![]() |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Towards Appy & Warhawk You see, it's not the difference of opinion that's the offense, it's the reasoning used to back it up and it's relation to others. If I just believe in God, then it doesn't really have any real effect on those on this board, but if I believe just believe that Global Warming is a natural, unstoppable, event, I stand as one more in the polls that polliticians use to "focus" (give a few million - billion dollar grants here and there and a speech maybe) or "ignore" (if it doesn't matter to the campaign, why bother, they're better things to waste time on, like kissing baby's on the forhead or making speeches about how much worse other canidates are). And while everyone is entitled to their opinion, debates can't really go on when sides don't care, and for that reason I don't debate God's existence, atleast not seriously anymore, as I won't listen to anything that says otherwise, I debate supposed contradictions in the Bible and other issues, where I'm probaly going to be stubborn and not change, but I'll atleast pay a little heed to people's posts, though I sometimes simply get tired or pissed and skip through anyway. As far as we can see, the global temperature is rising or atleast shifting, and that the ice caps are melting. Lets forget about the claims and arguments of the past for a bit and just think about the past couple of years, as we have no real detailed records prior to the 20th century except for freak weather incidents. We've seen CO2 levels jump and temperatures jump, does this mean that the one causes the other, by itself no. However we do know that CO2 traps heat more than oxygen, for example, if you are in a burning building, the CO2 will cause the heat to escelate, even if it may eventually put out the flames causing the fire in the first place, in this you'll start to feel heat exhaustion alot more easily from just being near the area, not even in the smoke, and once in the smoke it feels like being in a fire. Now, to see what it's like in oxygen sit next to a bonfire or camp fire, you'll feel not nearly as tired from heat exhaustion if at all. This is simply an easily imagined test, lab tests have been preformed and show that CO2 traps heat. Now if you can accept that CO2 traps heat, what effect do you think 14 gigatons of CO2 have on the Earth, versus the normal 2 gigatons released by nature. Furthermore, this doesn't dissapate by the time it's reached another 14/16 gigatons, meaning that the CO2 level is building up, or rising. Now towards global temperatures, the global temperatures have been on the rise aswell, almost at exponetial rates. It doesn't matter whether or not this is the hottest time in all history, it simply matters that the world is getting warmer now. It's a matter of putting the CO2 and the rising temperatures together given what we know about both. |
Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists The proverbial cat is out of the bag. I guess thugs exist even in the so-called enlighten scientific realm. I came across this article and it is a shame that scientists who disagree are ignored, removed or threatened. Is it any wonder why so much controversy surrounds this global situation and why many are reluctant, when we can’t even trust the “experts” to be non-basis and provide evidence even if it does not support a cause. Whatever happened to: “just the facts ma’am…” Spoiler: |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists The proverbial cat is out of the bag. I guess thugs exist even in the so-called enlighten scientific realm. It’s a shame that scientists who disagree with methodologies applied to this problem are ignored, removed from lists, etc. or threatened in some way. Is it any wonder why so much controversy surrounds this global situation and why many are reluctant, when we can’t even trust the “experts” to be non-basis and provide evidence even if it does not support a cause. Whatever happened to: “just the facts ma’am…” (note reposted here – started a second thread on accident:uhh: ) |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
I know that global warming, or rather climate change exists. I know that CO2 levels have increased at relatively the same rate recently (but not always *cough1940scough*). My argument is that this is not the proof that links human economic activity to change in the climate. Like I have said numerous times, this may prove a correlation between the two, but does not prove that one causes the other. In fact as I have discussed before on these forums, their is evidence that CO2 levels increase because of warming and not the other way around. It's called the carbon cycle. I have yet to have seen any evidence that is conclusive that links CO2 levels with increased temperature. None. I'd love to see some though. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
What the claims that the sun is to blame for the changes in climate bring to light is that there is just as much proof as attributing it to CO2. When there is more than one correlation involved, it doesn't seem right to just completely lay blame on just one of them. Quote:
It makes more sense to me that this would be the leading cause than CO2, since Mars is going through some very similar changes. But don't mistake me, I don't claim to have all the answers, as I am not a scientist. Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists I get you WarHawk – Yes we need to do something about pollution, yes the planet upon itself will evolve, change, etc. without our intrusion (i.e. Mt. Saint Helen did more to pollute the planet in 1980 then we have since its eruption), and yes we should have facts that are nonbiased in an effort to fix or correct a problem not to bend or support specific organizations, theologies or personal philosophies…some people are very loyal to an idea or “party”. Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists It actually has been colder than usual around here. My point was just that I can acknowledge that temperatures have been higher in some places, and that I am not some unflinching partisan George Bush neoconservative. I am actually quite moderate on this issue. I want the environment to prosper, I just think we can accomplish this in another way. A way that does not involve carbon taxes, or carbon trading (ie sending money to China). Apparently anyone who does not agree with these particular methods of "protecting" the environment is a neoconservative. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Well one solution some political organizations/activists have managed to do over the past twenty years to clean up the US is sending our manufacturing plants elsewhere (i.e. China, Mexico, India) guess that is called genius as it has reduced our production of greenhouse gasses…gotta love these guys, pass it on to someone else and call the pollution reduction a success – we screwed our economy and compound the pollution problem by handing off to often non-regulatory companies within countries who produce more waste than ever before.:lol: |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Looking at it in hindsight, I have to say, the world as a whole are a complete bunch of idiots. Quote:
Carbon trading is bullshit. Thats just like asking somebody to stop punching some kid at school, so somebody else can do it instead. And what's more, you set a schedule for it too. And we in NZ have just had one of the coldest summers on record by the way. And I really think George Bush is an ***hole. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Volcanic eruption are a naturally occurring process and cannot be technically regarded as a polluting agent. The principal components of volcanic gases are water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), sulfur either as sulfur dioxide (SO2) (high-temperature volcanic gases) or hydrogen sulfide (H2S) (low-temperature volcanic gases), nitrogen, argon, helium, neon, methane, carbon monoxide and hydrogen. Other compounds detected in volcanic gases are oxygen (meteoric), HCl, HF, HBr, NOx, SF6, COS, and organic compounds. Exotic trace compounds include methyl mercury, halocarbons (including CFCs), and halogen oxide radicals. Lets put this into perspective once. The total estimated global releases of volcanic activity amounts too 3-4 x 10E12 mol/yr, and this is a conservative estimate that includes average sized eruptions. Even though volcanos emit a substantial amount of CO2, man-made (anthropogenic) CO2 emissions overwhelm the volcanic average median estimate by at least 150 times. Think about that once. An example of this would be in 2004 where the United States alone, produced 87.2 million tons of CO, making it the most abundant air pollutant by mass. Every day that goes by, we have a constant continuous volcano spilling into the air. Its called the human race. |
| All times are GMT -7. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.