Wow. For once, we agree on something
If what the globalwarmers were true, my house would be under twenty feet of water by now.
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
Have you ever considered that the third rock from the Sun goes through periodic changes in climate that have nothing to do with the pissants that populate its surface?
Originally posted by: JellyBaby
The fact is there are few hard facts regarding whether or not it's happening and, if so, if it's a cyclical pattern out of our control or something within our means to help correct.
Eithe way, until the oceans eat up a few large U.S. cities not much will be done.
Originally posted by: Sid59
Global Warming is mostly due to the pollution and CFCs in the atmosphere, which can't go anywhere.
Global warming has progressively gotten worse. The Earth's population has progressivley gotten bigger.
If the tree huggers don't care for the Earth and push Grass Root Assemblies into Congress, who will?
Most people just don't care. That's the sad truth to it all.
Originally posted by: busmaster11
Charrison,
So whats the point? If you're getting technical, it still doesn't claim anywhere that it produces more CO2 than all the cars in America combined as you say. If you're trying to show that there are natural causes to many of the pollutants in our environment, go for it, because I've never disputed that.
My main point: Mankind is being very irresponsible with the environment and its natural resources. The US is the most prosperous country in the world, and we should be taking the lead in working to reduce that, and we're clearing not doing so.
My other point: There is a noticeable impact on the environment caused by man, and the evidence is increasing. At some point it will overcome the natural fluctuations in the climate such that even those of us with our heads buried in the sand will notice the trend. If that point ever comes, trust me - I won't be here celebrating, saying I told you so.
Originally posted by: hagbard
Originally posted by: JellyBaby
The fact is there are few hard facts regarding whether or not it's happening and, if so, if it's a cyclical pattern out of our control or something within our means to help correct.
Eithe way, until the oceans eat up a few large U.S. cities not much will be done.
The time has come and gone for that fantasy pal. They were threatening that ten years ago, what city has been eaten up by oceans?
Originally posted by: hagbard
The time has come and gone for that fantasy pal. They were threatening that ten years ago, what city has been eaten up by oceans?
Originally posted by: busmaster11
Originally posted by: hagbard
The time has come and gone for that fantasy pal. They were threatening that ten years ago, what city has been eaten up by oceans?
Not *yet*. Slowly but surely though. Unless you can tell me where all the ice thats covered Greenland for thousands of years and those record-breaking chunks of Antarctica ice has magically disappeared to...
http://yosemite.epa.gov/OAR/globalwarming.nsf/content/ImpactsCoastalZones.html
Please also read this one thoroughly, despite the title.
http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/global/sea_level.html
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: busmaster11
Charrison,
So whats the point? If you're getting technical, it still doesn't claim anywhere that it produces more CO2 than all the cars in America combined as you say. If you're trying to show that there are natural causes to many of the pollutants in our environment, go for it, because I've never disputed that.
My main point: Mankind is being very irresponsible with the environment and its natural resources. The US is the most prosperous country in the world, and we should be taking the lead in working to reduce that, and we're clearing not doing so.
My other point: There is a noticeable impact on the environment caused by man, and the evidence is increasing. At some point it will overcome the natural fluctuations in the climate such that even those of us with our heads buried in the sand will notice the trend. If that point ever comes, trust me - I won't be here celebrating, saying I told you so.
And here is where I will disagree. The US industry is some of the cleanest in the world. Our air and water for our cities over the past 30 years has become less polluted. Our cars all produce less pollution. New homes are built much more energy effecient than 30 years ago. We have taken the lead and we have no brown cloud like developing countries do.
Is there more we can and should do? Yes, but 280million consumers in the US need to start the energy saving revolution.
[/quote]Originally posted by: busmaster11
Very true. But what you have described is a natural progression of technology as a society becomes more advanced. Its processes become cleaner and more efficient. But for 70-80 years we were doing the same thing the Eastern Europeans and the Chinese are doing today. While those countries are struggling with their politics, double digit unemployment rates and mere survival, we're still by all comparisons thriving. So what you've described is good and all, but its the least we can do.
The technology's there for emission-free and near emission-free vehicles. The Bush Administration even held a presentation on the White House lawn, I believe, with the big 3, demonstrating their products and *ahem*, their commitment to it. But all we've seen from the big 3 are crappy POS cars with bigger and bigger engines.
