POLAR CAPS MELTING Options

[CommanderChoth]

Yay! A debate!

Global warming, now that's a tough one.

I am going to agree with Hamma on this one. It is a problem, a big one. I am actually giving a speech on this for a class next week (it's a informative speech, not a persuasive one), so as I come across more information (for both sides), I'll keep those interested posted.

If you look back say 10 yrs maybe a few more these same scientists were screaming that we are headed into the next ice age. It was all over Time magazine. Specials on 60 mins the whole nine yards. Given enough time and a few dollars thrown my way I can probably find some scientist to agree that the moon is in fact made of cheese. Which would be awesome as I LOVE CHEESE!!!! Either way I can't do squat about it. You can't do squat about it. So why should we care or argue about it?

Junkie

Now junkie, you don't mean that . They say we are headed into an ice age, that could be true, and the cause of this will be, anyone, anyone? GLOBAL WARMING!
Trust me it makes sense. Let's go on a journey.
I took a weather and climate class that covered this, and I have first hand experience with these climate models. CO2 creates more CO2 in a sense. The higher our green house gas levels are, the greater the increase of global temperatures. The result of this is higher plant activity, more plant activity results in greater CO2 levels (GO AHEAD, say it, I dare you). This reduces the atmospheric transmissivity. Haze, smog, that stuff. A reduction of transmissivity of nearly 2-3% can drop global temperatures 5-10 degrees (volcanoes, case in point). You know what's going to amp up these temperatures even more? Melting of polar ice caps. This exposes the actual rock underneath the poles, (like antartica), rock has much lower albedo (reflectivity) than ice or snow. The hotter it gets, the colder it will be!
Luckily the earth can recover, always will. Equilibrium! It survived a giant meteor, it can survive human activity. The problem is, WE can't survive it. So don't be tricked by people who say that the Earth will recover. It will, but the question is will we all still be alive?

Hubris is a tragic downfall there Druid, you gotta find a little irony in your statement .

I don't agree at all.
There has been just as much scientific evidence against the idea of global warming as their has been for.
One major difference is the media has grossly overplayed the whole global warming issue.
Climate change is a cyclic as the seasons

The fact of the matter is that St.Helen's did have dramatic climatic effects. Temperature drops, for example, were seen globally. 3-4 degrees isn't much, and we may not feel the effects of global warming in our life time. Still, the evidence that supports the theory is compelling enough to suggest that this simply isn't cyclical climate change (there are several "change over time" charts that will compell you to think otherwise, unfortunately, I saw them in a class, and don't remember the source).

I also don't put much emphasis on peer review. Just because someone can find other like minded people, doesn't make him right, which is exactly all peer review really is. I could do a little research and find 100's of failed scientific hypostases that passed peer review but were later proved to be completely wrong.

Peer review makes the rocking world go 'round. I put every emphasis on peer review. These theories you speak of were later found wrong because of peer review. Per 100 failed cases, there thousands of successful ones. How else would you suggest the scientific community prove/disprove theories?

Either way I can't do squat about it. You can't do squat about it. So why should we care or argue about it?

I'm a planeteer, you can be one too! There's a shit ton you can do. Buy a hybrid, walk or bike, turn off the lights when you leave a room, keep your thermostat at reasonable level. Recycle.

Most of all, don't support a president who has such extensive ties in the oil industry (just saying). But that's another day, huh?

This post has been edited by CommanderChoth: 09/20/06 9:58am

[UNDEAD 1]

im no advocate of gore and completely aware of the many blunders hes produced .I'm no expert on this at all but i do know if you run a car in a garage while sitting in the garage your gonna goto sleep-forever. the 1920s thru 80s were probably half of whats on the road today.between the massive gridlock traffic i deal with here in broward county (which i believed tripled in residents in 4 years) and the 300 planes that fly over my head a day make me wonder what I'm breathing.as for the environment -who knows? but I'M SEEING ALOT OF EVIDENCE. i do know that governments do hide these environmental issues for instance-do you know the ocean/beaches in south eastern Fla are not only over fished but polluted to contamination? coming from a doctor friend (who wont bring his kids to the beach) sees numerous children coming in with open wounds and countless viral infections in adults all from the beach. is it public ,no because if even half the truth came out tourism is finished for like 10 years.its already had a major hit with hurricanes!

