I write this now to Inform You all that you should watch this movie..."An Inconvenient Truth".

This Movie Is all about Global warming effects on earth. The Prompter Is none other than Former American Presidential Candidate "Al Gore". He speaks about how The world is changing for the worse and how WE are contributing to the problem..He talks about Floods, Destruction of Rain forests, Melting of the Ice Caps, etc. He even goes on to talk about our car emissions and so forth. I urge you all to watch this movie Not only to inform yourselves of the problem but also to see what you can do to help reduce global warming.

Their is a survey in on a website "ClimateCrisis" which gives a rough estimate as to your current Contribution to the greenhouse effect. Mine a stunning 18.75...the average being 7.5..I was truly shocked by this movie and I hope that it will change your outlook on the subject as well. I urge that you go down the corner to your neighborhood blockbuster and Rent this movie. There were soo many shocking and disturbing Images and Graphs and Calculations from Leading scientists that it was simply and utterly shocking. I overuse the term when I use "shocking" but I mean it.

this movie is fascinatingly Interesting so if you have the time I recommend that you watch it.

NO offense Spartan, but that movie is a bunch of half baked lies and wild suppositions.

In a word, it's Al's attempt to scare everybody into voting for him for President.

No offense, Vinny, but I'm surprised to hear you say that. Enough time has passed to allow scientists to evaluate the claims made in the movie. There are indeed a few minor errors, but overall, according to the scientists who have researched the facts cited in the movie, Gore did a good job of presenting the information accurately.

Here are some articles that back up this claim:

National Geographic

Real Climate

Salon

Slashdot

You can find many, many more articles that fact check the movie, but clearly, the majority of facts mentioned in the movie have been widely accepted by the scientific community. This really is an issue that transcends political theater. In a way, it is too bad that it was Al Gore who produced the movie. I wonder what the reaction would have been if it had been made by someone outside our polarized national politics.

Many who have seen the movie are unaware of Gore's previous national best seller, "Earth in the Balance" which was first published in 1992 when he was a Senator. This topic isn't something that Gore has come to only recently. He has been seriously involved in climate issues for decades.

alas, much of the world's pollution originates in China and India, mostly from open topped wood/oil cook fires....but, when you have over half of the world's population stuffed into a small area, its tough not to pollute. Then again, Gore and the Clinton's have been in China's back pocket for years....and that isnt going to change anytime soon. I hate when this country is blamed for the world's ills.



Lead

...wow.

I don't disagree that there are political motives with the movie. Gore has encapsulated the challenge of the next century, and if educating the populace is how he goes about garnishing political will, its better than any other method I have seen. Case in point the current fear monger. Gore is presenting scientific fact.

David Suzuki, a 'popular' scientist in Canada has become much more vocal about the current state of global warming in the last year, I suspect in part due to Gore's docudrama so cheers Gore. Although not as polished, his message is the same. Suzuki is a real advocate for education and the environment, his website is a great place to get information, to be involved, to educate, and inspire.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/

Lead, you are right! Our (north america and europe's) responsibility in this is not so much change our habits, although this goes hand in had with the real challenge. This is to identify and bring about solutions that can be adopted in the "third world" and manufacturing economies... this is critical. Otherwise any changes we make, as lead alludes, will pale in the destuction caused by these regions.

I will be totally honest, the current state of 'climate change' and our complete arrogance about it, scares the living piss out of me!
I second Spartans request, if you haven't seen this, go and rent this documentry!

I really don't care if this is political or not for Gore but what he is talking about makes a Lotta sense I mean the Leading nation contributing to the problem isn't Russia or Japan or china...IT is the United states. We contribute what 3-4 nations dish out combined. some states haven't even tried for a change in what they burn and contribute the the overgrowing problem, some states excluded from this such as California and the 9 states in the North east of the country. This guy isn't only talking to us about it he has gone around the world to try and make a contribution to stop this. I mean for your generation it won't matter but for the one's that will be stuck with the problem in the future it will be.

