How Many Here Believe in Global Warming?

[drydreamer]

Did you know that there are scientists who DO NOT believe there is any Global Warming happening on this planet? This subject is generally accepted as a proven theory, but it really IS NOT conclusively proven. Part of the reason we are handed this theory as if it were a proven fact is that the news media thinks it is better for their ratings to scare people. They're afraid that good news will make us get bored and change the channel. But if they tell us something scary, maybe we will stay tuned to their program long enough to see all the commercials. However, there may or may not be any truth in this theory of global warming. That's because Earth's climate goes through periodic changes. Sometimes the global climate will get warmer by a degree or so; and sometimes it will get cooler. We live in a fluctuating ecosystem. Comments are welcome. drydreamer

[sandy82]

LOL, drydreamer, have you been watching the Fox News Channel? Or maybe reading "truthful" press releases from Karl Rove?

Sure, the earth goes through weather and temperature cycles. One such temperature downturn led to the extinction of the Viking colony in SW Greenland, the home of Leif Eriksson. Long-term temperature fluctuations are noted in Wales from before 1000 AD. See "A History of Wales," by John Davies (1993). Even as recently as the early 1880s, the eruption of Krakatoa affected world temperatures (lowering them) for several years.

No question about natural, and often unknown, causes for heating/cooling of the atmosphere.

At the same time, chemical reactions in the atmosphere, including reactions involving carbon oxide emissions (CO, COsub2), together with unaltered emissions, result in too much carbon dioxide (COsub2) and ozone at fairly low levels and too little ozone at higher levels. Hence, additional heat retention close to the surface and too little radiation absorption at higher levels. Near the poles, there are now holes in the ozone layer which didn't exist 20 years ago, and people in Patagonia have been warned at times to wear sunscreen all year long.
(I'm no chemist. If someone with greater knowlege--of whom there are probably 11,999 on this site--spots an error that impairs the sequence, I would welcome the correction)

Ordinary carbon can indirectly add to the COsub2 blanketing qualities that cause/contribute to global warming. A living tree is good; a rotting tree is, theoretically, a different matter. It absorbed the carbon from COsub2 while it was growing. What happens to that carbon when it dies?

Leaving aside pollution from factories, electricity plants, dying forests, and the like, the number of cars (and in the U.S. the number of vehicles that meet even lower standards...see pickup trucks, then see auto lobbyists, then see Congressmen who live verrrrrry well, and then see that great "pickup truck" known as the SUV) has risen and so have the emissions. Look at China and, now, India. All the pollution goes somewhere...and indendepent-minded scientists know where it's going and what it's doing.

How about an additional question?

Is global warming caused more by:

(a) industrial plants and vehicles emitting carbon, etc., ....or....

(b) sleek politicians emitting methane?

[makidas]

I think our government hides alot of information so not to start mass panic.

[morrcomm]

[sandy82]

morrcomm, that is a great post.

Don't get me wrong. I share your view almost totally. My natural predisposition is to tell the PETA people and, as you say, the Birkenstock crowd to shove it.

My natural inclination has been tempered by following closely the level of discourse (and candor) that emanates from this Administration. Why not ditch USDA regs and replace them with "My Pet Goat"? Or to get the right perspective: "My Bible-thumping and Corporate Tax-deducting Pet Goat."

As for Kyoto, my objections center on the miserable text that we initialed in the first place. By setting 1990 or 1991 as the base year, the Germans got to count all the Trabis and all the East German factories that were going to be eliminated anyway. The British got to credit open-pit mines and coal-fired utilities that either had been closed by the time of the negotiations or were firmly set for closure anyway. Did the US get credit for all the steel mills that were closed around Pittsburgh? No. That happened in the 1980s.

To spread the blame where blame is due, the draft Kyoto agreement was the fault of the Clinton Administration.

We never learn. In the mid-1920s, the Washington Naval Treaty set strict ratio limits on the number of battleships at least five countries could have. The US scrapped actual ships. Everyone else tore up blueprints.

As for man-made greenhouse gases, rank methane right up there. And when one considers 1.3 billion farting Chinese, one begins to see a genuine dimension of the problem!

[isadora]

Is whether the weather fluctuations are 100% our fault?

As sandy82 pointed out, weather fluctuations in the past are not uncommon. There was the mini-iceage in the 1800's that was one of the factors to the French Revolution. And there are numerous huge explosions from volcanoes in the history that have added their own pollutic form to our atmosphere.

