Were you aware that both volcanos and the ocean release chlorine into the atmosphere which can help to deplete the ozone. And at the same time, with an erupting volcano there is spewed into the atmosphere large amounts of green house gases that contribute to global warming? Scientists can supposedly only go back 650k years and say the earth has been constantly getting warmer due to humans. If I am not mistaken they also say that when dinosaurs were alive even longer ago that there were numerous volcanic eruptions and geysers and tarpits, all of which more than likely contribute to green house gases much in the same way as volcanoes do. But lets not look into anything other than the fact that it must be humans causing all the problems with global warming, after all, when the humans lived in caves there were never any weather issues.
Poll
is global warming a real threat
| yes | 71% | 71% - 337 | ||||
| no | 28% | 28% - 135 | ||||
| Total: 472 | ||||||
^^Sorcerer0513 do you want it this time or would you like me?
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Oh yeah, and since I am about to be flamed. Did you also know that with the reduction of CFC's the ozone has slowly increased. But at the same time with increased use of HCFC's or HFC's that are used in the CFC's place, there has also been an increase in global warming. Take your pick, because apparently unless we all go back to living in caves and hunting with rocks, we will destroy the earth.
Lol, i don't smoke pot, i'm not chinese, and i'm not in prison...EVieira wrote:
Well JR, you seem pretty certain we aren't responsible for the warming. Cientists can't agree on that, but I guess they should be listening to you. The fact is, we MIGHT be causing global warming. We'll only be certain when its too late. But if you want to follow China's lead, then start by shooting people in the head for smoking pot. At least you'll wear down your prison system.ReDevilJR wrote:
Well, obviously you wouldn't want to live like that, it's disgusting. I was suggesting that "warming of Earth" is out of our hands, and that it's nature. Obviously you'd want to recycle to preserver resources. Show me China's policy to this acknowledgment to human impact. I doubt you'll find it since they don't agree, at least to my knowledge, because their government denies it also.
So are you saying that there has been a massive increase in the number of volcanic eruptions in the past 50 years?Canin wrote:
Were you aware that both volcanos and the ocean release chlorine into the atmosphere which can help to deplete the ozone. And at the same time, with an erupting volcano there is spewed into the atmosphere large amounts of green house gases that contribute to global warming? Scientists can supposedly only go back 650k years and say the earth has been constantly getting warmer due to humans. If I am not mistaken they also say that when dinosaurs were alive even longer ago that there were numerous volcanic eruptions and geysers and tarpits, all of which more than likely contribute to green house gases much in the same way as volcanoes do. But lets not look into anything other than the fact that it must be humans causing all the problems with global warming, after all, when the humans lived in caves there were never any weather issues.
Last edited by cospengle (2007-01-02 19:23:45)
Im saying its possible, but just like everything else, it is hard to know for sure. As technology and communications have advanced, the ability to track eruptions has increased, so on paper it would look like they have. At the same time, who is to say they havent?
Scientists are getting paid millions to find "evidence" to support their claims, they don't tell you the whole story.Vilham wrote:
Why gives a shit what Al Gore says? He isnt a scientist, CO2 does cause it as hundreds of scientists have warned repeatedly.
Goodnight, be back tomorrow.
Last edited by ReDevilJR (2007-01-02 19:28:55)
lol, how many millionaire scientists do you know or even heard of?ReDevilJR wrote:
Scientists are getting paid millions to find "evidence" to support their claims, they don't tell you the whole story.Vilham wrote:
Why gives a shit what Al Gore says? He isnt a scientist, CO2 does cause it as hundreds of scientists have warned repeatedly.
One more question and I will be quiet. Has anyone actually tracked the CO2 buildup the remains airborne for 100 years, and counted it down till the day it evaporated? Do they tag each individual molecule so they know for certain that it is the same one that has been up there all this time? Seriously, they are guesstimating it just as much as they are when they say exactly how much CO2 is up there, they don't know for sure, IMO.
