Global Warming?

[Egon]

Considering that of all the living things on earth 95% are now extinct perhaps Hawkins is on to something!

Now I don't know beans about global warming and our influence??? on it but remember the song?

"Whatever will be will be"
"The futures not ours to see"​

 

[LMTC]

Considering that of all the living things on earth 95% are now extinct

Where do you get this information?

 

[Buckeye_Jim]

... A few glaciers have receded, but allot more have grown. You can look at the data anyway you want, but I'm gonna stick with natural weather as the reason for what happens on the planet and not blame the USA for everything that's bad. ...
Eddie

Eddie,

From everything I know about, glaciers all over the world are receding. There are big changes at the North and South pole. I believe their are all sorts of natural and manmade influences to climate. The sunspot activity is probably the biggest factor for sea surface temperature cycles. You have heard about el Nino or la Nina. We must be able to sort through the BS. Not an easy subject.

Jim

 

[turnkey4099]

Those who don't believe in global warming have to ignore some pretty major evidence that it is happening.

Ice caps at both poles shrinking.
Open water in the Arctic Ocean that didn't used to be.
Glaciers receding world wide.

That it is happening can't be denied. Does mankinds activity have any influence on it? That is what the debate is about, not whether or not it is happening.

Harry K

 

[dmccarty]

Jim, there are some glaciers that have been growing. I heard that the Antartica is getting lots of snow.

The problem with Global Warming is that it is political. There was a group of Greenies that picketed the Hurricane Center because the head of the center does not believe Global Warming is caused by humans or that it is affecting hurricanes. There are others the believe what he does but the Greenies are trying to shut them up by threatening their jobs.

Very Orwellian. Very PC.

When someone says Global Warming what is usually meant is Human Caused Global Warming. I believe Global Warming is happening. But I don't believe its Human Caused Global Warming.

Greenland use to be Green. Its turning Green again. Archeologist have studied the settlements in Greenland and they can see the change in diet from land based animals to marine ones that was caused by Greenland turning into a bigger Iceland. The settlers did not adjust to living off the ocean so the died off and/or left.

I don't believe the ice was caused by humans...

I was watching something the other night about when humans came to North America. The scientists know it happened at least 10,000 years ago. No real debate there. The debate is did the movement happen at 11,000, 12,000, etc years. The problem is that the most likey travel routes are under water. Hmmm. If the land was not under water 10,000 years ago that means it got warmer, the ice melted, and the oceans rose.

I guess humanity 10,000+ years ago did not have Greenies telling them to stop burning trees since it was leading to Global Warming. Good thing too.

The UK just had this "study" done on about Global Warmng. The way to stop Global Warming was to raise taxes on the usual suspects such as transportation but also hotels. The reporters never said how the taxes would be used to stop Global Warming.

Don't forget the around 1800 there was a mini ice age for some reason. There was snow on the ground during the summer in New Egland. Crops failed. Livestock died. People had to move or die.

I guess all the horse, mules, and oxen people had back then pooted, which led to Global Warming and stopped the Ice Age.

By the way, one of the arugments FOR Human Caused Global Warming is that humans have such huge number of livestock that they poot and poop which adds to Greenhouse gasses and thus to the warming. Course this argument somehow glosses over the herds of Bison that used to take days to pass one spot on the plains. Or equally large number of animals that used to walk in Europe, Africa, and Asia. Those are "natural" animals, Greenies. Their poot and poop don't stink, so to speak.



Later,
Dan

 

[EddieWalker]

I'm not a scientist, and like most of us here, I base my opinions and form my opinions on what I read, then decide how factual that information is. If somebody is telling me that my car or home is causing global warming, but that person has more car, more homes and contributes 100 times the polution and burns 100 times the fossel fuels than I do, then I consider that person a hypocrite. If somebody makes statement after statement that is later proven to be false, misleading and totaly fabricated in order to suport there point of view, than I don't consider that person to have any credibility.

I consider most of what's reported on the news to be political. Local news is bad, but national news is downright horrible.

Most of what I read I also consider biased for one reason or another, so it's rare that somebody writes something that I find credible. It's even rarer for a politician to do this.

I don't know anything about Senator James Inhofe from Oklahoma, but his speach last year is one of the best I've come across that addresses the Global Warming debate. He brings up just about evey issue and offers a counter point of view that to my way of thinking makes allot more sense than what I'm getting from the Al Gore's out there.