But are we solely to blame for global warming? Or is it a combination of facts? Would we be experiencing a-certain-form of Global Warming now if we were 100% pollution free? I think so, yes.

However we are making it like a BILLION times worse. Maybe if our environment weren't the way it is now (stupid Ozone Layer! how DARE you keep the pollution and other hazardous gases inside our atmosphere!), maybe then we wouldn't have global warming.

But then we wouldn't be here either.

[loony28]

:twisted: I for one believe that global warming is taking place. I don't believe that we are the cause of it. To believe that we can affect the temperature of the planet to such an extent is the height of arrogance. Do we contribute to it? Perhaps in a small way we do but there is evidence of major climate changes in the past when humans weren't around. I tend to believe that it's just a natural cycle. As for the ozone layer I find it funny that the only holes in the ozone layer are at the north and south poles, right where the Earth's magnetic field funnels the solar particles. :twisted:

[drydreamer]

I think it should be noted in this discussion that the media gets a lot of mileage out of frightening headlines. How do we know about global warming or anything else? Usually because we see or hear it in the news media. Back in the days before electronic media, there were a lot of people who simply didn't know about many of the things that were going on. For example, records of weather disasters only go back so far; so there may have been destructive hurricanes that few if any people ever heard about, because no one survived to tell their friends about it!

There is a certain psychology to fear mongering. Because of religious traditions, many people have a secret suspicion that God is going to punish them somehow because of their mistakes and failures. So when the TV news anchor starts talking about a hurricane that's heading their way, a little voice in the back of their minds says "aw oh! Here it comes! Just as I suspected!" And of course, this suspicion that they have been having will then cause them to give the news their full attention. When the TV news person starts talking about global warming, the next thought we may have is "it's God's retribution." This grabs our attention and we are hooked. Which is exactly what the TV station wants, of course, because they are concerned about their ratings. But if the news anchor starts talking about the nice boy scouts who helped some crippled people in the bus station, we tune out! Why? Because after all, that could not be God's retribution - it's GOOD, not bad! So if we could just stop waiting for God to punish us, maybe we could carefully analyse what we are hearing and not jump to negative conclusions.

Does anyone remember the flap about 05/05/2000? Remember? Some guy wrote a book about how the world was going to come to an end on 05/05/2000 because of the planetary alignment that took place on that date, and also because of the amount of ice that had built up on the South Pole. :lol: He said that the gravitational force brought to bear on Earth by all the outer planets that were lined up, together with the extra weight of ice packed on the South Pole would cause Earth to role over on it's side with catastrophic consequences! :lol: As foolish as this idea may sound now, that book flew off the bookstore shelves as May of 2000 approached! It was that little voice in the back of our heads saying "here it comes - just as I suspected." But it did not come. Nor did IT come on the numerous other occasions when silly men predicted the END. They all made great money from their books, and now we have subsidized the handsome retirements of these guys who had the gutts to write down their foolish ideas. They're probably all basking in the sun on the beach at Rio, either laughing at us, or laughing at themselves. But if the joke is on us, we deserve it because we bought into the religious programming we were brought up with. I predict that in a hundred years we will all be wondering what the big flap was about global warming. drydreamer

[sandy82]

No doubt that the earth goes through temperature variations based on natural or unknown causes. Isadora, I didn't know about the link to the French Revolution. Interesting!

No doubt that man, to whatever extent, is introducing into the atmosphere chemicals whose reactions and properties can contribute to warming. For those who grew up in retribution-based environments, I can understand that a first thought might well be that we're all being punished.

Here's a notion to ponder. If we can't tell when natural rises and falls are occurring or how long they will last, and if we don't know precisely how much humans are contributing to a rise, then at least two (actually many more in between) possibilities are out there.

1. If, in the natural cycle, temperatures are currently rising, then man's contribution to global warming looks negligible.

2. On the other hand, let's suppose the following. If, in the natural cycle, temperatures would currently be falling (if it were not for man-made pollution's contribution to global warming) then we may have a problem in the future.

There are two "bright sides" here. In the first instance, nothing to worry about. In the second, all of us here will probably be dead from other causes before the effects become genuinely dangerous.

In the meantime, morrcomm raised an interesting point about viewpoints, egos, and axes to grind. It's interesting to watch what nostrums are being peddled on all sides of the issue.