Originally posted by: busmaster11
Originally posted by: hagbard
The time has come and gone for that fantasy pal. They were threatening that ten years ago, what city has been eaten up by oceans?
Not *yet*. Slowly but surely though. Unless you can tell me where all the ice thats covered Greenland for thousands of years and those record-breaking chunks of Antarctica ice has magically disappeared to...
http://yosemite.epa.gov/OAR/globalwarming.nsf/content/ImpactsCoastalZones.html
Please also read this one thoroughly, despite the title.
http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/global/sea_level.html
Originally posted by: thomsbrain
:sniff sniff:: what's that smell? it's getting stronger... oh i think it's the conservatives running as fast as they can to heap their bullsh!t into this thread!
Originally posted by: tk149
IIRC from my college geology courses, the "natural" state of the earth since the surfaced cooled off from planetary creation has been an ice age. We are now in a "warm" period. The earth has spent far more time in ice ages than in warm ages. In fact, I think we're due for the start of another ice age sometime soon (keep in mind that an ice age takes thousands of years to occur).
Maybe global warming ain't a bad thing?
Not that I find the evidence presented so far as compelling. The average global temperature *may* have increased slightly, but the question is whether it has increased significantly. Also, I've seen nothing to convince me that this increase is substantially a product of human industry. I've seen far more evidence that this may simply be a completely natural trend.
From: link
And finally, the funniest facts.. An average human being makes 18 in and exhalations per minute. As we were taught in school, oxygen from air converts in the human organism to carbon dioxide because of burning of the organic food inside. It's percentage in and exhalation is about 22%. The volume of one exhalation is 2.7 liters. So there is 0.6 liter of carbon dioxide in one exhalation, or, otherwise stated, it is 1.2 gram. It means, the average human being produces 1.2 x 18 = 21.6 gram per minute, or 0.021 x 60 x 24 = 30.24 kg per day, and 11.04 tons per year. It is frightening to say, but 30 millions Canadians exhale 340 millions tons of the "most harmful" carbon dioxide! And nearly the same quantity (350 million tons, see above) they put into the atmosphere with the exhaust gas of their cars, their power stations, their fireplaces, and their Bar-B-Q devices. It is a crime against nature, isn't it? Maybe the best way to decrease the pollution substantially is to stop breathing? And to ask our leadership to set us an example?
Obviously, the answer to global warming is simply to kill all the Canadians. Actually, I think their tidal volume estimate is high, but the logic is the same. 6 Billion human beings put out a considerable amount of carbon dioxide, relative to the total output of human industry. Never mind the methane that sheep and cattle (and bean-swilling humans) produce.
Originally posted by: Jellomancer
Originally posted by: tk149
IIRC from my college geology courses, the "natural" state of the earth since the surfaced cooled off from planetary creation has been an ice age. We are now in a "warm" period. The earth has spent far more time in ice ages than in warm ages. In fact, I think we're due for the start of another ice age sometime soon (keep in mind that an ice age takes thousands of years to occur).
Maybe global warming ain't a bad thing?
Not that I find the evidence presented so far as compelling. The average global temperature *may* have increased slightly, but the question is whether it has increased significantly. Also, I've seen nothing to convince me that this increase is substantially a product of human industry. I've seen far more evidence that this may simply be a completely natural trend.
From: link
And finally, the funniest facts.. An average human being makes 18 in and exhalations per minute. As we were taught in school, oxygen from air converts in the human organism to carbon dioxide because of burning of the organic food inside. It's percentage in and exhalation is about 22%. The volume of one exhalation is 2.7 liters. So there is 0.6 liter of carbon dioxide in one exhalation, or, otherwise stated, it is 1.2 gram. It means, the average human being produces 1.2 x 18 = 21.6 gram per minute, or 0.021 x 60 x 24 = 30.24 kg per day, and 11.04 tons per year. It is frightening to say, but 30 millions Canadians exhale 340 millions tons of the "most harmful" carbon dioxide! And nearly the same quantity (350 million tons, see above) they put into the atmosphere with the exhaust gas of their cars, their power stations, their fireplaces, and their Bar-B-Q devices. It is a crime against nature, isn't it? Maybe the best way to decrease the pollution substantially is to stop breathing? And to ask our leadership to set us an example?
