| yes | 71% | 71% - 337 | ||||
| no | 28% | 28% - 135 | ||||
| Total: 472 | ||||||
QFTKing_County_Downy wrote:
Yes, everyone plant as much marijuana as possible. Our only hope is to plant some dope.Freke1 wrote:
Interesting - anyone know of a solution?
QFEKing_County_Downy wrote:
Yes, everyone plant as much marijuana as possible. Our only hope is to plant some dope.Freke1 wrote:
Interesting - anyone know of a solution?
Last edited by ATG (2007-01-02 17:52:54)
hehe who would challenge the models...people with common sense. Models are what mirrors of reality or fabrications of it?Kmarion wrote:
Computer models have generated those projections. None of which have ever been challenged. I think when NOAA starts telling us we have a serious problem it is time to listen. The flow of ice from glaciers in Greenland has more than doubled over the past decade.ReDevilJR wrote:
All i'm trying to say, is how can it be in proportion to what he said, the part of the movie you posted first, he shows you the projected Co2 level, but he makes it up to you to figure out what the temperature is.cospengle wrote:
As I said before, I haven't seen Al Gore's film, but why is there no way the temperature cannot increase to ANY level?
You have a better method? Enlighten me.Fen321 wrote:
hehe who would challenge the models...people with common sense. Models are what mirrors of reality or fabrications of it?Kmarion wrote:
Computer models have generated those projections. None of which have ever been challenged. I think when NOAA starts telling us we have a serious problem it is time to listen. The flow of ice from glaciers in Greenland has more than doubled over the past decade.ReDevilJR wrote:
All i'm trying to say, is how can it be in proportion to what he said, the part of the movie you posted first, he shows you the projected Co2 level, but he makes it up to you to figure out what the temperature is.
Reliance on models once again in a world where you can't even predict the weather 2 weeks in advance is just some serious bull to swallow.
I haven't seen the movie, dunno if they showed it here and I didn't find it on the net when I was looking for it some time ago. But I somehow doubt that they would put something like that in. Now, my knowledge on the subject is not that good, but I think it's more like this:ReDevilJR wrote:
That's what's stated in Al Gore's movie, that Co2 thickens the ozone, making it more difficult for Co2 to escape.
Last edited by Sorcerer0513 (2007-01-02 18:59:02)
ATG wrote:
http://i18.tinypic.com/30u33ap.jpg
This is a map of Greenland.
Does it look green to you?
It looked green to the Vikings when they settled it and built farms, http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland/ but then the ice advanced and they mostly left.
In fact, geologist have solid evidence that Greenland has been at vareious times covered in ice and not, and back and forth.
But seriously, Al Gore, what color is Greenland and why?
The ozone and global warming are not the same issue. The ozone is healing, an issue we acknowledge and the whole world banded together and took steps to help, such as banning cfc's.Sorcerer0513 wrote:
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that causes that the warming of the earth. I think wiki can explain it better than I. It has nothing to do with ozone layer I believe. What ozone layer does is protect us from the harmful solar radiation. It was thinning due to CFCs and other harmufl gasses and it was letting more UV radiation in, but that seems to be improving since CFCs were banned.
I'm nearly 100% positive he said that, i'll have my teacher replay it...Sorcerer0513 wrote:
I haven't seen the movie, dunno if they showed it here and I didn't find it on the net when I was looking for it some time ago. But I somehow doubt that they would put something like that in. Now, my knowledge on the subject is not that good, but I think it's more like this:ReDevilJR wrote:
That's what's stated in Al Gore's movie, that Co2 thickens the ozone, making it more difficult for Co2 to escape.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that causes that the warming of the earth. I think wiki can explain it better than I. It has nothing to do with ozone layer I believe. What ozone layer does is protect us from the harmful solar radiation. It was thinning due to CFCs and other harmufl gasses and it was letting more UV radiation in, but that seems to be improving since CFCs were banned.
Would you like some more real data?Fen321 wrote:
Better method would involve collecting real data then having MODELS verify not produce the data.
But seriously....the wind is out of the sails the second when stops....ask him/herself when was the last time the weatherman told anyone it will rain tomorrow with 100% confidence. No to that equates to no to being able to predict weather phenomena in 100 years....25 years....1 year in advance.
