1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Anyone Not believe we are causing Global Warming?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Abaddon, Dec 26, 2006.

?

Do Humans cause Global Warming?

  1. Yes - American

    33.2%
  2. No - American

    11.5%
  3. Yes - Non American

    48.4%
  4. No - Non American

    6.9%
  1. batteryacid

    batteryacid Prince

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    449
    I will check,but I think that mainly they aree measuring them from trapped air in ice core (one link).

    CO 2is a greenhouse gas, that means it absorbs heat radiation at night, when earth gives heat up into the universe, and thus trapping additional heat at earth.

    CO2 levels today are either measured with mass spectrometers, by non-dispersive IR absorption, by Laser absorption or RAMAN scattering of Lasers; Mass spectrometer detectors usually have a dynamic range from one count/sec up to some billion counts per second; so are the most accurate ones, followed by laser absorption and NDIR methods, which have around 0.1 ppm accuracy.

    Problems as is with all measurements is to do proper sampling and prevent some kind of bias concerning sample or sampling inlet (means you should not measure CO2 near the road or cement production site; most popular backgroiund measurement sites have to b outsite heavy populated areas (like Finland, Canada, Hawaii etc.)

    I think some satellite of the ESA or NASA has gone online last year to make direct measurements of a whole variety of gases over the whole globe.
     
  2. Sidhe

    Sidhe Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,987
    Location:
    England
    Just to add to this, warmer water expands more than cooler water, thus the sea rising we are seeing has more to do with the GMT of the sea than the actual deposit of water into the seas by ice melting at the poles etc.
     
  3. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    And the question remains: how much will it rise?

    No, I'm drawing a parallel.

    If you keep a fire in your sealed greenhouse to stay warm, you risk suffocation; if you go without a fire, it's gonna get cold in there come winter.

    If we don't spend money to combat global warming, we risk messing up the planet. If we DO spend money to combat global warming, we're using up money that could be spent to combat hunger or AIDS or nuclear proliferation.
     
  4. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    The way to determine whether you have a surplus or a deficit is to add up TOTAL expenses and subtract that from TOTAL income.

    If global CO2 levels are rising, it must be because TOTAL emissions are greater.

    The numbers don't care where the extra CO2 comes from. And, as batteryacid's "Missing Carbon" link describes, the numbers don't seem to be adding up. The planet's CO2 level is lower than expected.
     
  5. Mulholland

    Mulholland Happy New Year!!!!

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,756
    Location:
    Quebec
    Combatting global warming is a temporary thing though. It's just a push on the goverment's side to subsidise(encourage) the change to a carbon reduced economy. Once the transition has been made things go on as normal. Denamrk has jumped on this train of thought and has become one of the best producers of wind energy and wind energy technology in the world.
     
  6. Sidhe

    Sidhe Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,987
    Location:
    England
    Yes of course it is, link.

    And Basket case if your not going to provide us with anything scientific, why should we listen to your opinions?

    lower than what, lower why, why is this significant?
     
  7. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    Combatting global warming must be permanent if it is to be effective; the numbers on the ledger must add up to zero in order to get CO2 levels to stop rising. Once those windmills are up, they have to stay up, and they have to be maintained.
     
  8. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    Creationism is false.

    I am not going to provide any evidence to support that claim, whatsoever.

    Do you agree with me?
     
  9. Mulholland

    Mulholland Happy New Year!!!!

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,756
    Location:
    Quebec
    The electric company can hire engineers much like those used in a coal plant to keep things running smoothly. Wind energy can still be very profitable. Small scale hydro can work too. Tidal energy is in it's infancy. Domestic solar can also provide for many household needs. We can stop burning it's just a matter of political will.
     
  10. StarWorms

    StarWorms Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,348
    Location:
    England
    We're not going to die from hypothermia if we refuse to reduce our effects on global warming. I don't see what your point is here at all.
     
  11. Sidhe

    Sidhe Deity

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,987
    Location:
    England
    Creationism isn't scientific, back up your words. No ones going to believe opinion, although you've readilly showed that that's all you believe by not supporting your arguments.

    On my side we have science. Read Gothmogs thread for the science, on yours you have supposition and endless rhetoric without substantiation. Go do the work.
     
  12. StarWorms

    StarWorms Deity

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2005
    Messages:
    2,348
    Location:
    England


    You would agree that this graph has a very high correlation, right? It is possible to extrapolate with confidence. The further from the graph you go, the less confidence you can give. By 2020 it's quite easy to suggest that the CO2 concentration will be roughly 410ppm, and I can say that with a high degree of confidence.
     