Global warming is happening. I mean If You look back 2 yrs ago the Hurricane Katrina was more powerful than what hit Florida way back when ( Hurricane Andrew ). The only reason Katrina became a threat is because after Florida it moved into very warm waters and intensified. then battering New Orleans.

the destruction of the wetlands of the world, and the increase in urban sprawl, especially at sea level, is a receipe for disaster, global warming or not.

Providing a solution for global warming? Un-enforceable as far as i can see....Kyoto Accords haven't been ratified by all of the nations of the world; the Japanese still refuse to stop whaling and unrestricted gill net fishing. The United Nations can't enforce its will on any of its member nations.

The decline of strategic resources, specifically oil, is going to be the primary issue in the next 20 years. People moan and groan about "blood for oil, blah blah blah" but petroleum is necessary in everything we have and build today. A century ago, people used wood and metal and wool and clay for what we use in petroleum based products, especially PLASTIC. Imagine a world without plastic. I cant. And someday, we are going to run out of it. The war for the control of strategic resources has started and wont end until we are all under one flag, whatever that will be......


So until then,




Leadmagnet

I think this is great stuff for debate. But, before we all bend over and take massive tax hikes to control "Global Warming". We need to be sure that First, that it is something that mankind notably effects and Second, we CAN or should do something.

First, We all know MANY of these scinetist get paid from Govnt Grants to study this Global Warming event. What good does it do to disprove ones own paycheck?
http://www.epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?pa...p&id=257909

One of the biggest hits for Big Al is the increase in Hurricanes in recent times. It is a blatently false pretense to say that science can link Hurricanes to global warming, Carbon Dioxide or any other such thing. Besides there isn't even any PROOF that Hurricanes are increaseing.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...convenient.html

Big Al presents Dr. Mann's findings as fact that the temperatures are rising in North America. But seems all the other scientist say he is science is wrong.
http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2wee...20060718_06.pdf

The Snows of Kilimanjaro's. The snow is not disappearing because of "global warming". It is disappearing because the land at the bottom has changed and dryer air is rising up the mountain face that in years past. Even National Geographic notes that "many factors" go into the snow on top of the hill.

Then we have all snow and ice disappearing in the Artic and Greenland. Well, in the 1930's Scientist say the Artic temperatures were actually higher than now. Hmmmm. Could the the small areas where ice is melting possibly be from natural occurance? And what about all the other areas where snow and ice are accumulating? How can that be?
Funny how all that ice that covered North America 10,000 years ago seemed to disappear without any help form SUV's, Oil Companies and chain smokers. FACT: The Artic ice has actually INCREASED from 1973 to 1996. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html

My position is that the global climate temperature has been increasing (about 0.6C) since the late 19th century, well before the industrial revolution. We have no true consesus from the scientific community on what impact, if any, mankind has on this trend. Therefore, unitl we do we should act as responsible custodians of our world that God gave us. But, we should not take drastic measures, spend Umpteen Trillions of dollars and outlaw the internal combustion engine as Big Al suggests. Lets get the facts straight first.

Cheers,

Vinny



For further reading,

Point by Point refute of Big Al's Movie

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/environment/gore.html

The US is the world's #1 contributor to greenhouse emmisions.

The US is big enough, powerful enough, and rich enough to change that. But it has to try. And it has to stop blaming "Al Gore" for summerizing the view of 19 out of 20 scientists.

Is there any other issue in the world where half the US population is willing to dismiss the view of 19 out of 20 trained scientists to believe 1 out of 20?