Models leave out the sociological changes and predict a constant state of affairs in terms of technology in use. Will you still be driving a car 25 years from now? Who knows ? But the catch is you can't predict that so why can you now derive a model of the system 25 years later when you can't even count into the equation what technologies we will be using.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 18:09:57)
Last edited by Fen321 (2007-01-02 18:14:36)
300 billions metric tons of CO2 is being created by us. I don't see that as natural. Quite simply we are stressing this planet and convincing ourselves that there is no way that we can affect it. It's just easier to accept than to make changes. Seriously, just pick your reliable Science source and investigate it. I was saying exactly what you are saying now. I can probably go back and find some old post I made resembling yours. But I took a break from defending and did some research.Fen321 wrote:
Bro you are right the earth is warming, but the catch is its a very NATURAL phenomenon/process. Eventually the earth will shift its axis and reverse when we have winter in the Northern Hemisphere things are constant they only appear that way cause well Humans have a hard time accepting change, and our life spans last only a fraction of the time that it takes for geological process to take place.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 18:21:55)
So does that mean you tap out and say we can't do anything about it? Every major government has acknowledged the impact humans have had on the atmosphere and are taking steps to address it.ReDevilJR wrote:
I know i said this at the beginning, but no one has really argued what i first posted. As far as similar phenomenons are occurring on Mars as they are on Earth. Mars contains no life, and the caps are melting. So, why is it difficult to believe it's happening here for the same reason?
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 18:30:12)
EVieira wrote:
What does all that mean? I'll sum it up:US Government [b wrote:
E[/b]nviromental Protection Agency]What's Known
Scientists know with virtual certainty that:
* Human activities are changing the composition of Earth's atmosphere. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere since pre-industrial times are well-documented and understood.
* The atmospheric buildup of CO2 and other greenhouse gases is largely the result of human activities such as the burning of fossil fuels.
* A warming trend of about 0.7 to 1.5°F occurred during the 20th century. Warming occurred in both the Northern and Southern Hemispheres, and over the oceans (NRC, 2001).
* The major greenhouse gases emitted by human activities remain in the atmosphere for periods ranging from decades to centuries. It is therefore virtually certain that atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases will continue to rise over the next few decades.
* Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations tend to warm the planet.
Top of page
What's Likely?
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has stated "There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities" (IPCC, 2001). In short, a number of scientific analyses indicate, but cannot prove, that rising levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are contributing to climate change (as theory predicts). In the coming decades, scientists anticipate that as atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases continue to rise, average global temperatures and sea levels will continue to rise as a result and precipitation patterns will change.
Top of page
What's Not Certain?
Important scientific questions remain about how much warming will occur, how fast it will occur, and how the warming will affect the rest of the climate system including precipitation patterns and storms. Answering these questions will require advances in scientific knowledge in a number of areas:
* Improving understanding of natural climatic variations, changes in the sun's energy, land-use changes, the warming or cooling effects of pollutant aerosols, and the impacts of changing humidity and cloud cover.
* Determining the relative contribution to climate change of human activities and natural causes.
* Projecting future greenhouse emissions and how the climate system will respond within a narrow range.
* Improving understanding of the potential for rapid or abrupt climate change3.
Addressing these and other areas of scientific uncertainty is a major priority of the U.S. Climate Change Science Program (CCSP)4. The CCSP is developing twenty-one Synthesis and Assessment products to advance scientific understanding of these uncertainty areas by the end of 2008. More information5.
Throughout the science section of this Web site, use of "virtual certainty" (or virtually certain) conveys a greater than 99% chance that a result is true. Other terms used to communicate confidence include "very likely" (90-99% chance the result is true) and "likely" (66-90% chance the result is true). These judgmental estimates originate from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2001).
That greenhouse gases exist and that they help keep the earth nice and cozy is a FACT. That CO2 is one of those gases is a FACT, water vapor and methane are also greenhouse gases. if you want other sources than the EPA, there's plenty on net and libraries.
We humans are burning billions of barrels of oil every day, that is a FACT. These billions of barrels produce millions of tons of CO2 (and also carbon monoxide, a poisonous side effect of inefficient oil burning), that is also a FACT.
That this CO2 we humans a producing contribute to to global warning SEEMS PRETTY GODDAMN PLAUSIBLE, considering the rate we are burning oil and the first fact I stated.
Scientists COULD BE WRONG, but at the moment NOONE knows for sure. We will only know for sure 50 or a 100 years from now when it it will be TOO DAMN LATE to do much.
So we can sit on our asses and keep buying hummers, or we can make and effort to pollute less. The WORST thing that could happen if we became a little less polluting is that we would have a cleaner world. But some powerful people think otherwise...