[sandy82]

[drydreamer]

I don't care. I still don't believe there is a serious problem with Global Warming, and politicians are not always correct in their assessment of the priorities of different issues. Most often, their personal agenda's, or the agenda's of their constituents are foremost in their minds. But if the readers of this discussion still wish to be controlled by fear, they are welcome, and their congressmen will be very grateful for the attention.

And why was this thread moved to the Philosophy, Religion & Politics Forum? Does EMG agree with me that religion has precipitated this flap about global warming by trying to scare us with stories of divine punishment? If so, thanks for helping me make my point! drydreamer

[sandy82]

[Linja]

I voted yes. I won't have much to say on this, because I clearly know nowhere near as much on the subject as you do, and when I don't know much I try to keep my mouth shut...

But here's my two cents:

1. We are logging forests faster than they are growing. Plants are our source of oxygen, so I think that this is a bad move on our part.

2. The human race is growing. The population of Earth is growing exponentially. Our oxygen consumption is also therefore growing exponentially.

3. Due to cars, factories, whatever... Our Carbon Dioxide output is also increasing exponentially. (Among with other harmful gases I'm sure).

So, unless anyone can tell me those three poitns are wrong, I figure that the Human race needs to change it's gameplan, or lose. We are destroying the environment, while we increasingly need it. This is not smart.

I'm not sure so much about global warming, but I think that the Human Race has a terrible tendancy towards strange optimism when it comes to areas where money is to be made. Many are not willing to accept global warming (real or not) because it means that people will have to change their lifestyle, possibly for the worst.

When the truth is depressing, it's amazing how some people refuse it.

-Linja

[sandy82]

[morrcomm]

[sandy82]

LOL, morrcomm, you have described perfectly the Kerry Syndrome:

"I think I used to vote against that...until I voted for it."

The entire Congress is famous for voting "for" in committee, "against" on the floor. Or the variation: "for" the authorization; "against" the appropriation.

What would interest me here, and perhaps you have access to the answer. Comparing like with like, has the Republican-controlled Senate ever before adopted a resolution that mentions the existence of global warming; and have an equivalent number of Republican senators been so straightforward in their comments.

[morrcomm]

[sandy82]

Thanks, morrcomm. I'll go with the following formulation:

<<Is global warming happening? From what I've seen, most likely. But does that mean we understand all the mechanisms involved? Hardly.>>


As they say, plagiarism is the sincerest form of flattery. :)

[gurlbidesign]

[drydreamer]

Interestingly enough, there is serious talk among scientists with the space program about terraforming Mars! For those of you who don't know, terraforming means to change an alien planet into a world like "Terra," or Earth as most of us call it. And guess what one method would be? The introduction of greenhouse gases! Yes, it's really true! Greenhouse gases are actually NEEDED on Mars because the atmosphere is way too thin, and the planet is too cold. The primary greenhouse gas that is available there is CO2, but it is locked up in the rocks and soil of Mars. There are ways to get the CO2 out of the ground and into the air; and this would quickly make the atmosphere much thicker, and would cause the atmosphere to retain much more heat. Even though people cannot breath such an atmosphere, the CO2 would build enough atmospheric pressure that people could walk around on the surface of Mars without space suits, and needing only breathing masks. Then the excess CO2 could be scrubbed from the air by planting lots of trees and vegetation. Plants love CO2, and they produce oxygen which would then be added to the atmosphere. After about a hundred years, we wouldn't need the air masks anymore. Methane is also a greenhouse gas, and could assist in the function of thickening and heating the atmosphere; but it has the drawback of not being compatible with plants, so some other method would have to be used to reduce the atmospheric methane levels. But maybe since we are so good at producing greenhouse gases, we just need to take our expertise to Mars! drydreamer

[sandy82]

[DaytonaMaster]

[drydreamer]

I have read the trilogy, Red Mars-GreenMars-Blue Mars, and one interesting thing about Kim Stanley Robinson is that he is actually a scientist who writes fiction on the side. Most of the really good SciFi writers are real scientists these days, and they use a lot of real science in their writing. Terraforming is something we actually know how to do; but we just can't afford the space program that would be necessary to carry it out. Believe it or not, it would even be possible to terraform the moon! Crash an ice asteroid about 500 miles in diameter into the moon, and all the ice would be vaporized, creating an instant atmosphere! Yes the moon's weak gravity would not be able to hold it; but guess how long it would take for the air to bleed away into space: 100,000 years! That's much longer than all of recorded human history on Earth! So even the moon could be changed by the hand of man - that is IF he could get the program through congress! LOL drydreamer