  13. El_Machinae

    El_Machinae Colour vision since 2018 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Messages:
    43,504
    Location:
    Pale Blue Dot youtube=wupToqz1e2g
    VRWCAgent: I'm having trouble finding articles that don't require a subscription to Nature. Here's something one the ice core sampling.

    Would you prefer some type of educational material, an audio seminar, or someone linking the wiki?
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/5314592.stm
     
  14. azzaman333

    azzaman333 meh

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2005
    Messages:
    22,877
    Location:
    Melbourne, AUS Reputation:131^(9/2)
    A 40 year span is too short to confirm human's are causing the increase though.
     
  15. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    It's called an analogy.

    We might die from AIDS or warfare or plain old basic starvation. All of which are very real and immediate problems competing with global warming for attention. Many world leaders have already rendered their opinion: they don't care about global warming because their people have bigger problems.
     
  16. Atlas14

    Atlas14 "Sophomoric Troll Master"

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Location:
    Maryland
    If we continue to destroy the earth, your other issues will be irrelevant. Even if we assume you are correct (which you certainly aren't) and that global warming induced by humans is not reality at all, we are still polluting the air we breathe and the water we drink. These greenhouse gases need to be minimized even if your lame theory is correct.

    That said, I know you are wrong because when CO2 reacts with O3, CO3 and O2 is produced. We completely rely on the chemical geometry of O3 to reflect the most harmful of solar radiation and we get heat in the process. With a healthy O3 layer, the heat bouncing back off the earth and the heat we produce can escape. However, when O3 reacts with CO2, the geometry is destroyed and heat cannot escape. This clearly heats up the earth, whether you like it or not. It is a matter of chemistry. Keep bringing lame "evidence" of magnetic shifts or some other irrelevant graphs to support your position, but keep in mind that there is little denying chemistry.
     
  17. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    Sure they will. If it squares with their own, they will accept it with no need for evidence.

    Do you believe God created the Earth, or not? I don't; I'm an Evolutionist. Do you need me to back up my opinion? Probably not. Similarly, those right here in this thread, who believe global warming is real, did not challenge their allies to back up their own opinions. When someone in here says "global warming is definitely being caused by humans", you believe it.


    When I posted the magnetic-field theory, I said up front that I didn't know if it was fact. And believe me, I surfed pretty hard trying to find out. One of the reasons I posted it was precisely BECAUSE of the lack of research on the subject. The very best way to test a theory is to dangle it before your opponents; they will, without hesitation, jump on it and try to tear it down.

    One of the best people to answer the question would, of course, be an astronomer. So I ran the idea past a retired guy a few doors down who spent his entire life in the space program at TRW. He worked on satellites, including a few solar observatories. His assessment: if the Earth's magnetic field weakens, the Earth would in fact get hit with a lot more solar wind (and his assessment of THAT was "extremely deadly to life on Earth"). When I asked him how much extra heat those incoming particles would deliver, his answer was "probably not much, but I don't know".


    I already posted my source for the five-extinctions idea: the October 2006 issue of Scientific American. From the idea that the Earth naturally belched huge amounts of CO2 five times, the question arises from simple deduction: when will it happen again, if it does? No further evidence is required to ask that question.

    I don't have an answer to that one--therefore I am not required to post any further evidence. The question remains valid: when is the Earth going to burp again? Could it be in the process of doing so right now?
     
  18. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    And if AIDS becomes a global pandemic (some say it already is!), global warming will become irrelevant. If a nuclear war renders most of the planet radioactive, global warming will become irrelevant. If an asteroid ten miles across hits the Earth, global warming will become irrelevant. Etc. (That last one is a lot less likely, in my opinion--but that asteroid might still be coming our way even if we don't see it.......)
     
  19. Atlas14

    Atlas14 "Sophomoric Troll Master"

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,502
    Location:
    Maryland
    Right, so how does that make global warming or the environmental damage caused to the earth less important than the other things?
     
  20. BasketCase

    BasketCase Username sez it all

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    13,024
    Location:
    Closer than you'd like
    Because people are already starving to death by the millions. Because AIDS is already killing people by the millions. Because there are already numerous wars in progress around the planet. Some of which have been ongoing for decades.

    Whereas the damage from global warming is largely a case of "what if".

    Greenland's Ice Cap is Melting
    How much of the Greenland cap will actually melt? How much arable land will become desert? How much nastier will the weather get?

    That which is "unlikely" remains possible, of course. The Greenland cap might melt completely. Global warming alarmists tend to take those headlines and run with them. Well, worst case scenario: AIDS infects everybody on the planet and the human race goes extinct. So there. Time to drop everything else and spend all our money on AIDS? Didn't think so.
     

Share This Page