister's Website: Rose Hill StudiosMy Website: My Website

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by Phat, posted 09-30-2019 4:53 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 391 by Phat, posted 10-01-2019 6:38 AM jar has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024