Last edited by EVieira (2007-01-02 18:33:53)
I know, but it goes back to what ReDevilJR said about the movie. I find it very unlikely that he would say in the documentary:Kmarion wrote:
The ozone and global warming are not the same issue. The ozone is healing, an issue we acknowledge and the whole world banded together and took steps to help, such as banning cfc's.Sorcerer0513 wrote:
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that causes that the warming of the earth. I think wiki can explain it better than I. It has nothing to do with ozone layer I believe. What ozone layer does is protect us from the harmful solar radiation. It was thinning due to CFCs and other harmufl gasses and it was letting more UV radiation in, but that seems to be improving since CFCs were banned.
It seems more probable to me that what is said in the move is along the lines of CO2 making it more difficult for the heat to escape earth, although I would not word it that way, it's too simplistic. That is the main reason for what I wrote. It's like you said, they're two different issues and ozone layer has nothing to do with global warming.ReDevilJR wrote:
That's what's stated in Al Gore's movie, that Co2 thickens the ozone, making it more difficult for Co2 to escape.
He did mention it as encouragement. He was not trying to instill hopelessness.Sorcerer0513 wrote:
I know, but it goes back to what ReDevilJR said about the movie. I find it very unlikely that he would say in the documentary:
The point is, it's a natural cycle.Kmarion wrote:
http://i16.tinypic.com/2lj6v0i.jpgATG wrote:
http://i18.tinypic.com/30u33ap.jpg
This is a map of Greenland.
Does it look green to you?
It looked green to the Vikings when they settled it and built farms, http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/greenland/ but then the ice advanced and they mostly left.
In fact, geologist have solid evidence that Greenland has been at vareious times covered in ice and not, and back and forth.
But seriously, Al Gore, what color is Greenland and why?The ozone and global warming are not the same issue. The ozone is healing, an issue we acknowledge and the whole world banded together and took steps to help, such as banning cfc's.Sorcerer0513 wrote:
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, that causes that the warming of the earth. I think wiki can explain it better than I. It has nothing to do with ozone layer I believe. What ozone layer does is protect us from the harmful solar radiation. It was thinning due to CFCs and other harmufl gasses and it was letting more UV radiation in, but that seems to be improving since CFCs were banned.
...no, its because gore's movie was more about him and how he lost the election than about global warming.RedTwizzler wrote:
Know why? It's an editorial article.cospengle wrote:
BTW I don't see what Al Gore's childhood has to do with Global Warming, but the Author of the article seemed to think they were inextricably linked somehow.
Either way, the sun will eventually explode, as all stars do. I figure that will occur before the melting and subsequent re-freezing of the polar ice caps.
I thought I've been saying, we don't cause this "warming".Kmarion wrote:
So does that mean you tap out and say we can't do anything about it? Every major government has acknowledged the impact humans have had on the atmosphere and are taking steps to address it.ReDevilJR wrote:
I know i said this at the beginning, but no one has really argued what i first posted. As far as similar phenomenons are occurring on Mars as they are on Earth. Mars contains no life, and the caps are melting. So, why is it difficult to believe it's happening here for the same reason?
Here is the US policy.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/index.html
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.Smoke_Deez wrote:
WOW, so I guess we should just pollute as much as possible then so we can definitely tell that we caused it, dump your trash in the street, drive high emission vehicles, lets burn our trash in our fire places, fuck the world. We are so small we can't possibly effect this huge world we live in, like how over fishing is not depleting sea life and disrupting the natural food chain of that little body of water. I also think we should chop down all the rain forest, who needs it anyway, if CO2 is not a danger we certainly don't need that fucking thing. Get real, you think all the shit we put in the air isn't bad, show me a study that says it is. I hope every nay sayer lives on the coast, go get your fucking stilts boys and girls.
Then why would we have a comprehensive policy and list of actions to curve our impact?ReDevilJR wrote:
I thought I've been saying, we don't cause this "warming".Kmarion wrote:
So does that mean you tap out and say we can't do anything about it? Every major government has acknowledged the impact humans have had on the atmosphere and are taking steps to address it.ReDevilJR wrote:
I know i said this at the beginning, but no one has really argued what i first posted. As far as similar phenomenons are occurring on Mars as they are on Earth. Mars contains no life, and the caps are melting. So, why is it difficult to believe it's happening here for the same reason?
Here is the US policy.
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/policy/index.html
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 18:53:29)
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.
Last edited by cospengle (2007-01-02 18:58:00)
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.
Last edited by Kmarion (2007-01-02 19:05:51)