James M. Inhofe - U.S. Senator - Oklahoma

I'd be very interested to here what he got wrong and why he's wrong. I'm of the opinion that he got it right and he says so very clearly.

Eddie

 

[Egon]

Don't forget the around 1800 there was a mini ice age for some reason

Mt. Tambora!

 

[NewToy]

"Science" magazine has just published a report about the carbon dioxide levels being 27% higher than anytime in the last 650,000 years. This has been determined by careful examination of Antarctic ice cores. I can't see how we can't be affecting the atmosphere through all the deforrestation and fossil fuel use. I believe Global Warming to be a very real issue. How can we burn 80 million+ barrels of oil per day worldwide along with the coal and NOT have an effect on the atmosphere?

 

[LMTC]

I'm not going to take the time, but anyone who is interested can find information (and you other "old-timers" probably recall) that in the 60s the then-equivalent of the whatever-pseudonym-you-prefer for those who seem to always have something they need to stop mankind from doing were telling us that by 2000 the world would be overpopulated to levels that would leave us with mass starvation and disease. Later in the 60s and early 70s we were facing another imminent ice age from the nuclear winter that was going to occur when we rained down atomic havoc on the globe. No nuclear winter, and the only starvation we have is politically induced (i.e., food is withheld or prevented from getting to a region). Plenty of food around the globe (again...I acknowledge distribution of it to be an issue, but that is from political influences in the places where people are starving), and no nuclear winter.

How does any scientist know what the blazes things were like thousands of years ago? A thousand years ago "science" insisted the earth was flat. "Science" said leeches would cure disease. "Science" has been repeatedly and routinely trumped by new information, which makes what was "science" now just bad information..not just old information, but often wrong.

 

[N80]

How can we burn 80 million+ barrels of oil per day worldwide along with the coal and NOT have an effect on the atmosphere?

Because people, and many scientists, don't understand big numbers. Do you know how big the ocean is? Do you know how big the atmosphere is? Have you ever heard the phrase, drop in a bucket?

But sure, humans can have an impact. As someone mentioned above, there are things that are real. The passenger pigeon is gone. There is acid rain. It is sorting out the fact and the fiction that causes the problem.

(And why do we have acid rain? Anyone? Because the greenie no nukes kept us from getting nuclear power. So we rely on coal. The windmills and solar panels and everyone walking to work just didn't pan out, did it? Way to go guys. Nice move. With friends like that, mother nature needs no enemies.)

 

[Egon]

[Do you know how big the ocean is?

I think water covers about 75% of the earths surface. Of this 75% we probably know less than we do about the moons surface!

 

[NewToy]

Because people, and many scientists, don't understand big numbers. Do you know how big the ocean is? Do you know how big the atmosphere is? Have you ever heard the phrase, drop in a bucket?

But sure, humans can have an impact. As someone mentioned above, there are things that are real. The passenger pigeon is gone. There is acid rain. It is sorting out the fact and the fiction that causes the problem.

(And why do we have acid rain? Anyone? Because the greenie no nukes kept us from getting nuclear power. So we rely on coal. The windmills and solar panels and everyone walking to work just didn't pan out, did it? Way to go guys. Nice move. With friends like that, mother nature needs no enemies.)

I think that's why people are so easy to dismiss the fact that we are changing things. While the ocean is vast it is finite. There is a cumalative affect that adds up. Put a drop of oil in a bucket of water and you have fouled your bucket of water.
John

 

[midlf]

I have no concerns about global warming. I have no kids. I have had to be involved in the solution to situations set up by my forebearers and their contemporaries. I don't think we should deprive future generations of a situation for them to creatively solve. Also I don't quite see the flooding of NY city and Miami as a loss.

OBTW - <grin>

 

[frank_f15]

The main problem here is that the last Ice Age was only 10,000 years ago when all of the MidWest was under a 2 mile thick solid sheet of ice and then it began to recede and left us with the flatlands and the Great Lakes.

Unfortunately, at that time, Al Gore's ancestors were all huddled in a cave somewhere freezing to death and had not yet invented human language, speech, or writing to record the last Global Warming event, but they all sure could grunt real good......it would be another ten milleniums until Al was able to invent the internet and warn everyone.

WHAT IS THE INTERNET

 

[tallyho8]

Greenland use to be Green. Its turning Green again. Archeologist have studied the settlements in Greenland and they can see the change in diet from land based animals to marine ones that was caused by Greenland turning into a bigger Iceland. The settlers did not adjust to living off the ocean so the died off and/or left.