I don't know if there is "Global Warming" or not. All I know is that in my lifetime (at 35 years) I've seen it swing back and forth. I remember distinctly in 4th grade (you do the math) hearing about "Global Cooling". Oddly enough that was one of the "snowiest" winters I remember. I was living on the Jersey shore at the time. I remember walking out of school one day and seeing HUGE snowflakes. To this day I have not seen snowflakes that large ever again, (my brother in Jersey tells me the snowflakes were that large again this year).
Anyway, in college I took some science. I studied a bit about thermal dynamics of the oceans. The fact is, when the ocean (Atlantic) has more salinity (warmer) the storms are worse. When it is cooler (less salt in the water due to more fresh water off the polar ice caps) the storms are fewer.
So, if global warming meant the ice caps were melting than there would be more fresh water in the ocean making it less saline and hurricanes less frequent and weaker in strength. I'm not trying to prove anything. I'm just saying that not all arguments about global warming stand up to independent science, as far as I can tell. Here is a link to back that from National Geographic: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/20...rricanes_2.html

Also, after Katrina many people used recent hurricanes as evidence of global warming. Well, oceanographers pointed out that we are just in a cycle of bigger hurricanes. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2005/s2540.htm
Oddly enough, the same evidence is used to "prove" that it is the result of global warming.

To me this argument reminds me of the argument over the Sphinx in Egypt. Geologists look at the Sphinx and say the erosion was caused by rain and floods which dates it at X number of years. Egytologists don't like that. Nobody tells them their business of Egyptology. The sphinx can't be as old as it is, because it doesn't fit their research. The erosion to the Sphinx was caused by wind and sand, not by rain and floods. What would Geologists know about Egyptology?

I'm not saying I know what is right. But I know the planet is huge and regulates itself and has been very hot and very cold. Man has been on it for a very short time. For us to say with any certainty what is up is silly. For us to say that greenhouse gasses don't cause problems is silly. We need to learn about these things and make changes. The sooner the better. But I can not bring myself entirely buy into the nightmare stories being told. Not as long as regular science doesn't back up government science.

Initially I bought into Gore's presentation about global warming, but I've been exposed to enough skepticism about it, that I'm not taking Gore's presentation so easily. Unfortunately my graduate studies keep me busy researching other topics, so I don't have time to look much into this realm!

Somebody needs to set up a live debate between scientists in both camps. I'd be very interested to see such a debate in that it wouldn't feature Al Gore and other figure heads (on both sides) who aren't academically trained in the fields global warming covers. Most of the literature I've found has been posed by non-scientists who don't have the expertise a scientist would have. Unfortunately it is sometimes difficult to find opposition to such politcally charged debates since many skeptics do not want to face criticism or risk their careers.

the rest of the worlds scientists ,except china , have enough evidence and are taking steps to improve the problem ,not keep screaming its not me!! i don't know about you guys but i have a child and i would like him to grow up in an environment the same way i did. i have one question i always ask when this debate comes up, what if they are wrong???????????????? then what, it'll be too late .its not just the fuel , its the total lack of carelessness.

lack of proper recycling -landfills are totally filled ,now garbage is being sent to other states and buried there.alot of it is burned and is toxic.

i think %98 of all of american rivers streams and waterways are contaminated with pesticides-that's right people were poisoning the land which runs off into the water ways.how can it be organic veggies when the soil is contaminated??

have you ever seen documents on water treatment plants? here's one for fort lauderdale,the treatment plant is about 40 years outdated driving with in a mile you can smell it.a friend of mine works at broward general and said they treat kids coming in from the beach with open wounds from polluted waters(not a lie) he refuses to go to the beach.they keep it quiet because it will hurt tourism.they take active surveys on the beach all year long.cali,mexico,ny,boston do you think theirs are up to date?

the amount of trees being cut down probably doesn't have anything to do with the massive mudslides,tornados and weird weather all together etc.. its 2007 ,have we not found the means to make a wood substitute that's recyclable and doesn't burn???by the way , if anyone gets a chance ,Edward Norton narrated a documentary as to why the Cali red woods aren't growing back-fascinating movie.

we don't make these changes because it would cost people jobs and that will cost a politician a term.

question-is AL gore running for president??

The 'debate' is over... any questioning of what is 'fact' is gone within scientific community. A few weeks ago even the UN issued a press release with part of the abstract below, which was almost laughable within the scientific community. This is generally accepted and no press release is required. But there it is.

UN http://unfccc.int/2860.php Full text.

"Against the background of the most conclusive scientific evidence to date that the warming of the climate system is unequivocal and accelerating" UNFCCC Executive Secretary, Feb 2, 2007.

