Why is there global warming in Civ IV?
- Thread starter Menzies
- Start date
- Status
1) A theory is not always something that has not been confirmed. When a theory is postulated it has to be proof by making predictions about the results of experiments (which can be produced or occur naturally). If the theory allows to make predictions which result to be real, then it is accepted.
An example is the theory of gravity.
2)Whit climate change what happens it is at first that it is not one theory, they are multiple theories which work together on diferent areas. Thanks to meassurements taken during the last 40 years it is clear that temperature around the globe is rising. Thanks to the use of climate models (which are incomplete of course, because of this they are called models) it is almost clear that emisions of Greenhouse gases are the most important cause of this.
3) Even if this is clear, it is not very clear of what the cost of global warming is.
4) Yes in civ 4 global warning is not well represented, it shouldn`t occur only because of the use of nuclear weapons and it shouldn`t transform green tiles into desert.
An example is the theory of gravity.
2)Whit climate change what happens it is at first that it is not one theory, they are multiple theories which work together on diferent areas. Thanks to meassurements taken during the last 40 years it is clear that temperature around the globe is rising. Thanks to the use of climate models (which are incomplete of course, because of this they are called models) it is almost clear that emisions of Greenhouse gases are the most important cause of this.
3) Even if this is clear, it is not very clear of what the cost of global warming is.
4) Yes in civ 4 global warning is not well represented, it shouldn`t occur only because of the use of nuclear weapons and it shouldn`t transform green tiles into desert.
Yes but thats climate change not global warming, theres a huge difference...
Climate change is undisputed fact, global warming however isnt, i wish people would stop confusing the two and using both frases as if they mean the exact same thing... its like compairing a bulldog to rottweiler, both dogs, both ugly as hell, both totally different.
Anyway over 70% of the world is ocean and most of thats temperature isnt & hasnt ever been monitored, so seeing as no one can claim that every (or at lease a suffienct percentage) part of the worlds had its temperature monitored over a period of at least a few years there is no one who can claim that average temperature of the world has risen or fallen.
And why wouldn't it be? time and time again key finds in the search for proof of evolution continue to get disproven, usually long after the general populace has already accepted it, but also the theory continues to get refined. Darwin's pilt down man was hailed as the undeniable proof for 50 years till proven to be fake. So its going to be a long time yet before its either undeniable true or undeniably false.
<*edit>
Anywy, back to the part about nuke's... nukes need more of a impact, the little global warming effect on a single tile just isn't enough. Possibly a 3*3 tile converted to dust around impact point and then surrounding that radiated fallout
the world is geting warmer that is a fact proven my temperature monitoring station all round the world a few areas are getting colder but the general trend is that it is getting hotter and this cannot be disputed. a theory to explain this is that human pollution has caused this, that is a theory it may be true it may not. another theory is that it is due to magnetic changes within the suns core certainly that has been a major factor of global temperatures over the course of earths life, and we are currently in a particulaly cold spell so maybe the world should get hotter rather than colder.
none of this post can be argued against and i look forward to reading the arguments against it with a wry smile becuase you lot are so argumentative i can't se this post not being attacked.
none of this post can be argued against and i look forward to reading the arguments against it with a wry smile becuase you lot are so argumentative i can't se this post not being attacked.
Darwin's pilt down man??
Piltdown man was discovered in 1912, 53 years after the Origin of the Species was written.
I'd suggest you actually learn some basic facts before coming out with statements as stupid as that.
And the theory of evolution has been proven beyond any doubt whatsoever, i cannot for one second believe you might think it hasn't been. What planet do you live on??!
T.rex
Chieftain
As I said, a theory, but a theory with a mountain of evidence to back it up.
Can you give some examples aside from Piltdown man - which by the way was a deliberate and planted fake....
True, and that is one of the great basis of science - theories change and are revised as new findings, methods of analysis and data come to light.
First of all, Darwin had nothing to do with the so called "Piltdown man". Secondly it was a hoax, a deliberate fabrication to gain recognition and fame and later debunked as such in '53. Furthermore, at that point in time accurate radio isotope dating had not been invented yet. So naturally a cleverly planted fake could escape notice for 40 years. So as a result, we can forgive the scientists of the day for being hoodwinked by a clever fame seeking huckster.
I find these scientific debates so enjoyable...there's nothing like having two people who have read a solitary article on the subject (Climate Change or Evolution) argue with the conviction of one who has indisputable omniscience.
Kadasbrass
Warlord
Actually I think the major matters of disbute is not the existance of climate change, but all the factors behind it and the possible results. Climate change has occured on this planet long before our existance and has even occured during written history a few times before industrial revolution.
