Global warming - fake or real?

zaim · Mar 12, 2007, 10:29 PM

we're all doomed.

ronnn · Mar 12, 2007, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zaim

we're all doomed.

Not sure we are all doomed, but the naysayers to global warming aren't helping! The scientific community accepts climate change via greenhouse gases by a huge majority. Takes more than a slick film to change that.

dsdsdk · Mar 12, 2007, 11:45 PM

Here's more from Carl Wunsch.. written by himself:

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=4688&tip=1

ronnn · Mar 13, 2007, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dsdsdk

Here's more from Carl Wunsch.. written by himself:

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/page.asp?id=4688&tip=1

So if I understand him, absolute proof of human induced climate change is not there, but a very high probability is assigned by most scientists. Therefore it would be prudent to act on this.

Lelisevis · Mar 13, 2007, 08:21 AM

Was going to stay out of this one but for years i've had suspicions about humans supposed impact on Global warming, I can't help but think it's just the latest easy media target and vehicle for politicians to gain popularity.

However thats by the by, the reason i'm posting is because I've just watched a tongue in cheek piece on the BBC which showed what the average uk home-owner would have to do to hit the planned government co2 emissions targets. First went every electrical item in the house and the fitting of energy saving bulbs, followed by the removal of the radiators and central heating. Next to go was the family car. Enough? nope next to go was the once a year family holiday.
Don't know about anyone else but i'm going to get a jump on the soon to come latest craze, im putting my house on the market and i'm off to find a nice cave to live in........erm think i'll be ok to light a fire to cook and stay warm or should I go vegetarian?

Dowaco · Mar 13, 2007, 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronnn

Not sure we are all doomed, but the naysayers to global warming aren't helping! The scientific community accepts climate change via greenhouse gases by a huge majority. Takes more than a slick film to change that.

The "scientific community" that is always refered to is made up of a good many non-scientists as well as scientists who do not agree with the findings but were left on the author list and many who participate because that is the only way they can get funded. The global warming hyseria relies on the public being ignorant of how science works. How can Al Gore save you if you know you don't need to be saved?

We should be talking about new energy sources and ways to protect ourselves from the harsh realities of the solar system like sunspots, cosmic rays, earthquakes, and meteors. But there is no one to blame for these things so politicians invent evil corporations or blame their political opponents. Mark my words, the first meteor to hit the earth and cause significant damage will find politicians pointing fingers at each other saying "my opponent failed to do anything to stop this catastrophe".

We could dump three times the Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere and not have any significant impact on the greenhouse effect. Carbon Dioxide is a smoke screen, it has no scientific importance to this debate. Rather, it is a surrogate for Capitalism. "Reduce Capitalism - vote for me" does not sound as convincing as "Greedy corporations are poisoning our planet and will cause the death of billions unless I save you".

We are indeed doomed if we continue to allow charlatans to lead us down a path that leads only to their own glorification, because we refuse to understand science.

dsdsdk · Mar 13, 2007, 09:40 AM

#35.. lets start a cave-community :-)

#34.. when you re-write like that...

Thus at bottom, it is very difficult to separate human induced change from natural change, certainly not with the confidence we all seek. In these circumstances, it is essential to remember that the inability to prove human-induced change is not the same thing as a demonstration of its absence. It is probably true that most scientists would assign a very high probability that human-induced change is already strongly present in the climate system, while at the same time agreeing that clear-cut proof is not now available and may not be available for a long-time to come, if ever.

Some bonus stuff (to ppl who hasnt seen the vid):
0.054 percent of athmosphere is CO2.
Temperature in upper athmosphere hasnt changed.. even though this is where the significant change would appear first..
Even wikis say CO2 change lag behind temperature change..

Tinkerhell · Mar 13, 2007, 11:06 AM

Well my thought is that "global warming" is BS.

With that said, I also believe that you shouldn't shit where you live. Humans are grossly wasteful and destructive and greedy and that we should do all we can to stop using non-renewable resources. I personally believe that the biggest reason we aren't much further along with solar & wind energies & alternative fuel vehicles & electricity is because oil companies have too much power in the world. Period. We should all be running our own homes via solar & wind & water independantly. But the world (well the US anyway, where I know is all I can really speak to) is soo damn dependant upon others its pathetic. If we all grew a few vegitables for ourselves and didn't depend on being tied to the local power grid for 100% of our electricity the whole world would be better off.

Oh. There are too many of us too.

Just my opinions.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Mar 13, 2007, 02:51 PM

Inconvenient truth, films like that are full of hogwash. Yes the treat is real but
these extreme exudation dooms dayers. Who take every "natural event" and
twist to say see, see , we are not loons! then says "oh noes111 the sky is falling".

If they'd stop the BS people would find it more palatable. All these idiotic film makers
do is HURT the course in the main stream and of course fuel their loonies extremists.
So much many ignore the problem all together.

Mousey · Mar 13, 2007, 05:00 PM

My mum was telling me about how Global Warming might not actually be affecting the planet, i thought bs of course but it was interesting to hear about...

i forgot most of it lol....

cozumel · Mar 13, 2007, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mousey

My mum was telling me about how Global Warming might not actually be affecting the planet, i thought bs of course but it was interesting to hear about...

i forgot most of it lol....

Always listen to your mom and cherish what she says Grasshopper.

And always investigate the data, explore the facts and then form an opinion or theory.

Always keep your mind open to new information or ideas presented and be prepared for your beliefs to change.

cozumel · Mar 13, 2007, 05:58 PM

Just found this data:

Quote:

This graph shows two different proxies of solar activity during the last several hundred years. In red is shown the Group Sunspot Number (Rg) as reconstructed from historical observations by Hoyt and Schatten (1998a, 1998b). In blue is shown the beryllium-10 concentration (104 atoms/(gram of ice)) as measured in an annually layered ice core from Dye-3, Greenland (Beer et al. 1994).

