|
Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists More proof the debate is not over on global warming: Quote:
What's going on here? Why are so many having their names tacked on to a document that they do not agree with, against their will? They call this a "consensus"? |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Sure do pick your article from the "republician section" don't you?, since it's been proven with the help of carbon gas that has been found trapped in Antarctic ice, that carbon levels have picked up hundreds of times over in the last one hundred years, then it did in the last 400,000? Yes, well I hope stupidity makes for sterile genetics. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Please. Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists I'm sorry, but have you ever taken a science class in you life? I would have expected the oil wealth of Alberta and the rest of Western Canda to have paid for such an education, or is that too socialist for you? Its a matter of fact (by way of science, if that isnt heresy by your standards) that the atmosphere surrounding this once-fine planet we call Earth can shield within the dangerous emissions known as "greenhouse gases" that can be generated by our many industries (wasn't that part of the evidence behind the recent UN findings about global warming?). I'm sorry to have to say it, but you're one of Harper's neoconservatives, thoroughly wrapped in anti-Kyoto, anti-environmentalist BS. I'm not some Liberal "nut", I dislike all Canadian parties almost equally and I'm pro-seal hunt (I despise those hippie bastards), but you're coming off as though you buy into every single shred of the most partisan BS availible to the Conservate Party of Canada. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Wow Warhawk...i mean...just...I'm stunned by your ignorance here. CO2 comes from all industry, all cars, and anything else that uses any sort of fossil fuel. And so science shows us that C02 levels have sky rocketed within the last century and a little more...funny how within that last century there was this thing called the INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. Truthfully, I'm not surprised is maybe there was some lying going on as far as who agreed with what...you need to actually think here and ask yourself: what does anyone have to lose from driving less, saving energy, and being overall conservative when it comes to the Earth and nature? Well, there's really no great sacrifice here...yeah the little stuff like "oh I dont want to ride the bus" and "well now it's gonna take alot longer to get here" or "well now we need to find a new source of renewable energy" but when you think about it all these things are minor. Yet - what do more conservative minded political figures and economic figures have to lose? Well if people stop driving cars, buying gasoline, and using less electricity and energy...all those electric companies, car dealerships, oil companies, etc will lose ALOT of money - funny how that works doesnt it? Yes - it's true that every so many years an Ice Age happens on Earth when the world will heat up and then cool down etc...but what's happening is that humans are speeding up that process...not causing it..it'll happen no matter what - we're just easing the process a little. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
[quote] Quote:
Quote:
Not to mention the other side is chalk full of vested interest themselves. Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Well this doesnt happen often. I gotta side with Mihail. Im sure in the near future you will be able to pretend global warming isnt happening while sitting wearing sunblock 140 in the Ottawa tropics. If the future maps are correct after the sea levels rise at least I will be close to the great inland sea's beach. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists It is not an issue of whether or not global warming exists or not, but what are its causes. I would have thought you of all people would have understood this since you seem like an intelligent person. Your resorting to blind hysteria does not bode well for my former assumption either. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Warhawk...I'm seriously thinking that you might not even know you're own point here. You keep asking everyone else what their point is and telling them that what they're saying is not what you're talking about. So what is your point!? An imbalance in CO2 levels causes temperatures to rise and plunge...it's a cycle of life and what the world does naturally is a kind of homestatis (to apply a biological term here) - meaning that the earth will change itself to make sure it stays stable...and this results in the warming and eventual fall in temperature over thousands of years. If you want proof open any science text book b/c to the non-ignorant this is all common knowlage. Quote:
Yet - if you want some hard facts just look at the amount of records set in the high temperature category all over the world...many have been broken by growing highs over the past few years...not mention the record setting Tsunami and Hurraine 2005 season...unless you live underground and away from the rest of the world you should see that the world is changing...and changing pretty fast. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists It's interesting that the people who are strongly opposed to the idea of climate-change use the same tactics as creationists to get their point across: they continue talking about the same weak spots (for example an outdated hockey-stick-study) all the time and think this is conclusive evidence that they are right even though they ignore all the other evidence. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists It's interesting that people who are strongly opposed to the idea of alternative views use the same tactics as evolutionists to get their point across: they continue talking about the same weak spots (for example, studies that link nothing) all the time and think this is conclusive evidence that they are right even though they ignore all other evidence. ok, now that I spewed my nonsense to match other nonsense, I'll continue. No, it has not been proven global warming has been caused, nor excelerated by any of man's actions. It has not been proven global warming was not caused, nor excelerated by man's actions. It can be proved that global warming has taken place, and is taking place now. I'm not sure if I'm with the man's fault crowd thats the in thing these days or not, just because they are the loudest shouters. I will say though, Taking the argument and setting it aside, I think I like trees and I know I'm no fan of 100+ F degree temperatures as the norm. I also think I don't like breathing in polution at all, or finding layers of "dirt" every morning on my cars that were so nicely desposited from local mills/factory's every morning. Taking all these things in to account, I fail to see the relevence of the argument entirely. So... what? If we do everything we can to lessen man's output of polutiuon and/or CO2, and it turns out not to be man's fault.. I guess that leaves us with a terrible side effect of.. a cleaner environment? The whole debate is academic, not practical by any means, except in the sense that maybe there are those still out there who do not care either way, and shifting blame to a global cause rather than a man cause, allows them to not have to alter their behavior in the slightest. In this case, that has nothing to do with the academic argument and more to do with being lazy and selfish. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
However, is the sun at high activity? Pretty sure I read it hit it's peak in 04, but who knows. Regardless what these scientists are forgetting is it takes quite a considerable amount of output from the sun to make a large difference here on Earth. We receive but a fraction of the power output of the sun, the incident angle has a much larger effect on how much energy we get than distance or output to/from the sun changing. The only good point you've made here is the fact that scientists that are against the claims are added as supporters. FURTHERMORE why the hell is an expert on malaria on the scientific committee to determine the causes of global warming? Do we actually care what his "opinion" is? |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
:rolleyes: Humans...no appreciation for sarcasm. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists As far as any argument involving the sun and it's part: The sun's increased activity is causing the warming? You dont say? Well you know why that is? It's b/c the ozone and the layer of atmosphere protecting the earth's surface from absorbing mass amounts of dangerous UV radiation is actually deteriorating with the massive amounts of CO2 we're producing and putting into the air... It's quite simple: CO2 is naturally produced with or without humans. The earth keeps a fine balance of this CO2 by putting such things as trees and other plants to work intaking CO2 and producing O2. The ocean is the biggest producer of CO2 (b/c more than 75% or something of the world's mass is covered with water). Yet - by increasing the output of CO2 into the air and at the same time deforesting the land we're getting rid of the means to turn that CO2 into O2. Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
The ozone isn't deteriating because of CO2. CFCs and ODS are the two main contributors to the thinning ozone in the troposphere. http://www.epa.gov/ozone/science/process.html Mass deforestation only tends to occur in places like Central America, South America and the Africas where the poor farmers need to clear the forest land to plant new crops. The world government is trying to curb this by issuing grants and other forms of relief to governments who do what they can to conserve the rain forests. The majority of the rest of the world practices the replanting of forests that have been cleared. I can't speak for all countries but here in the states we have a massive amount of land under protection of the federal government. Quote:
We have trouble predicting what next week's weather is going to be like much less next decade or next century. The planet goes through orbits where it gets closer and slightly farther away from the sun from time to time. This can cause massive climate changes and mass extinctions. There was a time in history when the entire planet was far more tropical than it is now. At one point Antarctica was a tropical paradise. When you look at what has happened and compare it to what is happening a person realizes that the more things change the more they stay the same. The world isn't going to end and the world government will do anything it can to keep the climate, ergo, the people in as good a shape as possible. They do this, because the second things change for the worse that's the second where corporations start to loose money. In the end money is what makes the world go round. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Hmmmm... looks like warhawk could use some help here. I would consider it an honor to be your comrade at arms in this battle. ;) First off, why be so insulting? Agree with them or not, all of his points are legitimate. -Correlation does not equal causation, -far greater warming has occured in the past that was natural, -and opposition to the theory is growing. Now Mr. Fancypants claims that an argument against the theory is only legitimate if it debunks the latest and newest global warming platforms. But that is incorrect. Its all about a track record. Let's take a look at their track record. -Originally, it wasn't even "global warming" at all, it was global cooling. This was debunked. -The Hockey stick has been debunked as misleading and slanted. -The claim that it has never been this warm in human history before has been debunked. -The claim that the icecap melting would be a disaster has also been debunked (1410 anyone?) Of course the global warming scientists have trotted out a new set of great ideas, but please don't be offended if we take them with a grain of salt. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Yes, and the ozone layer gap is also NOT man made.....:uhoh: Its alien made, or oh wait, it was here long long long before industrialization. ... |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Regardless. Now, I don't think GW is the devastating mass-extinction catalyst that the doom sayers are proposing this time - that ain't a debate starter, by the way, it's an expression of opinion (and no, if qualified scientists haven't managed to change it, you don't stand a great chance either). And as global warming is almost like a religion these days, with its evangelical supporters almost fervent in their dedication to the cause, it doesn't particularly surprise me that they would fudge some signatures to get their point across either. Throw some corrupt politicians into the mix, and you've got yourself a sure-fire winner on that one. But it's fairly irrelevant anyway - neither side is likely to change their opinions, this far into the game. But none of this really matters, as it doesn't change another rather serious problem along the same vein that we all face in the near future. All of the fuels we are actually burning to make nasty CO2 in the first place are running out rather quickly. Pretty soon it won't be economically viable to continue using them, even if there is any left. Heck, ask any delivery firm and they'll tell you that it's already too expensive to be economically viable. When that happens, the economy as we know it will come to a halt. No more goods will be moved, no more supermarkets will be stocked, no more plastic products will be made, many areas of the planet will go without power... you better sell your stocks and shares before that happens. Not that you'll be able to do much with the money by that point, short of burn it. We're facing an economic and sociological crisis that requires a switch to renewable fuels quickly (dubious correlation charts drawn by has-been politicians notwithstanding), lest we drop like a boulder right back down into the dark age again*. And at present, there is no viable alternative fuel to replace it. Not a single one. Think of all the things we use oil for, and then try to imagine a world without it. Mud huts and dirt roads, horse drawn carriages and wooden dashboards, ladies and gentlemen! Make the most of your video games while you've still got them... Seems to me, then, that we have two options available to us. Blow it all now and lose any chance we have of retaining the lifestyle we are all accustomed to, or, conserve it long enough for an alternative to be developed (hopefully). * To be honest, the first time around wasn't so bad. People in those days were tougher, it wasn't a massive change, they could survive it. I don't see your average McDonalds junkie surviving it the next time around, though... |
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. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists The first statement is sarcasm, the ozone has been facing heavily accelerated degredation and will continue to degrade for years to come because of what we have already done, stopping now may slow it down in the far future. It's like taking your foot off the gas to stop a car, if you keep your foot their, you'll keep on going, if you take it off, you'll slow down eventualy. The second statement you've made is completely untrue, the rainforest hasn't grown back elsewhere, and seeding only does so much to help if anything. Seedlings consume very little CO2 and produce very little O2 in return, whereas the trees that we cut down have probaly been living for decades if not centuries, and do much more, meaning we are cutting down are filters faster than the new ones can grow to compensate. Furthermore, the ecosystems destroyed will not appear elsewhere, leaving many species extinct or on the brink of oblivion. Your third statement is half true, a severe volcanic eruption, radically changes local weather, but this is do this is sudden release rather than our slow steady release, but it happens and then stops, whereas we continuously pour out pollutants into the air. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You're trying to blame the actions of third world countries on us. I don't know about you - but that sounds a little unfair to me. Quote:
In the end - this theory is based on pride. We like to pretend we're not insignificant bugs that could be squashed suddenly at any time. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
If you were trying to make a point here, it's lost on me. Volcanoes really do alter the weather through ash blotting out the sun. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Besides, volcanoes disrupt the weather through the ash. It's a different process. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
It's first world customers that the rainforest is cut down for. Of course deforestation is only a small part of the problem. Quote:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._by_Sector.png Looks like those volcanic eruptions you mention are some undefined part of the "Residential, Commercial and other sources" - some fraction of 10.3 %. Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
If we could find a planet identical to earth, we could put greenhouse gasses in it and see if the results correspond to our own. But we can't do that, so we can only make educated guesses and theories about this subject. Quote:
Quote:
http://www.thewe.cc/contents/more/ar...ill_rising.htm Quote:
We put our whole military at risk trying to solve a trivial problem. Why should we risk the whole economy trying to solve another trivial problem? Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Have to disagree there. 600 million cars over many years sounds like a lot, but it really isn't if you compare it to the sheer size and power of a volcanoe. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Yet volcanoes still don't produce a really significant amount of greenhouse gas. Let's say 10.2 % of those 10.3 % "other sources" are volcanoes - which is already unlikely i might add - transportation fuel still makes up a greater percentage at 14 %. And then there's power stations, industry, agriculture etc. All in all even the most awesome eruptions don't make that much of a difference. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Nature- 2 Gigatons of CO2, per year Humans- 14 Gigatons of CO2, per year Nature may be powerful, but it's not nearly as reliable to pollute as we are. And towards your America vs the World statements, I never claimed that America was the real problem, but it wouldn't hurt to try what we can here, and if we need to, then we'd damn well better send in the marines to Brazil and central America, hell, the time off would be great, going down to the beach, catching some rays, albeit, Jungle Patrol.... well, lets just give them all pin ups like the ole days to keep their minds off the bugs, deadly animals, nigh constant rain. Better than eventualy depleting our oxygen faster than we can produce it, or coming close to that, as it would trigger mass panic. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Quote:
You can see this from the pollution trends. European governments went into hysteria and made huge promises... but kept none of them. The USA was a bit more cool headed and didn't commit themselves to any rash promises. Our pollution steadily declines every year. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
http://themes.eea.europa.eu/IMS/ISpe...5/view_content It's published in 2007 by the EEA and shows that some member states have made significant progress, whilst others, including Finland, have not. All that energy intensive forest industry isn't very beneficial in this area... :( EDIT: I knew I was bound to do something wrong this tired, that source is only about greenhouse gas emissions, I'll try again tomorrow... |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Furthermore, I wasn't suggesting sending the marines in to shoot up factories, I meant to guard the jungles, which I said, in my post. To prevent illegal logging, the marines would be introduced to defend the trees and wildlife. They would use as little force as possible, while attempting to hold their ground, most likely armed with a lethal secondary weapon, and a series of non lethal primaries, such as rubber pellet guns, stun guns, pepper spray, and as a secondary, a standard handgun, and if the situation gets bad, reequip the marines with M16s just like in a war, but again as a secondary weapon that they should attempt to avoid using at all times, so unless the loggers start coming at them with chainsaws and they know that nothing will be effective except lethal force, they are not to kill those attacking them. If these rainforests die off we won't just slow the cleaning of the air and production of oxygen, but make a serious slash to the medical companies. New roots and plants with potential pharmasutical effects are found almost every day, and who knows how many plants we've destroyed that could have cured a horrific disease or something. School children don't give a damn about the enviornment or what will happen 10 seconds from now, I'm hardly concerned about them rioting in the streets, versus adults rioting in the streets when they find out the air supply is going down. I can see it now, people beating each other bloody over air, people buying air, people selling air, Pari-air (Space Balls), oh what a wonderful world that will be, when we know that we only have a few thousand years of air left. Hell, tell people the Sun is going to explode in 5 billion years and they freak out, imagine knowing that the human race won't be able to live on Earth in a few thousand. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
