1. Firaxis celebrates the "Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month", and offers a give-away of a Civ6 anthology copy (5 in total)! For all the details, please check the thread here. .
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Old World has finally been released on GOG and Steam, besides also being available in the Epic store . Come to our Old World forum and discuss with us!
    Dismiss Notice

Study: More CO2 Now Than Past 650K Years

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by marshal zhukov, Nov 24, 2005.

  1. marshal zhukov

    marshal zhukov good economist wannabe

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    Brazil
    Just more evidence about Global Warming:

    Read this at Yahoo News, Source AP ( Associated Press):

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/greenhou...fFV9cCs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-
    More evidence. Can anyone deny that by burning fossil fuel we will cause
    Global Warming, and therefore change Earth's climate?

    Somebody should show this article to Bush, he should think again about the Kyoto Agreement.
     
  2. WillJ

    WillJ Coolness Connoisseur

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    Messages:
    9,471
    Location:
    USA
    Of course people can. Some people are just stupid.
     
  3. Sims2789

    Sims2789 Fool me once...

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Messages:
    7,874
    Location:
    California
    Science schmience. I have my Bible!
     
  4. SonicX

    SonicX Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,267
    Location:
    Republic of Flanders (Be)
    Shut up about it :D
    For my political course at univ I gotta write a paper, do a presentation and preferably win a debate over why Kyoto should NOT be ratified by the US and Australia. Don't make it harder for me than it already is ;)
     
  5. ew0054

    ew0054 Troll Extraordinaire

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    Messages:
    718
    Location:
    N.J., U.S.A.
    Maybe there's more CO2 because there are more people breathing than there were 650,000 ys. ago. That population is what... 5 billion? Ever think of that?
     
  6. Warman17

    Warman17 NES Grandpa

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2002
    Messages:
    7,107
    Location:
    America
    and what, the millions of tons of fossil fuels don't burn CO2 into the atmosphere?
     
  7. SonicX

    SonicX Emperor

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,267
    Location:
    Republic of Flanders (Be)
    Wow, you're far behind, it's 6.5 billion now :D
     
  8. blackheart

    blackheart unenlightened

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2004
    Messages:
    8,633
    Location:
    Chicago
    And that would prove that there is more CO2, and more CO2 has a correlation with global warming.
     
  9. Stylesjl

    Stylesjl SOS Brigade Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2005
    Messages:
    3,698
    Location:
    Australia
    650 thousand years is a long time, all kinds of natural things can have increased the CO2 level

    However burning fossil fuels definetly increases the CO2 level, but just by how much is the question they didn't answer
     
  10. Godwynn

    Godwynn March to the Sea

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Messages:
    20,502
    Isn't there a possibility of CO2 just changing normally? Just fluctuating?
     
  11. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    This is rather sensationalistic. If it had been written to actually link the rise in the CO2 levels in more recent decades and correlate it with the recent rise in temperature then maybe they would have something. But a gradual rise in 200 years? Correct me if I am wrong, but in the last 200 years hasnt there been more evidence of weather being cyclic in nature as opposed to it being affected by global warming?
     
  12. EzInKy

    EzInKy Excentric

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2002
    Messages:
    2,887
    Location:
    Kentucky
    Nobody can seriously argue that human activity is not hastening global warming, but the evidence also shows that climate change is a natural process. Ironically, only human intervention can alter natural processes and they can only do that through technological development.

    It makes no sense to harm the economies of the nations with the most technologically capability to develop solutions for climatic change.
     
  13. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,875
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    Hahahahahaha.

    No.

    It's the pollution.
     
  14. Narz

    Narz keeping it real

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2002
    Messages:
    28,875
    Location:
    St. Petersburg, Florida
    Think about it. Where is all that CO2 coming from? What is the most logical explanation? :hmm:
     
  15. MobBoss

    MobBoss Off-Topic Overlord

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    46,853
    Location:
    In Perpetual Motion
    Logic does not always explain everything. Actual pollution levels in major US cities has fallen in the last five years. Heck, you can even see the sky most days in LA now.

    But there could be a lot more factors than just testing little air bubbles in the ice. Has the world experienced more volcanic activity in the last 200 years than in the last several thousand? I am almost positive that wind currents have probably shifted over antartica over 650,000 years...how has that and continental drift effected the reading.

    My point is that its always easy to view something as X + Y must equal Z...but in my experience that type of formula is a huge over-simplification of the actual issue and it gives you a false answer.
     
  16. The Yankee

    The Yankee The New Yawker Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2002
    Messages:
    19,467
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    [devil's advocate]Where was it coming from 650,000 years ago?[/devil's advocate]

    I'm not saying that our influence isn't to blame...I'm sure it hastens it or helps it along...plus it just isn't great for us in the very long run. But I'm sure a lot of it is also because of things out of our hands right now.
     
  17. The Fjonis

    The Fjonis Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2005
    Messages:
    514
    Location:
    Trondheim, Norway
    :lol: Thanks for the laugh!

    I don't think the debate is whether or not our burning of fossile fuels is causing an increase in CO2 concentration in the atmosphere. What is being debated, is what impact this is actually having on the global climate, and whether it can be blamed for the temperature increases etc seen lately. But that is another matter.
     
  18. Oerdin

    Oerdin Deity

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2002
    Messages:
    2,937
    Location:
    San Diego, CA, USA
    That's a 50% rise in 200 years.
     
  19. Mr. Blonde

    Mr. Blonde Dr. techn.

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,233
    Location:
    Now in Tirol...
    CO2 is not a pollution but the endproduct from burning fossile fuels. And as it stands the complementary principle of mass is valid for chemical reactions, so you can indeed calculate precisely how much CO2 comes from burning fossile fuels.
     
  20. Pikachu

    Pikachu Emperor

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    1,024
    But we cannot know exactly where the CO2 is going. Maybe all the human emissions are absorbed by some mysterious phenomena, and at the same time some totally independent natural phenomena occurs that releases lots of CO2 independently of human activities?

    Likewise, even though everybody knows that more greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere must increase the global temperature if all other parameters are constant, it’s entirely possible that this known phenomena triggers an unknown phenomena that cancels out the effect of the human disturbance, and at the same time an unknown and totally unrelated natural phenomena occurs that causes the increase in the global temperature independently of human activities.

    Yeah, that makes sence. Le't blame nature! :p
     

Share This Page