[BobbyS]

I've only just read this topic and I CANNOT BELIEVE this!!!
The electric car has already been developed but not released (it's been bought out by oil companies to protect profits).
Parts of the polar ice shelf have already melted off and sea levels are rising because the ice caps are melting.
British (I don't know the figures for other countries, sorry) summers are getting hotter by about a 1/4 degree celsius each year.
BMW (may actually be some other manufacturer - could be wrong) have already developed hybrid cars that only use petrol for faster speeds and electricity for lower speeds.
Organic fuel that uses crops for lower CO2 emissions has been developed.
Companies are considering storing waste gases at the bottom of the sea to halt the effects.
All this evidence and you STILL think global warming isn't a problem - no, worse - that it DOESN'T EVEN EXIST???!!! If it doesn't exist then it seems that people are wasting a HELL of a lot of money on something nonexistant.
As for the media circus INVENTING it for shock tactics - that would be more along the lines of a Sudan1 problem. The press in Britain alleged that products containing Sudan 1 were dangerous as Sudan1 is a carcinogen and thousand of British stores had to alter their inventories accordingly. It was true - Sudan 1 IS a carcinogen, but it comes in such minute amounts that you'd have to eat several hundred jars of curry powder in one sitting to face a slight risk of contracting cancer. THAT is a media press circus, not global warming.
You'd have thought wouldn't you, that if these 'scientists' were certain global warming doesn't exist they'd be on their phones right now;
'Hey guys, this global warming business, it's just a load of hot air -yeah neat joke, huh? So, like basically you're all off the hook; politicians, oil companies, car companies, everyone. What's that? You wish I'd told you sooner? What, before you spent millions securing that electric car, and building a hybrid car? Oh, sorry, it must have slipped my mind...'
Or alternatively, maybe these scientists enjoy seeing their fellow man sweat for a living (metaphorically).

loony28, as for your comment, that we are not the biggest contributors - are you serious we breathe CO2 out (yeah okay, so do a lot of things), we run power stations, factories and cars which churn CO2 out so fast it seems it doesn't know where to go, we manage farms with cows on that fart methane and we're constantly chopping down rainforests that we need to soak up CO2, too many times without even planting replacement trees. To say we are the main contributors isn't bigheaded at all, it's the honest truth. What's bigheaded is to feel it's not our responsibility to clear up after ourselves.

And sandy82, I normally find your comments to be the most logical, neutral and pacifying ones on the board, but to say that we shouldn't worry about global warming now saddens me. What about our children? Even if you don't have children, future generations will be affected by this. Maybe not the direct next generation, granted, but your bloodlines (if you do have kids) could be affected by this.

In this rant I may have come on like a hippy, but I didn't mean to. I'm not vegetarian, I don't wish everyone could just get along and I admit war can be necessary. I even consider the possibility that the use of the A-bomb was justified. As for the G8 summit and Africa, I agreed with Bush (for the first and probably last time) that helping Africa is down to trade, not calling off the debt and letting dictators scoop up the money.
However, although I am used to some fairly selfish, angry and pathetic posts in these forums (ah who can forget that evangelical weirdo of a month ago) this topic has been the first that has actually upset me. To refuse to help lessen the blow of global warming is selfish enough (just by catching a bus if it's possible, instead of driving) but to refuse to believe it exists beggars belief.

But like sandy82 says, who cares?
Soon oil stocks will run out, people will NEED electric cars and that will both lessen our reliance on the middle east, meaning less of a terrorist threat (poor Bush, no more terrorists to fight) and less contribution to the greenhouse effect.
Of course by then coasts will have been submerged in freezing water, but at least you'll be able to drive your SUVS - until the fuel runs out.

[sandy82]

[BobbyS]

Wow, guess I'm kind of eating humble pie now... :oops:
Sandy82, you made very good points, I just got a bit carried away when I saw some of the stuff written in the forums.
I agree that your plan of charging $5.00 for petrol and giving annual rebates would achieve the desired effect and whilst I would be happy to go along under a similar plan, I fear those opposed would consider it a bit of a dictatorship.... :lol: Also, there'd be unavoidable problems or questions concerning the government's handling of the rebates.

So whilst I could have kept a cooler head in the post, I still stand by every <other> point I made.