If I may chime in here. The Word of God reveils the truth of the matter.



¶ For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.
Malachi 4:1

I have read that thing. Read it carefully, note that certain verbage is inconsistent and lacking in many key areas. That is quite strange to me for a document that has been through probably hundreds of revisions.



I am no expert when it comes to global warming but it seems like there is some evidence that it may be occurring. The problem that I see is that the science behind the cause is flawed and is being misused for political reasons. They can't tell what the weather is going to be like tomorrow with much certainty yet the UN/Al Gore is able to define exactly what is causing global warming and how it will affect the earth in the next 20-50 years? The Farmer's almanac has a similar track record.



Beyond the alarmist calls to action, no one has a solution. Why? Because they don't know how to fix it. That is pretty solid evidence that they don't know what causes it. They also don't know if it can be fixed at all or is just one of many documented swings in temperature on the earth throughout history.



Even funnier is that the skeptics are being fired. Talk about intolerance of alternate ideas.

LOL!! Shar, you always have a great perspective. Oh man, you crack me up!!!

LOL grim... Too much fire and brimestone for me!

I reread the article, and found the verbage consistent and concise.
The good thing is that we need some to start acting now, others can wait until they are sure, and act later.

Cheers,
SH

LOL Shar! That ghas to be one of the funniest posting I've seen in a loooong time!

The biggest problem in understanding global temperature trends and what effects it, is that there is just not enough data. Mankind has had the ability to measure and record temperatures in SOME areas for maybe 75 years. Other areas maybe 30 years. That is NOT a lot of data points.

The one thing I am not blind to is that most scientist have an aganda. Whether it is making a case for grant money, research funds, being paid by certain institutes (one scientist already confessed he doctored evidence in favor of global warming), or simply protecting ones own fawlty research.

What amazes me is that not one person has commented about any of the points I refuted about Big Al's movie.

With all due respect, Vinny, your observation about the lack of "data points" for temperature readings sounds about as ignorant as someone who stands outside and says, "I can see all the way to the horizon, the earth must be flat."

Vinny, I challenge you to watch the movie before making any more of these kinds of statements. At the very least, familiarize yourself with the basic science involved in temperature reconstruction from isotopes of oxygen and hydrogen trapped in ice and you will quickly learn how scientists can indeed calculate temperatures dating back 650,000 years. Cores have been drilled that have preserved ice dating back 800,000 years but they are still working on analyzing that data.

The basic premise is that heavier isotopes, with an extra hydrogen neutron or oxygen with an extra one or two neutrons, precipitate out of the atmosphere at a faster rate at lower temperatures. By examining the ratio of heavy to light isotopes found in ice cores drilled out of ancient ice it is relatively easy to determine the temperature at the time the ice was formed. So, we have a basic "natural thermometer" built right into the ice.

And before you say "voodoo science," let me assure you that this is very, very basic stuff that has been thoroughly tested. All one has to do is to use your old trusty mercury thermometer to measure the temperature trends over a couple of years and then compare the isotopes found in the ice formed during those years.

And trust me, there is absolutely nothing political about an isotope!

HammaTime Ownage proof. Woot woot.

Guys, there is no such thing as Global Warming. Except what occurs in nature.

97% of greenhouse gases occur naturally, mostly as water vapor.

Of the remaining 3% most is carbon dioxide which is given off by "plants" during photosynthesis.

Most scientists agree that the earth has risen in temperature 1 degree in the last 100 years.

Truthfully, we have only been able to monitor temperature accurately since the 1970's with satellites.

A lot of the data used to support the global warming myth comes from Accuweather. Needless to say, most of the readings come frome cities which give off the "heat island effect" or places where people live. Cities give off heat. Nobody cares what the temp is in the Mojave desert, Greenland or places where there aren't people. Thus, no readings there.

I won't babble on. But it is a myth.