I can think of a few Millionaires who have an interest in making sure there is a policy change.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
lol, how many millionaire scientists do you know or even heard of?ReDevilJR wrote:
Scientists are getting paid millions to find "evidence" to support their claims, they don't tell you the whole story.Vilham wrote:
Why gives a shit what Al Gore says? He isnt a scientist, CO2 does cause it as hundreds of scientists have warned repeatedly.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
US can't sell it's cars overseas because the foreign nations' road systems are more narrow, because they are older, and don't want to update them. It's doubtful they actually care about "Global Warming."Kmarion wrote:
In all honesty I can't really blame the skeptics. There has been a concentrated effort to raise doubt by those who stand to lose much with a policy change. This is why there are only two countries who have not adopted Kyoto Protocol. (And the US wonders why they can't sell their cars overseas)cospengle wrote:
Can anyone tell me what's so hard to understand about this?
For the past 650,000 years the global average temperature has correlated (not linearly) with the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
We (humans) are causing an increase in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
The concentration of CO2 is now much higher than it has ever been in the last 650,000 years.
Therefore the earth is getting hotter than it ever has in the last 650,000 years, and this is caused by us.
http://i18.tinypic.com/2mhfukh.png
A lot of people wont be millionaires if we did have a policy change in the country. all the VROOM VROOM industries for one.Kmarion wrote:
I can think of a few Millionaires who have an interest in making sure there is a policy change.GunSlinger OIF II wrote:
lol, how many millionaire scientists do you know or even heard of?ReDevilJR wrote:
Scientists are getting paid millions to find "evidence" to support their claims, they don't tell you the whole story.
Actually most other nations including China have stricter requirements on MPG. California tried to pass an Act that required higher standards and the state was sued into a stalemate. US cars have to be moded to fit these standards and it's not economically feasible in general.ReDevilJR wrote:
US can't sell it's cars overseas because the foreign nations' road systems are more narrow, because they are older, and don't want to update them. It's doubtful they actually care about "Global Warming."Kmarion wrote:
In all honesty I can't really blame the skeptics. There has been a concentrated effort to raise doubt by those who stand to lose much with a policy change. This is why there are only two countries who have not adopted Kyoto Protocol. (And the US wonders why they can't sell their cars overseas)cospengle wrote:
Can anyone tell me what's so hard to understand about this?
For the past 650,000 years the global average temperature has correlated (not linearly) with the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
We (humans) are causing an increase in the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere.
The concentration of CO2 is now much higher than it has ever been in the last 650,000 years.
Therefore the earth is getting hotter than it ever has in the last 650,000 years, and this is caused by us.
http://i18.tinypic.com/2mhfukh.png
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 19:37:19)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
You know what? Who gives that the earth is heating up? Even if the earth continues to heat like that it will be centuries before something earth shattering happens, and I'll be dead then. Plus, who really knows how the earth's heat cycles work? Nobody. You could all be wrong. The one thing it does is give us something to fear, and make us donate millions to groups like Greenpeace and the Sierra Club who have astronomically rich leaders. Is there a correlation? I think I'll become one of those leaders. I'll be rich!
This just reminded me of something. Did it occur to anyone that it's not only our pollution that matters here. Did anyone of you think about the shrinking rainforest? Lungs of the earth anyone?Kmarion wrote:
The Earth has a natural CO2 cycle that moves massive amounts of CO2 into and out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation release and absorb over 200 billion metric tons of carbon into and out of the atmosphere each year. When the cycle is balanced, atmospheric levels of CO2 remain relatively stable. Human activities are now adding about 7 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere every year,which is only about 3–4% of the amount exchanged naturally. But that’s enough to knock the system out of balance, surpassing nature’s ability to take our CO2 emissions out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation are absorbing about half of our emissions; the other half remains airborne for 100 years or longer. This is what is causing the rapid buildup of CO2, a buildup that dwarfs natural fluctuations.
(Per National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration)
So not only are we increasing the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere, we are also reducing the planets ability to absorb it at the same time. I won't even go into what pollution does to plankton. And if I am not mistaken, plankton absorbs even more CO2 than the rainforest.