I'm someone who believes in not waiting to see what the other guy does (leading by example)and with the land Ive bought in NC I'm already implementing solar and hydro power and seriously considering switching to a diesel engine vehicle to convert to veggie oil.a veggie car would be more of a convenience for me as i am going to put my own pump in by the garage and it'll be my personal middle finger to our tax happy government and the middle east?!! solar energy will allow me not to pay $300.00 A MONTH in electric and thats conserving.its really not as expensive as most think.veggie cars are for real,i know of 2 stations already opening in fort Lauderdale alone.it s going to be the future!

and choth ,hell of a post but WE WILL NEVER HAVE A PRESIDENT who doesnt have ties to oil and insurance comanies! they fund all politicians!

http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginal...ews_on_glo.html







This post has been edited by UNDEAD 1: 09/20/06 10:33am

[Druid]

My point on peer review stands true as most ( not all ) of the predictions are based not on true scientific facts or methods. In stead are based on using completely unsupported and improvable variables when they compute their global climate change models.
The "Hocky Stick Graph" that was used for years as proof not only of global warming but man's impact on it passed peer review, is now seen not only as flawed but biased to support the scientist hypothesis.
Or another example, the "Drake equation" which mathematically proves the likelihood of extraterrestrial life, has passed peer review on numerous occasions. It passed peer review not because the scientists believed in it but accepted several unsupported variables used in the equation, variables no one could possibly no such as the percentage of planets/stat that should be capable off supporting life.


Actually I'm not dismissing the possibility of global warming, I am only dismissing the fanatical environmentalist and alarmists view it's caused by man and the sky is falling. That is an incredibly simplified view but is what's accepted by the general population. Which was my point in mentioning Mt. St. Helens in one day created more green house gases than Man has in our whole history.

[Genocide Junkie]

I guess I'm apathetic regarding all of this because I can revert to the year 1895 and it's not going to change the size of polar bear genitals in Antartica(yes this was an actual study done in regards to global warming posted on cnn.com last week). The fact is that we've changed our way of life to a point that we're not going back now. The other fact is that because there is so much money in fossil fuels and the vehicles that use them we will continue to be slaves to them. I have no doubt that what ends us on this planet (if you take out religious options) will be our own doing. Man has done it for 3000 yrs. There was a special on Discovery showing people in the desert who started irrigating their land to survive by growing crops. This same water that they diverted to grow crops eventually made the land uncultivatable due to different minerals etc. This led to them basically disappearing from historical record. We're not much different. We use what we need to make our lives better now. One day we too will have no oil to use and will have to find another option. It might be that we fight each other to the death over the last few drops. Another problem the world will begin to face as the population continues to grow is the need for fresh water. The western half of our own country already faces these problems. Not to mention Africa and the Middle East. Think we won't begin to fight when you can't get a drop to drink? We can worry ourselves to death about things we can't control and still get hit by a bus tomorrow. We'll adapt the best we can until we can't then we'll be extinct. Just like the 1000's of species before us have..... so let's kick back not worry about it and enjoy our time here without stressing about the size of a polar bear's jibblets.....

Junkie

[UNDEAD 1]

will man destroy itself by war or slowly?

http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/murmurs...pesticides.html

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=169

http://www.environmental-expert.com/magazi.../wasp/index.asp

http://www.mapcruzin.com/global_toxmaps.htm

http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageS...=issues_mercury THIS IS FOR REAL!

http://www.nrdc.org/water/oceans/qttw.asp

[UNDEAD 1]

i also found it ironic that on history channel (modern marvels)at 8pm last night they had solar,wind,hydro renewable energy.

they also had veggie cars and how to make fuels from the green in plants.this episode was like a year or two old but it was awesome.
if anyone was interested (which i doubt)you could see the episode on history channel .com.


This post has been edited by UNDEAD 1: 09/21/06 5:22am

[HarryCaray]

Ice was melting thousands of years ago, if it didn't it would be an Ice Age right now.

BTW, the extra money you "save" from gas by driving a Hybrid will not exceed the amount of extra costs when buying the Hybrid.
You don't "save" at all.

This post has been edited by HarryCaray: 09/21/06 8:04pm

[Pancakes]

Ice was melting thousands of years ago, if it didn't it would be an Ice Age right now.