CO2 is natuarly occuring but is used as an input to photsythesis (used by plants) the waste given off is O2 (lucky us). Greenhouse gases are 'naturally occurring', h2o or h2o vapour is not considered a greenhouse gas. The image below is a chart of CO2 atmospheric concentrations for the last 1000 years... it speaks volumes about what is happening.

Temperatures... see hamma's post above, we know quite a bit about the historical temperatures of the planet, particularily the last 1000 years.

You guys actually don't believe global warming is happening? You are just debating to debate? This is taught in grade 8 or 9 or something... like the periodic table, and plate tectonics...

The link below is a really interesting site that talks pretty direct about the science in laypersons terms and also discusses solutions... Should check it out, I hope it helps provide some further insight into what is happening, at least it may provide another perspective for you.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/Climate_Change/Science/

I think it is hilarious how a nation that can make a show like CSI a number one television hit, chokes on the concept of mass spectrometry when it is applied to earth science.

Gee, when a forensic scientist uses the mass spectrometer to determine that there was blood at a crime scene, that wasn't visible to the naked eye, we gobble it up as mass entertainment. Those findings have long been accepted by our courts as viable, and acceptable evidence. But when science turns its instruments to small gas bubbles trapped in ice, we've got BIG problems that are caused by guys named Al.

I would also point out that it is perfectly natural for the Earth to get Warmer and Cooler over time.

If you look at the Pleistocene period, the Earth became very warm due to ocean currents / activity.

Would anyone disagree that humans can neither create nor destroy matter?

I find it strange that some people in this forum don't believe that global warming is actual happening, despite of what so many experts and scientists claim. I wonder why. Try "global warming" at google.

In Europe there is a big concern about the melting of ice in the North Pole. The gulf stream passes through our coasts and keep our climate warm (in relative matters). If (or when) the Ice at Greenland and the north pole melts we will have a destruction/another path of this stream. Norway is roughly in the same latitude as Baffin Island/Bay in Canada. There is no warm gulf stream there - and that's the climate we will have in Europe. Gives me the creeps - anyone seen "The day after tomorrow"? (No comparasiation btw)

see this is the problem with the us as were the only ones still debating , most other countries have accepted the OBVIOUS . you say humans cant destroy matter? wtf is that,we are completely destroying our habitat .

I think everyone realizes that Globar warming is occurring, the debate appears to revolve around whether this is due to the natural elements vs human contribution. I find it interesting to read others opinions as it educates our minds and opens the doors for future solutions .

If you want the correct answer, be here in two hundred years:)

T/A6Pak

or maybe 20 .

Like I said, it's not that I don't believe global warming is occurring, I'm just not sure that I believe all the nightmare scenarios. As you pointed out (and I did in my last post) the influx of fresh water from melting ice would make the water less saline and stop the Gulf Stream (and the other water convection cells of the oceans). This would bring about a great cooling effect and could actually cause the Earth to be thrown into Global Cooling. The oceans distribute heat along the planet. If you take that heat away Northern Europe will become much colder.

I've really enjoyed this discussion and have found it enlightening to see the various opinions voiced here. No matter the ultimate answer to the problems facing the world, it is nice to see so much interest here in this lowly forum.

As Kleerance stated, the potential for disruption of the Gulf Stream is something that is obviously foremost on European's minds. Not only will they have to deal with rising sea levels, they risk seeing their climate change dramatically. That flow of nutrient rich water is a massive engine that not only provides Europe with warm, moist air, but it also helps pump nutrients for all the creatures of the sea. An infusion of fresh water is all it will take to turn off the pump. This would be a devastating event for the fishing industry here in Maine, to say nothing of what it will do to our climate and the fishing industries spread throughout the North Atlantic.

It may be too late to avoid that cataclysmic event, but there are many things we can all do to help battle climate change ... and none of them involve tax hikes! Simply turn off the electric appliances and lights you aren't using, replace your incandescent light bulbs with energy efficient fluorescents, tune up your car, make sure your tires are inflated properly. It really doesn't take much to make an impact.

Hi all, Im 38.76 years old now. When I was a child, like 30+ years ago, I could look up into the sky and see a nice yellow sun...



