Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Global warming my ass!
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 16:40:20 -0600, "Ryan P."
wrote: wrote: Who determines what the "perfect" global climate is? 10,000 years ago, before cities and electricity, we were in an ice age. Was that the perfect natural climate? 60,000,000 years ago most of the land mass was tropical or sub-tropical in temperature. Was that perfect?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - The above shows exactly what some of us are concerned about. You can't even raise any question about global warming without being attacked as some kind of neanderthal and called an ahole. The same thing is happening in academic circles. Many scientists have a choice to make. Raise legitimate questions about global warming and be ridiculed, outcast, have your funding cut off, denied tenure, or stay silent so others can claim there is no disagreement. . . And yet liberals say that conservatives are the ones that don't allow dissenting opintions.... . . To your issue about Mars also seeing a rise in temp, I would add this. According to current evidence, there have been 4 major cycles of global warming and cooling going back about 700K years. This is the common graph used to link CO2 with global warming. It's used by Al Gore in his movie. It shows CO2 and the earth's temp rising and falling together. However, it also shows that in every cycle, the temp starts to rise a few hunderd to 1500 years BEFORE CO2 starts to rise. I've yet to hear anyone explain that. Typical response I've seen was from an alleged expert at a major university, who stated that this only shows CO2 isn't responsible for the early part of the rise. Huh? I would submit that if that answer were given to a question in high school science, it wouldn't pass. I don't remember for sure, but isn't that one of the "factual errors" that the British judge cited when he ordered that Al Gore's movie can be played in British classrooms, but it must be accompanied by a list of things that it gets blatently wrong? On the other hand, I've listened to an Ocean Sciences professor at MIT who believes cycles in the output of the Sun is responsible for increased warming of the Earth. The oceans are a major reservoir of CO2 and as they get heated, just like a warming open bottle of soda, they release CO2. And because the oceans are so deep, it takes hundreds of years after the warming starts for the CO2 to increase. Sounds pretty reasonable and it explains the graph, but like others, this guy is dismissed as an ahole heretic by the true believers. . . In 20 years when we go into another cooling trend, the wackos will forget all about global warming and become worried about all the wildlife that is displaced as they have to migrate south. Before we get into a big debate (which has been done many times by folks far more knowledgeable on these issues than us) I need to know where we are starting from. Do you believe in evolution? Lots of folks don't, so global warming can't be a problem because the world is just the way God wanted it and isn't old enough to have climate shifts. I see a leading Republican contender doesn't believe in evolution. That should scare the shit out of you. "If you want to believe that you and your family came from apes, that's fine. I'll accept that," he said Friday. "I just don't happen to think that I did." Assuming we agree that evolution happens, are you denying that the earth is getting warmer? Apparently some reputable scientists believe we don't have enough information and that the evidence that we do have is being interpreted incorrectly. If we agree that the earth is getting warmer, is man at least partly responsible? Some scientists seem to thing that humanity is too inconsequential to be causing climate shifts. I look at all the stuff we're dumping into the air, sea, and ground, and think that not only are we altering the weather, we're causing lots of other damage - species extinction, new types of organisms, and such. Many scientists who disagree that man is responsible for all of global warming agree that we're having some impact. Do you believe that the global warming debate is a conspiracy to funnel research funds into the pockets of evil scientists? If so, you might also consider that well funded corporate interests might be paying the bill for some of the scientists that oppose the global warming idea. Finally, do you think that global warming, if it is even occuring, might be a good thing? I sort of lean that way a bit. I think that it's too cold where I live (NYC). I love it here, but surfing is limited by the fact that the ocean is now 43F. That doesn't stop the really dedicated surfers I might point out. My main beach (http://www.surfline.com/reports/report.cfm?id=4270) often has people surfing in the winter. That's why God invented wet suits after all. I admit to enjoying asking right-wingers if they think the opposition is a conspiracy. I'm a firm believer in conspiracies myself. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Global Warming and what you can do to against it | United Kingdom | |||
18" of Snow on Long Island - yes this too is global warming | Ponds | |||
Global Warming "The debate on whether climate change is occurring has ended." | alt.forestry | |||
god bless global warming | Ponds | |||
(LONG) Warning on global warming | alt.forestry |