BTW, the extra money you "save" from gas by driving a Hybrid will not exceed the amount of extra costs when buying the Hybrid.
You don't "save" at all.

Zing! Harry is super duper cereal!

[UNDEAD 1]

Ice was melting thousands of years ago, if it didn't it would be an Ice Age right now.

BTW, the extra money you "save" from gas by driving a Hybrid will not exceed the amount of extra costs when buying the Hybrid.
You don't "save" at all.

UNLESS ITS A CONVERTED DIESEL HARRY! i personaly have a friend opening the first station here in fort lauderdale- IMPO ,its not about the money,although its bs 350 a gallon!

A CONVERTED DIESEL CAN DRIVE FROM CHICAGO TO NY ON ONE TANK! price of conversion $500.

price of veggie oil -free at any mcdonalds! seriously!

[Bargod]

My point on peer review stands true as most ( not all ) of the predictions are based not on true scientific facts or methods. In stead are based on using completely unsupported and improvable variables when they compute their global climate change models.
The "Hocky Stick Graph" that was used for years as proof not only of global warming but man's impact on it passed peer review, is now seen not only as flawed but biased to support the scientist hypothesis.
Or another example, the "Drake equation" which mathematically proves the likelihood of extraterrestrial life, has passed peer review on numerous occasions. It passed peer review not because the scientists believed in it but accepted several unsupported variables used in the equation, variables no one could possibly no such as the percentage of planets/stat that should be capable off supporting life.


Actually I'm not dismissing the possibility of global warming, I am only dismissing the fanatical environmentalist and alarmists view it's caused by man and the sky is falling. That is an incredibly simplified view but is what's accepted by the general population. Which was my point in mentioning Mt. St. Helens in one day created more green house gases than Man has in our whole history.

Off topic, but in college I took some Astronomy classes. In astonomy 2 we talked about how everything in the universe (galaxies and larger) is moving away from each other because of the big bang. The further things move from each other, the faster the are moving away from each other. Now, I pointed out to the professor that if that was true, eventually things would reach the speed of light, which is supposedly impossible. That is when the professor pointed out a variable in the equation. He explained how this variable was in the equation to make sure that it didn't break the rules of physics.
Which just makes me wonder how the equation has any validity at all. If it is a fact that the further two things are away from each other, that are always moving away from each other, and the farther away they get, the faster they are moving away from each other, than you can not just ADD a variable to make it not break laws of physics. Either it's true or it's not. Don't throw in an extra "x" because it may break a rule.

I debated for 45 minutes after class with the teacher and never came close to getting a satisfactory answer. I doesn't mean I'm smarter than him, but it has always made me feel that even he thought that it was a bs equation.

[UNDEAD 1]

theres two scientific sides -ones says were in trouble the other says were not ,its a cycle.i ask what if we choose the wrong side?

i only think of my son,it wont effect us -maybe meowman.

[HammaTime]

I get a kick out of non-scientists grappling with the reliability of the scientific process and especially peer review. Perhaps I've spent too much time around scientists and my view is warped, but this isn't faith we are discussing. It is science. Science can be flawed, and it often is, but the editorial peer review process offers us the best hope of getting things right. In fact, the mistakes in scientific research have all been uncovered through scientific peer reviewed research.

Bar - your professor would never have been able to publish a paper on that subject, and he most likely would never have been accepted into the National Academy of Science. You wouldn't believe how rigorous the process is for admitting someone to the Academy. The best and brightest professor you ever had in college most likely could never make the cut. Your professor obviously had a basic misunderstanding of the structure of our universe. If "everything" in the universe is speeding away from each other, how could we have direct visual evidence of galaxies colliding? Of black holes gobbling up billions of stars? OMM can certainly speak at length about these issues and even provide you with some stunning pictures!

Undead makes a very valid point. Even if you doubt the massive volume of research that is proving that climate change is reality, what is the harm with taking steps to combat climate change? We all know where our dependence on foreign oil is taking us. What's the harm with turning out a light when you aren't using it? Of recycling? Of reducing our dependence on oil that happens to lie under a lot of people that hate us. No one has ever explained to me how that would be a bad thing!