Now, 30 years later, you cannot look at the sun at all, for its now blazing white. Global Warming is not just happening on this planet, but all the planets are heating up. My point being is that the Sun is putting out more energy than it did 30 years ago. Im sure the other "old timers" can verify what I said.

Global warming, global cooling (though more likely it would be cooling in some areas, not overall global cooling), it doesn't matter. If there is a significant climate shift, even if it cooling in one area and heating in another, that can be devastating. The population of the world has settled where it is generally because it is livable. A sudden, relatively permanent global shift in climates will devastate agriculture and fisheries where it currently exist. It will cause droughts in areas that had plenty of water, flooding in areas that aren't prepared for it, but overal the globe will be hotter, meaning for most, it will mean more droughts inland, and flooding in coastal areas.

The problem with global warming is the thinking it is is that it is accelerating, gaining momentum, like an old steam engine train that's been feed far too much fuel, and the problem is that not only have we not even leveled out the pace we scoop on the coal, we keep shoving faster and faster! The results will be unpredictable for any given area of the globe, but there will be consequences, and except for maybe a smattering of landlocked northern hemisphere countries, the impact is not likely to be nice, and in some cases may be devastating.

Hey Grim, NASA's satellite's show that your years of observation unfortunately don't match the recorded data. NASA has sent up a fleet of satellites to study the sun's activity. Solar activity varies in 11-year cycles, but the actual visual light remains startingly constant. The variability of the solar irradiance (total solar energy output) peaked in 1979, declined until 1986, increased through 1991 and has since been falling.

Check out this chart:

Maybe your observations of a difference in light intensity might be because you've grown a lot taller in the past 30 years and now you are closer to the sun!

The sun feels hotter. Why we burn in 5 minutes now, and used to play outside for hours and not even worry about it? Somethin is different.

depends; the Northern Hemisphere is closer to the sun in the winter, and the angle of the hemisphere facing the sun is different as well, so the sun has less of the atmosphere to diffuse through to get to the earth, hence why the sunshine "feels" warmer in the winter time (solar radiation). Also, the decline of the ozone layer has a itty bitty part in that equation too....

Lead

Instead of complaining we are heating the Earth up you might want to consider that every 100,000 years or so the Earth WARMS up enough that we arent one big ice ball. This period generally last about 20,000 years. Guess what??? Yep you win the prize we are about 20,000 yrs into the current period of warm climate. I guess green house gases from the combustion engine were to blame at the begining of this current 20,000 year warm up.....

Junkie

Its really hard to tell if the aliens who designed us were using combustion engines, or their damn laser beams.

You obviously are referring to information that was circulating in 2005. These past two years have seen a dramatic increase in both CO2 and global temperature which have pushed way beyond any past historical highs. The British Antartic Survey released data in September from ice cores that dated back 800,000 years. At that time, the BBC quoted Glacial Chemist, Eric Wolff, one of the principal investigators as he reported the results, "My point would be that there's nothing in the ice core that gives us any cause for comfort. There's nothing that suggests that the Earth will take care of the increase in carbon dioxide. The ice core suggests that the increase in carbon dioxide will definitely give us a climate change that will be dangerous."

The previous data showed that CO2 and temperature fluctuated in consort. This is no longer the case. Since the 1970's atmospheric CO2 rose at an average rate of 1.5 ppm per year. Last year that spiked to 2.05 ppm and a series of similar jumps since 2001 has altered that steady growth to 2.1 ppm since 2001. These rates have raised CO2 levels 35% above pre-industrial levels.

Something fundamental is happening. This increase can't be blamed on pollution alone. It appears as if the earth's historical ability to absorb CO2 has been maxed out and now the earth can no longer cleanse the CO2 the way it once did. But, before we jump to conclusions, we'll have to await more data. We do know that melting permafrost has the potential to release HUGE amounts of trapped CO2 and this year's predicted El Nino could really help push CO2 levels to unheard of proportions. This is absolutely not a typical warming cycle.