Generaly speaking, on global warming I believe the extremes of both sides are honestly mislead or flat-lieing on the matter. Both sides cling to their values and care little for facts on the matter. How can you hope to achieve a realistic solution when you don't use actual evidence?
As for global warming and how its done in civilization. The game isn't going to be completely accurate, so in the context of the game its an okay thing. Could it be better? Of course, but alot of things could always be better.
Generaly speaking, on global warming I believe the extremes of both sides are honestly mislead or flat-lieing on the matter. Both sides cling to their values and care little for facts on the matter. How can you hope to achieve a realistic solution when you don't use actual evidence?
As for global warming and how its done in civilization. The game isn't going to be completely accurate, so in the context of the game its an okay thing. Could it be better? Of course, but alot of things could always be better.
Pres. Slayback
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 125
I really think that Firaxis has a tad political bias, they Have Al Gore in the game for the Internet (Yes, I know, it is a joke but really) global warming is so big in it, and they made fun of George W Bush in the Warlords vids...
bonafide11
Worker
Haha... exactly what I was thinking... I want evidence of any scholars/academics who fullout deny global warming because I have trouble believing it... And no, I haven't seen An Inconvenient Truth, but am judging by the obvious unusual weather cycles we have gone through recently...
WoW, talk about fanatical evolutionist ... next you'll by bombing churches in the name of science. Take a breather will you, grow past puberty then come back & post when your not such clueless arseholes.
... see the above response
. Keep believing whatever crap they feed you in school these days, maybe with some luck one day you'll grow up and start to think for yourself and start to look into & learn some of the alternate theory's and counter agruements.
---
Before you all go flaming me again in the gangbang fashion you just did, how you fanatics take a break & come back when you are level headed enough to get back on topic. Failing that, which you most likely will, feel free to pm your response to me just so you can get it off your mind (not that im going to bother reading it).
--- back on topic ---
I suggest you learn to read basic english before you post a response as stupid as that, it was mentioned because it was the most significant & later on the most contriversial find of the time relating to the subject at hand and was considered absolute proof of darwins theory for 40 years. Never once did i state or imply that darwin based his theory of evolution off it, neither did i state that the find occured before darwin published his book, so congrats on making yourself look like a idiot.
My mistake it was charles dawson not charles darwin... never the less, who it was doesnt matter, it was mentioned because its still the most famous example of what can happen & does continues to happen. And im not talking about just in regards to evolution, but to all theories in general.
Whats the matter? to stupid to do your own research? is google to complex of a web page for you to handle? too lazy to go to a library? sorry but im not your slave do your own research, you'll be more likely to believe it that way and while your at it maybe you want to get me this mountian of evidence you mentioned, everything i find seems to either have been disproven in the meantime or be a vain attempt to prove the theory by offering up another one.
Children are so demanding these days *sigh
... see the above responsePublic education, you cannot beat it
. Keep believing whatever crap they feed you in school these days, maybe with some luck one day you'll grow up and start to think for yourself and start to look into & learn some of the alternate theory's and counter agruements.This one, unlike your partner which live's up youranus.
---
Before you all go flaming me again in the gangbang fashion you just did, how you fanatics take a break & come back when you are level headed enough to get back on topic. Failing that, which you most likely will, feel free to pm your response to me just so you can get it off your mind (not that im going to bother reading it).
--- back on topic ---
As i stated in my previous post, from what i understand the entire worlds temperature isnt monitored due to the fact that 70% is isolated and uninhabital. And unlike thermometers, satalites used to read the temperature of those areas only read the temperature of the landscape (water) not the atmosphere.
I agree screw Darwin I like to believe in Religon and Mythology anyways
But Global Warming is real and happening but.....
the people on civ fanatics are big *******s becuase they try to act all scientific and geeky and stuff
But Global Warming is sooo happening and I LOVE how it is in CIV becuase I just discovered it and it makes me so happy when it says Global Warming has happened haha
At least some representation
And when do they make fun of Bush? In which video haha my computer dosen't play videos hehe
But Global Warming is real and happening but.....
the people on civ fanatics are big *******s becuase they try to act all scientific and geeky and stuff
But Global Warming is sooo happening and I LOVE how it is in CIV becuase I just discovered it and it makes me so happy when it says Global Warming has happened haha
At least some representation
And when do they make fun of Bush? In which video haha my computer dosen't play videos hehe
bds is just using the same argumentation methods that are used by religious people to deny science in general. Smoke screens, half lies and denying everything. That's cool. 
Apart from that, climate change is a fact. Global warming is a theory.
That is: We KNOW that the planet is heating up. The question is why. Is it due to us or is it due to other factors? And the REAL question isn't IF, it is HOW MUCH is it due to us. It's undeniable that carbon dioxide affects temperature. It's just whether it's a major or a minor factor. That remains to be seen.