[UNDEAD 1]

your right ! the first thing i started reading about solar energy,this writer teaches to learn how to read your wattage because how can you conserve if you cant read it.i thought,oh this will be tough (from an idiots standpoint) but it wasn't .then he said see what watts your using on all light bulbs in the house,which i did and was using 60w -120v bulbs (ancient) so i listened to this guy and changed every light bulb in the house-14 light bulbs to a 15 w bulbs (cost me $21 at costco) that are guaranteed to last 8 years each and my electric bill dropped $40 a month.

it was worth my while.also anything you buy electronic wise make sure it say energy star!!

as for oil- we complain about economic growth? why not CREATE more jobs here?





This post has been edited by UNDEAD 1: 09/22/06 9:19am

[Druid]

I don't have any problem with conservationist or environmentalist in general, to me it's only common sense to not waste our limited resources or not try to limit unnecessary pollution.
I think that's why the whole global warming issue is such a pet peeve as it take focus off more important subjects.
This whole chicken little hysteria revolving around "global warming" to me is a farce.
Even the best projections of the alarmist puts the man-made portion of CO2 around 0.2%. This is less than their percentage of error the tempretures cited in their own predictions of global warming.
So if EVERY man-made source of C02 was stopped tomorrow, it would have less than 0.2% impact on the problem.

People need to keep this in perspective. The global warming theory ( that's what it is a theory ), is mostly based on mathematical models where they can't even backup many of their assumptions used in the model.
Even the UN IPCC Panel who is the biggest chicken hawk right now. List 12 causes of global warming, then later admits they have little scientific understanding of 6 of the 12 factors and only marginal understanding of another 4.
So we are suppose to go by their predictions when they admit, at best only understand 1/4 of the reason?
Don't forget right up to the mid 70's the overwhelming belief was we were heading into another mini ice-age.


As for the universe expanding that is 100% fact as proven by red shift.
This BTW is who the hubble telescope is named for.
The confusion comes from a difference of perspective.
GENERALLY speaking everything in the universe is moving a way from each other.
This is the basis for the big bang theory. It doesn't mean it's the only force acting on it.
The Milky Way And Andromeda galaxies are both Generally moving away from everything else but at the same time are on a collision course to take place in 3 billion years.
All a matter of perspective.
Same as you're sitting still as you read this but at the same time you are moving in at least 5 different vectors.
Spinning around on the earth axis
Rotating around the sun
The solar system is spinning inside the milky way galaxy
Our section of the milkway galaxy is spinning on an axis to it's center
While the whole time the galaxy is flying towards a collision with Andromeda in 3 billion years.

[Genocide Junkie]

I don't have any problem with conservationist or environmentalist in general, to me it's only common sense to not waste our limited resources or not try to limit unnecessary pollution.
I think that's why the whole global warming issue is such a pet peeve as it take focus off more important subjects.
This whole chicken little hysteria revolving around "global warming" to me is a farce.
Even the best projections of the alarmist puts the man-made portion of CO2 around 0.2%. This is less than their percentage of error the tempretures cited in their own predictions of global warming.
So if EVERY man-made source of C02 was stopped tomorrow, it would have less than 0.2% impact on the problem.

People need to keep this in perspective. The global warming theory ( that's what it is a theory ), is mostly based on mathematical models where they can't even backup many of their assumptions used in the model.
Even the UN IPCC Panel who is the biggest chicken hawk right now. List 12 causes of global warming, then later admits they have little scientific understanding of 6 of the 12 factors and only marginal understanding of another 4.
So we are suppose to go by their predictions when they admit, at best only understand 1/4 of the reason?
Don't forget right up to the mid 70's the overwhelming belief was we were heading into another mini ice-age.


As for the universe expanding that is 100% fact as proven by red shift.
This BTW is who the hubble telescope is named for.
The confusion comes from a difference of perspective.
GENERALLY speaking everything in the universe is moving a way from each other.
This is the basis for the big bang theory. It doesn't mean it's the only force acting on it.
The Milky Way And Andromeda galaxies are both Generally moving away from everything else but at the same time are on a collision course to take place in 3 billion years.
All a matter of perspective.
Same as you're sitting still as you read this but at the same time you are moving in at least 5 different vectors.
Spinning around on the earth axis
Rotating around the sun
The solar system is spinning inside the milky way galaxy
Our section of the milkway galaxy is spinning on an axis to it's center
While the whole time the galaxy is flying towards a collision with Andromeda in 3 billion years.

And I'm still trying to figure out how they get cheese in a can..... this is too much for my feeble little mind...



Junkie