Both of these proxies are related to solar magnetic activity. Sunspots are darker, cooler regions of the sun's surface associated with high magnetic flux. Higher numbers of sunspots indicate a more active sun with stronger and more complicated magnetic fields. The dominant change in sunspots reflects the quasi-11 year Solar magnetic cycle. The quiet period observed from 1645 to 1710 is known as the Maunder Minimum and is associated with a near zero abundance of sunspots.

Beryllium-10 is a cosmogenic isotope created in the atmosphere by galactic cosmic rays. Because the flux of such cosmic rays is affected by the intensity of the interplanetary magnetic field carried by the solar wind, the rate at which Beryllium-10 is created reflects changes in solar activity. A more active sun results in lower beryllium concentrations (note inverted scale on plot). Since the atmospheric residence time for beryllium is not more than a few years, it is also possible to resolve the solar magnetic cycle in beryllium concentrations. Beryllium measurements, such as these, are the best evidence that the solar magnetic cycle did not cease even during the period with no evident sunspots.

The dark curves are 30 year averages of the data.

However, a 2006 study and review of existing literature, published in Nature, determined that there has been no net increase in solar brightness since the mid 1970s, and that changes in solar output within the past 400 years are unlikely to have played a major part in global warming.

Dowaco · Mar 13, 2007, 07:48 PM

Nice find.

Concerning solar output: Its not the output of the sun that counts, it's the amount that hits the Earth. The sun's magnetic field affects cosmic ray flux which in turn affects cloud cover which impacts both albedo (reflectiveness of the Earth) due to high level clouds and reflected heat from the surface from low level clouds. Meanwhile, the sun's brightness does not change very much.

Nobody said this was not complex, the problem is that global warming proponents tend to oversimplify and leave out key facts or tell outright untruths in an effort to push their agenda. The general public accepts what it hears with no proof.

ZzzombieBunny · Apr 13, 2007, 02:23 PM

Saving the planet and all human live from imminent destruction OR ignore the problem. Though choices, maybe we should just sit around on our arses for another 50 year and let the people in the future deal with it? I Mean it worked great in the 70s... 80s... 90s.

No but seriously, I think denying that global warming exists is about as ignorant and evil as denying the Holocaust. If there was even the sligthest minimal chance that we were causing the destruction of our (ONLY) planet, we should pull all our resources and efforts into seeing what could be done about it. Instead were just sitting on our arses debating over if the problem exists or not. It seems like for most people global warming is not an issue because they cant see it happening, you know like genocide in africa. Who wants that on their consious, I sure as hell dont. But then again im an atheist and nihilist so I dont really care if the planet blows up. We might as well speed up the process, as far as an intelligent lifeform in the universe goes, were a big frigging failure and im really ashamed of being part of the human race.

Its logicly undeniable that we cannot be the only intelligent lifeform in existence, how could we possibly justify our behaviour if another specifies popped by to say hello. We spent our whole existence on this planet killing eachother over the most meaningless things. We spend all our time and resources on either indulging ourselfs to the point that our bodies selfdestruct or building things that allow us to kill millions in the matter of seconds.

You know if I belived in God, I wouldnt be suprised if he himself set of global warming... just like we would use toxic gas to kill of vermin.

Sandok · Apr 13, 2007, 02:29 PM

THe problem is, you can never consider anything as an absolute fact... I think we should take care of the planet, but not go overboard and restrict basic things like PCs not being left on standby and such. Find a good medium.

ZzzombieBunny · Apr 13, 2007, 02:54 PM

Sure we can, we do it all the time.
Weapons of massdestruction in iraq. absolute fact.
Existence of God. absolute fact.
Stupidity of mankind. abso....

Leaving your pc on standby might not seem like a big deal, but hey lets multiply that with a couple hundred million. Then take ever other thing we dont really really need but still use and multiply that by a couple hundred million. I mean come on, you see how it all adds up. And theres more and more people joining in on the fun everyday going about clueless about how it all affects our enviournment. I think people who are pissed at Al Gore are just looking for excuses, who actually wants to take responsibility the planet. People are to lazy to throw trash IN the TRASHBIN, keeping the whole planet clean... people would rather ignore the problem and have faith in god and afterlife than deal with that shit.

Sandok · Apr 13, 2007, 02:57 PM

Hey I don't believe in the WMD or God but if everything is a totalism, that's no good for humanity...

Take care of the world, but don't go overboard, that's just what I'm saying.

ZzzombieBunny · Apr 13, 2007, 03:08 PM

Thats just the problem, we dont really need to take care of the world. All we really need to do is do a few changes to our lifestyle. Take some responsibility for our junk, consume less. Companies need to take more responsibility for what they do with the enviournment. But thats just not going to happen.

Why? Because the same people in charge of looking over enviournment issues are the ones who work for the companies causing them. Meanwhile most of us cant even take care of our own bodies and were expected to take responsibility for the planet? Thats not going to happen either.

So basicly, the goverment is not going to do anything about global warming untill the problem is staring them in the face. The people are not going to do anything, because the government isnt even acknowleding the problem. Meanwhile Al Gore tries to raise some awarness of the issue, what a bastard! I read in the papers today a guy dismissing what was said in Gore's movie (which is based on real actual scientific data by *shocker* educated people who spend their lives collecting scientific data and not just opinions by some selfcentered forum junkie like myself) because the guy has a big electricity bill and only made the movie to get some attention. I mean... just... wow. *cough*denial*cough*