I'll repeat what I already said - this is no reason for hysteria. Just keep on what we're already doing - carefully thought out and steady progress. Quote:
Yes! Let's invade every country at the planet and forbid them from using their own natural resources! While we're at it, can we steal all their oil too? Funny, I thought you opposed imperialism. Now from a practical standpoint - its completely absurd. We have about 250 thousand marines total. The number of combat marines is much lower. We could guard, at best, a tiny fraction of the world's rain forests. The cost would be huge - hundreds of billions of dollars. The casaulties would be devastating as well. The natives would be far from pleased, and would take every opportunity to force the marines out. This is NOT a theoretical scenario. We tried your plan in 1982-83 in Lebanon. The result? Hundreds of dead marines. Quote:
I doubt brainwashing children from an early age about every doom scenario the media latches onto would be a particularly wise idea. Quote:
|
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Cool!…where did you read this so I may do the same, cause it sounds like an opinion; save for the second paragraph which I'm guessing you pulled from somewhere (no offense) is strays from your writing style, and I really would like to read the complete text, not just what you selected from it. Quote:
Dude, pollutants are pollutants – you lost your credibility attempting to persuade with this statement. Quote:
Might want to scale back the “hundreds of years” most nations have only been industrialized for a couple of hundred years – some only in the past 50 or 70 years. Can't speak for other nations, but America used to clearcut - we don't do that anymore and haven't for decades...BLM and the US Forest Service makes sure of that as do the companies (loggers) that service our forests. New trees are planted where others have been felled; thining is necessary to ensure the health of our forests. To assist with this task, members of the California Conservation Corps, America-Corp, Job Corp, Sierra Club and a few others constantly plant new trees. ...Back to Volcanoes... Actually aside from bombardment from outer space (asteroids/comments) Volcanoes wreak havoc and have been known to wipe out entire areas, populations and many scientists theorize the Toba catastrophe (approximately 70,000 years ago) may have caused the genetic “bottleneck” of our human ancestors and why we all share specific genetic markers. This theory may account for the Adam and Eve story denoted in the Bible and similar stories shared by non-Christians. Anywho – many don’t know that we have a ticking time bomb right here in the US (Yellowstone Caldera) that became volcanically active (again) in the 1960’s if it goes (highly unlikely – but possible) it will do far more damage than man can ever dream of (short of nuclear war). It is suggested by computer models that most of the continental US would be a wasteland – soon followed by ash deposits up to 3 feet in some areas (Colorado, Mid-West and further out toward the Appalachians) those not killed by the initial blast would mostly like die a few weeks later from pneumonia or other lung infections caused by the ash. As the ash and gaseous bi-products (mentioned above by Sedistix) travel around the world from this one explosion and from the continuous eruptions that would follow in the area, a nuclear-like winter would encircle the planet drastically effecting climate conditions encouraging famine and other diseases. The point, putting Volcanoes aside, is that yes, manmade byproducts are in question here. Unlike volcanoes no viable good comes from it – short of our livelihood(s) and material possessions (i.e like the manufacturing of this computer and all the gizmos that went into it – that we are all guilty of supporting by just having one). Industrialization makes wastes – countries need to work together to continue to reduce or if possible eliminate the amount of pollutants we introduce to our environment. NO ONE COUNTRY is absolved from this sin, because even if you don’t manufacture it, you are still buying it; and it is difficult to rally people, a country or the world to endeavor when the very people who are supposed to be coming up with solutions to this global problem, provide false testament and chastise anyone who opposes them including their own. |
Re: Greenhouse effect is a myth, say scientists Quote:
Pollution is a undesirable state of the natural environment being contaminated with harmful substances as a consequence of human activates. Look it up yourself. Volcanoes are naturally occurring, and thus can not be classified as pollution. You, not I, lost credibility attempting to persuade with your poorly thought out statement. |
| All times are GMT -7. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.