"Global warming is real - it is man-made"

[Dante]

"Global warming is real - it is man-made and it is an important problem. But it is not the end of the world." - who said it?


Bjørn Lomborg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[youtube]YfVY5om9HtA[/youtube]

 

[MajinLink]

Wow it's a few degrees hotter, lets make a big deal over it

 

[Dante]

Wow it's a few degrees hotter, lets make a big deal over it

funny, but a few degrees globally is not the same.

why not make a credible argument rather than post troll shit?

---

I've never sided with Gore or others over whether the issues were in need of immediate solutions or not?

 

[antagon]

i think this issue is only valuable for the purposes of supporting commoditization of CO2. that's my explanation for why all of the funded scientists point to the gas and build the anthro argument. i dont see how it is credible in light of more dominant causes.

 

[JenT]

I think it's only valuable to those who want to control everybody else, gives them an excuse, they're trying to save the world!!!!

 

[glew]

I'm curious Dante...Dosen't the temp change by about 40 degrees, every year, in the northern and southern hemisphere? Also, with warmer temps and more co2 in the atmosphere, wouldn't the number and variety of plants and trees increase? What ever happened to the rain forest, nuclear meltdown, ozone layer, global cooling, or any of the other iminent catastrophes that will befall us if we don't do something RIGHT NOW!!? The only environmental issue important to envronmentalists is whatever one can generate the most money. At least oil companies get their cash by providing us with something we need. You enviro-whackos get yours by doing absolutely nothing at all, except making life harder for everyone else.

 

[antagon]

notwithstanding the shaky underpinnings of the CO2 argument, this is not an excuse to embrace our generally destructive impact on the planet, or the fuels industries which lead the way in many respects. one of my bigger concerns is that environmental impacts which i feel have a bigger impact on humanity and the rest of nature have taken a back seat to ideas which might have more commercial potential, should the governments of the world decide that there needs to be a hyperfocus on CO2, for example. non-toxic, vastly abundant, integrated into nature, CO2 is among the least of our worries. Hg(CN)2? different story.

 

[kirk2spock]

In reality humans contribute about 5% to global worming in terms of CO2 release into the atmosphere. Yes it is true that we are responsible for this number and trying to minimize it in whatever way we can, but humans are not ultimately the source of global worming. It is arrogant of us to think that we can effect the ecosystem of the world in such a drastic way in only 20 years. Science is divided on the issues with scientists in government labs reporting that global warming is an imminent threat caused by humans and only we can save the planet while scientists at universities and private organizations generally suggest that man is not the ultimate cause and in reality contributes little. The IPCC has published documentation and recommendations about global warming at regular intervals and it was not until one of their more recent publications that they completely overturned their previous data showing global warming to be natural in favor of new data that showed global warming to be human caused. The problem is that they used the same relative data set and simply changed the way it is viewed to maximize the human contribution. They have also been known to falsify information to suit their purposes and destroy information that proves them incorrect.

So it would appear that politics drives natural history and our relation to the ecosystem...inherent problems there.

Consider too Rapid Climate Change Events as documented by paleoclimatological data from ice cores drilled out of Antarctica and atmospheric analysis of gas frozen in the ice. This heating process occurs every 22,000 years like clockwork for the past 150,000 years that our records go back. Guess what...it has been just about 22,000 years...fancy that.

Remember in the 80s when the next ice age was around the corner and we were all going to freeze to death?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How did North America deglaciate 12,000 years ago?

 

[psikeyhackr]

In reality humans contribute about 5% to global worming in terms of CO2 release into the atmosphere.

kirk2spock?

And you computed that how in relation to the Keeling Curve?

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0Z7RRKzrdg[/ame]

psik

 

[Dante]

calling all USMB amateur scientists...your country needs you.

 

[antagon]

sorry Dante, they're too busy dodging discussion on the topic.

 

[hortysir]

How did North America deglaciate 12,000 years ago?

Woolly Mammoth hair spray??

 

[Old Rocks]

Very simple. Adapting to a rapidly changing climate is preferable to changing our present habits, no matter how destructive they are to the coming generations, or to the rest of the biosphere.

For most people, the present rapid changes are already stretching their abilities to adapt. They see jobs that they considered safe niches now gone forever, with no demand for skills that took years to develop, and now the scientists are telling them that they have to change even more. That we should cease to use fossil fuels asap, that we need to switch to an energy base that features nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, and other non-polluting sources, that they do not understand, and have no experiance with.

I see otherwise intelligent people convincing themselves of the scientific equivelant of the sun rising in the West simply because they wish to avoid any more changes in the lives, and the way that they live. Which, of course, pushes the changes onto their children, and grandchildren, who will be facing a much more serious situation concerning the effects of a changing climate, a rapidly changing climate, than we face today.

Well, that is the culture of this nation, and our children will suffer the consequences of our inability to face reality.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Even simpler.

Show us one repeatable laboratory experiment where a 200PPM increase in CO2 raises the temperature and we'll take you a little more seriously

 

[Old Rocks]

It was done by Tyndall in 1858, silly ass.

 

[antagon]

It was done by Tyndall in 1858, silly ass.

more genuinely, that was the discovery of the greenhouse effect altogether. such a study as frank challenges has not been conducted successfully in a lab or on a computer, despite their modeling flaws... not one which can tie a significant temp change analogous to earth with as little as 200-300PPM additional CO2.

this is a problem with the very basis of CO2 causation.

 

[editec]

Wow it's a few degrees hotter, lets make a big deal over it

It's a might BIG DEAL to the plants we depend on, Majin.

A couple degrees difference turnss most of the Americann Heartlands farms from arible land into deserts.

That may not seem like a big deal to you, but for those of us who like the eat?

Yeah, that is a pretty big deal.

 

[code1211]

Wow it's a few degrees hotter, lets make a big deal over it

It's a might BIG DEAL to the plants we depend on, Majin.

A couple degrees difference turnss most of the Americann Heartlands farms from arible land into deserts.

That may not seem like a big deal to you, but for those of us who like the eat?

Yeah, that is a pretty big deal.

Is that a logical conclusion?

This year, the path of Hurricanes went along the East Coast instead of the Gulf Coast. As a result, the lingering effects of the hurricanes which are the rain formations that typically range into the plains regions did not occur.

In Indiana, we suffered a drought of pretty significant proportion. Mardi Gras went off without a hitch, though. Was the relative temperature in the plains states what re-directed the path of the hurricanes?

During the Dust Bowl Days, there was also a drought in the Great Plains. It ended.

If the temperature bands move north, will the farming in Oklahoma be drought struck as well as the farming in North Dakota? Will all of it be droughted out of existance on the same day at the same time?

It's warm in the Rain Forests of the world and yet, it rains in Rain Forests. Do warmer temperatures always equate to drier climates?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It was done by Tyndall in 1858, silly ass.

Yeah, 200PPM, Jackass.