Actually, Iceland has a much better climate than Greenland and is much warmer with all it's geothermal springs. In fact, the capital city of Reykjavik is typically warmer that New York City in the winter. When the Vikings discovered Iceland and settled there, they decided to name it Iceland to keep all the other riff raff out. Then they named the island with the cold, hostile climate Greenland as a public relations method to get people to go there instead. The geothermal springs in Iceland could easily make enough electricity to supply all of Europe with no oil used if they could refine the delivery process. Iceland is a very civilized country with 100% literacy, one of the longest life spans and the 5th highest standard of living.

 

[_RaT_]

Actually, Iceland has a much better climate than Greenland and is much warmer with all it's geothermal springs. In fact, the capital city of Reykjavik is typically warmer that New York City in the winter. When the Vikings discovered Iceland and settled there, they decided to name it Iceland to keep all the other riff raff out. Then they named the island with the cold, hostile climate Greenland as a public relations method to get people to go there instead. The geothermal springs in Iceland could easily make enough electricity to supply all of Europe with no oil used if they could refine the delivery process. Iceland is a very civilized country with 100% literacy, one of the longest life spans and the 5th highest standard of living.

Interesting, I always thought it was a icy waste land. Their gimmick worked on me. The cold icey part not the riff raff part.

 

[dmccarty]

Actually, Iceland has a much better climate than Greenland and is much warmer with all it's geothermal springs. In fact, the capital city of Reykjavik is typically warmer that New York City in the winter. When the Vikings discovered Iceland and settled there, they decided to name it Iceland to keep all the other riff raff out. Then they named the island with the cold, hostile climate Greenland as a public relations method to get people to go there instead. The geothermal springs in Iceland could easily make enough electricity to supply all of Europe with no oil used if they could refine the delivery process. Iceland is a very civilized country with 100% literacy, one of the longest life spans and the 5th highest standard of living.

Iceland was green when the Vikings "discovered" it. The bones showed land animals with the Viking settlements. Then over time the bones from land animals gradually reduced in number and where overtaken by marine animal bones. Present day Greenlanders are very happy with Global Warming since they can now farm and raise land animals again.

Later,
Dan

 

[CRJCaptain]

I'm not going to take the time, but anyone who is interested can find information (and you other "old-timers" probably recall) that in the 60s the then-equivalent of the whatever-pseudonym-you-prefer for those who seem to always have something they need to stop mankind from doing were telling us that by 2000 the world would be overpopulated to levels that would leave us with mass starvation and disease. Later in the 60s and early 70s we were facing another imminent ice age from the nuclear winter that was going to occur when we rained down atomic havoc on the globe. No nuclear winter, and the only starvation we have is politically induced (i.e., food is withheld or prevented from getting to a region). Plenty of food around the globe (again...I acknowledge distribution of it to be an issue, but that is from political influences in the places where people are starving), and no nuclear winter.

How does any scientist know what the blazes things were like thousands of years ago? A thousand years ago "science" insisted the earth was flat. "Science" said leeches would cure disease. "Science" has been repeatedly and routinely trumped by new information, which makes what was "science" now just bad information..not just old information, but often wrong.

Wow...that pretty much leaves me speechless.

Nuclear winter? I don't think that's currently a problem since mankind figured out that it wasn't a great idea to detonate large quantities of thermonuclear devices above ground...North Korea not withstanding.

As for the question "How does a scientist know anything?"

Let's just for the sake of argument look at one discipline, physics.

There was Ptolemy, then Galileo and Newton, then Einstein. Each improved on the other's theories. Like Einstein said, he stood on the shoulders of giants, each improving on the other's theories. Were any of these scientists "wrong"? (Is anyone ever right?)

Do you drive a car or ride in an airplane? Do you believe man went to the moon? Do you own an air conditioner? See a physician on a regular basis? Are you on the Internet right now?! Well you must have some faith in the veracity of the fields of aerodynamics, classical Newtonian mechanics, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics and the list goes on...

Back to global warming...who of us knows the effects of releasing several million years worth of stored up carbon into the atmosphere in the span of a hundred years? Well, I've read a lot of posts on the subject of global warming here, and I suspect none of you have ever been published in any peer-reviewed journals like Nature or Science or the International Journal of Modern Physics.

I think the last people that I would believe to be qualified to talk about atmospheric science and climatology would be James Inhofe or Michael Crichton or Al Gore or Al Franken or, sorry, anybody on TBN.

So, can't we just go back to talking about tractors and the weather?