Obviously, the answer to global warming is simply to kill all the Canadians. Actually, I think their tidal volume estimate is high, but the logic is the same. 6 Billion human beings put out a considerable amount of carbon dioxide, relative to the total output of human industry. Never mind the methane that sheep and cattle (and bean-swilling humans) produce.
Remember that the human population is growing at an unsustainable rate, so just because we carbonize all that oxygen doesn't mean it's okay.
Originally posted by: Jmman
I think some people need to do a little critical thinking on their own about this whole global warming trend. I don't think 10 or 20 years of warming really constitute the threat that some people would have you believe. Maybe some of the older people here remember that back in the 60's and 70's many scientists were warning us about "global cooling"? Our planet has gone through many periods of climate fluctuation throughout it's history. As usual, all of the "chicken littles" feel free to disregard and continue to believe that the sky is falling.....
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
eh, most conservative fundies couldn't care less anyways. they're sure their messiah will return to them before anything happens anyways hehe.
Originally posted by: sandorski
The majority of CO2 in the atmosphere is from natural sources, however, human activity puts a large amount in as well. We need to remember that the conditions for life on Earth are very precarious, an increase or decrease in the atmospheric ratio of Oxygen could cause life to cease to be viable for instance. Temperature variations can be equally as damaging.
Ask yourself: Even if Natural Cycles are responsible for Global Warming, can the unnatural addition of sources of warming be of any help? The Earth has recovered from past variations, but only when dealing with Natural sources of the variations, adding the unnatural Human Contribution could tax Natural Systems beyond their capacity. This is the crux of the situation, we know that we are contributing to the alteration of the atmosphere, we know that the atmosphere is going through a change, we know that the consequences of this change are unpredictable and can be devastating, we know that any adjustment in our contributions will take decades(a century appox) to have an impact, and we know that we have the technology to reduce our contributions. Should we just pass this responsibility onto future generations? We are not discussing National Debt, we are talking about our very ability to exist here, there is no wiggle room.
This week(Tuesday I believe) the Parliament of Canada will vote on whether to ratify the Kyoto Agreement. Ratification isn't gauranteed, but even the Canadian Oil Industry agrees that CO2 emissions need to be reduced and that CO2 is a threat. Kyoto or not, Canada will be making changes in order to significantly reduce it's CO2 emmisssions. The US and Canada have really dropped the ball on this issue. While we have been dragging our feet, Europe has already reduced it's CO2 emmissions dramatically. It can be done, but the longer we hum and haw the further we get closer to a possible point of no return.
Yep plus almost half the earth has yet to be populated.Actually the world population grown is flattening out. Current world population reports are now talking about the problems of a decreasing population(socialist countries having their tax bases disappear)
Originally posted by: hagbard
Originally posted by: sandorski
The majority of CO2 in the atmosphere is from natural sources, however, human activity puts a large amount in as well. We need to remember that the conditions for life on Earth are very precarious, an increase or decrease in the atmospheric ratio of Oxygen could cause life to cease to be viable for instance. Temperature variations can be equally as damaging.
Ask yourself: Even if Natural Cycles are responsible for Global Warming, can the unnatural addition of sources of warming be of any help? The Earth has recovered from past variations, but only when dealing with Natural sources of the variations, adding the unnatural Human Contribution could tax Natural Systems beyond their capacity. This is the crux of the situation, we know that we are contributing to the alteration of the atmosphere, we know that the atmosphere is going through a change, we know that the consequences of this change are unpredictable and can be devastating, we know that any adjustment in our contributions will take decades(a century appox) to have an impact, and we know that we have the technology to reduce our contributions. Should we just pass this responsibility onto future generations? We are not discussing National Debt, we are talking about our very ability to exist here, there is no wiggle room.
This week(Tuesday I believe) the Parliament of Canada will vote on whether to ratify the Kyoto Agreement. Ratification isn't gauranteed, but even the Canadian Oil Industry agrees that CO2 emissions need to be reduced and that CO2 is a threat. Kyoto or not, Canada will be making changes in order to significantly reduce it's CO2 emmisssions. The US and Canada have really dropped the ball on this issue. While we have been dragging our feet, Europe has already reduced it's CO2 emmissions dramatically. It can be done, but the longer we hum and haw the further we get closer to a possible point of no return.
Yeah, how's the weather on Salt Spring? Go smoke another one.