To say that we are not having an effect at all is pretty ridiculous. But, since there's a lot of money to be saved and earned by increased production, there's also a lot of money to be spent on lobbying. Thus smoking takes a long time to be banned, thus pollution takes a long time to decrease.
Still you've got to realize that even though we're having an effect and that the climate IS changing - it might be despite our doing.
Denying evolution and believing literally in the bible is just too stupid to comment upon though.
Apart from that, climate change is a fact. Global warming is a theory.
That is: We KNOW that the planet is heating up. The question is why. Is it due to us or is it due to other factors? And the REAL question isn't IF, it is HOW MUCH is it due to us. It's undeniable that carbon dioxide affects temperature. It's just whether it's a major or a minor factor. That remains to be seen.
To say that we are not having an effect at all is pretty ridiculous. But, since there's a lot of money to be saved and earned by increased production, there's also a lot of money to be spent on lobbying. Thus smoking takes a long time to be banned, thus pollution takes a long time to decrease.
Still you've got to realize that even though we're having an effect and that the climate IS changing - it might be despite our doing.
Denying evolution and believing literally in the bible is just too stupid to comment upon though.
flyingchicken
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2007
- Messages
- 3,783
Think for yourselves and keep your thoughts to yourselves is is all that I have to say.
Rancid Sushi
Last year's catch
Agreed. Even Al Gore's own charts make global warming look cyclical over the centuries. Unfortunately, way too many people rush to judge humanity for it. Then they buy into the hysteria that politicians cause in order to keep the masses under control, and thus fascist laws are made to regulate when/where people can drive and whatnot. You guys know that Al Gore and his ilk use more power than most other individuals on the planet, right? If these guys are so worried about global warming, why do they insist on flying around in private jets that burn more fuel in one cross-country trip than an H3 Hum-vee does in an entire year? Just my .02. Remember kiddies, politicians do NOT have your best interests in mind.
Global warming is a FACT. Human civilization causing global warming is a THEORY. The player should have no sway in global warming or cooling, but it should be part of the game throughout the ages. Global cooling helped to bring about the dark ages, the French Revolution and napoleon's defeat in Russia. The Holcine Maximum occured around 10,000 years ago, temperatures were several degrees celcius higher than they are today. The Earth was actually cooling between 1900 and 1970 after warming up in the mid 1800s, in 1970 it began to warm again.
The Earth goes through temperature fluctuations all of the time. Our oceans getting warmer isn't even because of the current warm pattern, the oceans are so vast that even huge amounts of heat energy imput would take several centuries to start homogenously warming up the oceans.
I find the notion that Human civilization is powerful enough to heat the entire planet up by several degrees with our fraction of a percent of the total carbon dioxide output far fetched. But not quite as far fetched as the civ4 version of global warming caused by ICBMs, and the global warming only effects the person who launched the missile. If civ4 global warming applied to real life, the USA would be a total desert already.
The Earth goes through temperature fluctuations all of the time. Our oceans getting warmer isn't even because of the current warm pattern, the oceans are so vast that even huge amounts of heat energy imput would take several centuries to start homogenously warming up the oceans.
I find the notion that Human civilization is powerful enough to heat the entire planet up by several degrees with our fraction of a percent of the total carbon dioxide output far fetched. But not quite as far fetched as the civ4 version of global warming caused by ICBMs, and the global warming only effects the person who launched the missile. If civ4 global warming applied to real life, the USA would be a total desert already.
It's the upper ocean that's warming, which will happen relatively quickly when it's absorbing more energy.
The greenhouse effect warms earth about 33C. Human activity has increased co2 levels by over 30% in the atmosphere, and increased some other greenhouse gas levels too. The expected increase to the greenhouse effect is small, but not too small to be obviously insignificant to contribute to a 0.6C warming.
As for the other topic of evolution - piltdown man is irrelevant because over the decades a lot of genuine fossils have been found with forms inbetween ape and modern human:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html
The greenhouse effect warms earth about 33C. Human activity has increased co2 levels by over 30% in the atmosphere, and increased some other greenhouse gas levels too. The expected increase to the greenhouse effect is small, but not too small to be obviously insignificant to contribute to a 0.6C warming.
As for the other topic of evolution - piltdown man is irrelevant because over the decades a lot of genuine fossils have been found with forms inbetween ape and modern human:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html
Andrew_Jay
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2002
- Messages
- 438
Moderator Action: Thread closed. If you want to discuss global warming / climate change, do so in Off Topic. Otherwise, it's in the game because the devs put it in.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
- Status
Similar threads