Opinions?
They can measure with extreme accuracy now for at least the last 40k years. I'll have to find a better source to explain how the science is done. It involves ice samples.Canin wrote:
One more question and I will be quiet. Has anyone actually tracked the CO2 buildup the remains airborne for 100 years, and counted it down till the day it evaporated? Do they tag each individual molecule so they know for certain that it is the same one that has been up there all this time? Seriously, they are guesstimating it just as much as they are when they say exactly how much CO2 is up there, they don't know for sure, IMO.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 19:43:12)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
go kmarion go!
Plankton absorbs more CO2 than the forests, melting ice due to global warming means more water in the ocean which means more plankton, which means less CO2, which in turn means refreezing of the ice, thus ending global warming.
And Kmarion, the scientist can say they are as accurate as they want. But without first hand knowledge, all they are doing is speculating. There is no crystal ball that they can look into to see the past or future and know with any certainty that any one event or any one factor causes or caused anything.
And Kmarion, the scientist can say they are as accurate as they want. But without first hand knowledge, all they are doing is speculating. There is no crystal ball that they can look into to see the past or future and know with any certainty that any one event or any one factor causes or caused anything.
actually what they do is stick a tube down a few feet of ice at the north pole and extract the ice. its old and just like counting the rings on a tree once you saw it in half to see the age, you could see the levels of CO2 over the years through the ice samples. its actually like 100% accurate. but hey, science cant prove shit right? everything revolves around earth no?Canin wrote:
Plankton absorbs more CO2 than the forests, melting ice due to global warming means more water in the ocean which means more plankton, which means less CO2, which in turn means refreezing of the ice, thus ending global warming.
And Kmarion, the scientist can say they are as accurate as they want. But without first hand knowledge, all they are doing is speculating. There is no crystal ball that they can look into to see the past or future and know with any certainty that any one event or any one factor causes or caused anything.
Ice has frozen hundreds of thousands of years of atmospheric conditions in time. It has suspended the exact cycle of what has been happening for many many years. That is our crystal ball.Canin wrote:
Plankton absorbs more CO2 than the forests, melting ice due to global warming means more water in the ocean which means more plankton, which means less CO2, which in turn means refreezing of the ice, thus ending global warming.
And Kmarion, the scientist can say they are as accurate as they want. But without first hand knowledge, all they are doing is speculating. There is no crystal ball that they can look into to see the past or future and know with any certainty that any one event or any one factor causes or caused anything.
Quick turn on FOXNEWs! They are talking about GW and polar bears..lol
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 19:50:20)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
So they can pull a core of ice from 30 to 300 ft deep out of the middle of the glacier.... I never said they couldn't look at it and tell conditions. I said they have no idea what may have caused those conditions. Prove me wrong.
wow dude, are you serious? here you might find this website interestingCanin wrote:
So they can pull a core of ice from 30 to 300 ft deep out of the middle of the glacier.... I never said they couldn't look at it and tell conditions. I said they have no idea what may have caused those conditions. Prove me wrong.
http://www.alaska.net/~clund/e_djublons … ociety.htm
So no proof then, just some lame attempt at making fun of me. Nice.
What they have established is the norm. A trend that no longer exist. What they can see is that where we are now we have never been before. Never has the co2 levels been at this level. The cycle has shown us the relationship between the two. We know exactly how much we contribute in amounts of CO2. It is a simple matter of putting two and two together.Canin wrote:
So they can pull a core of ice from 30 to 300 ft deep out of the middle of the glacier.... I never said they couldn't look at it and tell conditions. I said they have no idea what may have caused those conditions. Prove me wrong.
It really funny because it is so precise. They can look closely enough at the ice and see changes and say, "See there, thats when congress passed the clean air act".
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 19:57:17)
Xbone Stormsurgezz
as long as I laughedCanin wrote:
So no proof then, just some lame attempt at making fun of me. Nice.