[snidia]

Look yall make good points on both sides of the issue, the earth takes care of herself, with oil spills in the oceans it makes bugs that consume the oil(just as a IE). The climate has always gone up in down, IE, the ice age that killed all of the dinosaurs. :( We as humans may have some impact on “global warming” it is minimal at most, electric car wont help unless we stop using coal and oil to make electricity and start using nuclear power, with would cause gas price to go down :D and extend the “limited oil supply”, but to do that we would need to get rid of the nature nazis and other hippies type people here in the USA. I know this don’t make sense to a lot of people, but I will end this with this saying “ It is fun to try to destroy earth to prove we can not” (stolen from the Kingdude Mike Church on Sirius sat. radio 142)

[sandy82]

[morrcomm]

Several times in this thread, some have wondered why intelligent people find it so easy to discount global warming. It's a good question, and one of the answers has to be rhetoric like the below:

"When the year began with a two-foot snowfall in Los Angeles, the cause was global warming."

Believe it or not, that's the second line of an op-ed from the Boston Globe (dated August 30, 2005). Hard to take seriously anything else he writes on the subject after that. The entire piece can be found at http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/08/30/katrinas_real_name/

Somehow, I completely missed two feet of snow falling on my home. But it's in the Boston Globe, so I guess it must be true... :wink:

[sandy82]

[morrcomm]

[sandy82]

[morrcomm]

[sandy82]

[morrcomm]

[makidas]

I think it would be foolish not to believe in global warming. With that said, I don't believe any of us will have to worry about it in our lifetimes. I had a dream about what will eventually happen and basically nature will fight back and win.

[makidas]

By the way, what the heck does NWC stand for?

[missypuss]

I have to say Im with Makidas on this one.I think Ive said it somewhere before ,but Mother Earths fighting back ,and shaking us of her back like the parasites we are.
Oh yes and what does NWC mean?

[sandy82]

[sandy82]

[missypuss]

There are plenty of double barreled parishes all over the west country Sandy..!!
Im sure you will enjoy your visit just as much as youl have fun trying to understand the funny west country dialect....
Cider is pronounced "Zider"
Boys are "Bays"
and Girls are "Maids"
Depending on wether you are a holidaymaker in Devon or Cornwall, you would be known as a Grockle or an Emmet.

[GAYTTO]

Question : Shall America sign the Kyoto protocol ?

Answer : Don't ever dream about it boy. Even Kerry wouldn't have done it.

Why : Most of the americans are arrogants and self-sufficients. Sorry to be rude about that. They prefer to drive in their ugly Hummers and protect their own economy and lobbies. And the rest of the world can go to hell.
Is New-Orleans in heaven now ? Well they thought it was in Africa.
I know that Katrina has probably nothing to do with the warming up of the planet. But the point is that America discovers now that the country is not protected by God. It's vulnerable too.

Let me tell you a secret : there is NO GOD ! Surprise ! ! !
Bush is playing with your bollocks ! But he's playing with mine too, and I cannot accept that (because I don't think W is sexy, otherwise...!). :roll:

[missypuss]

Hmmn.... Slightly controversial and definately baiting....
Good luck with the fallout ..... :twisted:

[sandy82]

[GAYTTO]

Sandy82, your posts are always amazing. Sincerely, it's a pleasure to read your comments.

I didn't want to be rude or controversial, I was a bit (!) upset yesterday in my last post. Thinking that we're all going to crash, and there is no pilot in the plane. Maybe that Kyoto is probably not the best answer to the global warning, but damn, something has to be done. But nobody cares.

The americans readers here are, I hope !, enough open MINDed to see clearly that I meant nothing personal against them (I really not sure about the construction of this sentence).

A few months after the 9/11, I met a guy from Boston who was visiting some relatives here in Brussels. I asked him :
"Do you like your President ?"
No answer.
I asked him again : "Do you like your President ?"
His answer was : "No, I don't like him, but that's the President"

Really I don't understand that point of view.
What's the point to be blind and to shut up when the f... President is leading the country and the rest of the world to the chaos.

Is that a new way of live : "The american way of disaster" ?

I don't have personaly nothing against americans and I'm going to come back in th States in 2006. I don't like the US GOV, that's different.
But your would be astonished to see how "the rest of the world" is considering your country.

I agree with Sandy82. USA is not totally responsible. The emergent countries in Asia will need more and more natural ressources in the following decades. And nothing will stop them. I wonder how it will end.

Vive le Roi, Vive la République !

[morrcomm]

[sandy82]

[sandy82]

[makidas]

Wow!;)

[morrcomm]