These recent CO2 levels have jumped so dramatically, going well beyond any historical highs recorded in the past 800,000 years. The million dollar question is, how will this dramatic increase in CO2 affect the earth's temperature. One can only guess.

Perhaps the real issue is how we're [modernised mankind] is accelerating global warming -whether it's a natural cycle or manmade. It is happening. Up here in Canada we see it full blast... up in Inuit territories is most striking. In Quebec and Ontarion we were used to seeing huge snowdrifts in the cities in January and now we see mostly bone dry pavements in the last 20 years - for the most part.

But we ain't seen nothing yet imo.... wait until the rest of the underprivileged majority of the world start living a normal life with them starting to get their rightful share of good jobs- higher incomes = more purchasing power- more expansive urbanization-more transport required. The hotline's going to get hotter it seems, in spite of our best efforts , or at least of those who making efforts. Seems as if technology will be our only saviour ironically.... or a bunch more trees.




Thats true... in the old masterpiece paintings blue skies were blue everywhere... nowadays except in very remote rural areas, a blue sky always has a pink tinge at the horizon.

Anyway... all this should convince us we better start figuring out how to get off Earth at some point. One day it will die.

Not only that but If this pattern continues we won't have an ozone Layer anymore and if that goes we will all be Burnt crispy critters. Has anyone watched the movie "The Core"?. Theres one scene in which they hover above the San Fransisco bridge ( Big Red Pretty one ) and The ozone collapsed and UV rays shun through and Toasted the bridge and the pedestrians and the people in the cars It was insane. I can Imagine it won't be like that, but still Its hard to predict what might happen if that atmosphere disappears.

In "An Inconvenient Truth" there was a scene where Al gore talks about Cars. He says that American Cars wouldn't sell In japan or China Because their Car Emissions prohibit ours. I mean If you look at these countries there are barely any cars anyway. Everyone Uses They're Bicycles and Mopeds. Not because they are underdeveloped because Japan Is the leader In technological advances, but because they pollute less and use up less fuel and oils. Its the same in China.

There are so many things we could do to reduce pollution, America Still Uses Coal Power plants to provide at least 40-50% of our energy. While We could replace them with Geothermal energies like Dams. which pour water that turn Turbines and generate electricity Ex: Houver Dam. Or we can Try with Wind Power Ex: Pinwheel turbines.

If this Continues I truly feel that the future will not be this Beautiful thing we Imagine.

Scary question that many look to other planets such as Venus for answers. Millions of year ago, Venus had a very similar atmosphere to Earth similar in size, shape and distance to the sun, including running water.

Due to what scientists suspect was a "runaway greenhouse effect", the surface of Venus has become one of the least hospitable places in the solar system. Surface temperatures in excess of 400C hot enough to melt lead, pressure in excess of 90 earth atmospheres, made up almost completely of CO2. Not allot of sitting out on the porch having a beer! Of course this took a long time... and is far more complex than I describe, but same general process is implicated.

Bottom line, we have to figure it out, because the moon just sucks and Mars, Mars sucks as much as the Moon only it is red aswell.

This is slightly uncomfortable....

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/02/28/g...ty.html?ref=rss

O'boy. What happened to "practice what you preach.....?"

We talked about this climate changes at work as well. So it made me kind of wonder........ Any cheap land to buy in the US? Somewhere in the middle (not the coast areas)..

Well, we have global warming ... and now, global dimming according to London's Guardian newspaper. This sure is surprising!

Records show that over the past 50 years the average amount of sunlight reaching the ground has gone down by almost 3% a decade. It's too small an effect to see with the naked eye, but it has implications for everything from climate change to solar power and even the future sustainability of plant photosynthesis. In fact, global dimming seems to be so important that you're probably wondering why you've never heard of it before. Well don't worry, you're in good company. Many climate experts haven't heard of it either, the media has not picked up on it, and it doesn't even appear in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/sto...1108853,00.html

The variability of the solar irradiance (total solar energy output) peaked in 1979,

I wondered what was going on that year! Man, it was hot as Hell and now I know! Thanks Hamma!

It was the Disco Inferno.