Global Warming!!!

[Ed Williams]

Watch this video and post what you think.

http://break.com/index/tough-to-argue.html

[The Dude]

Very good video!!!!!

Thank you for sharing...

[petef]

He presents an interesting method using a simple chart to determine
whether an issue is worth persuing or not. After watching it I was left
wondering if this was one of those tricks where the outcome is
predestined to come out one way no matter how you enter things
into the chart. In other words if you take his basic concept and apply
it to other issues, does it prove to be a valid tool for determining
whether it's right to take action or not take action?

To get what I'm saying try using his method & chart on an issue
such as Witchery instead of Global Warming. The issue being; Should
we seek out and burn Witches at the stake in order to save the world
from destruction by evil. Put your mindset in the times of the Salem
Witch Trials and see if his method works to convince you to burn witches
at the stake. I haven't tried it yet, but if his method works to convince
you to burn witches, then it proves that his method is bogus and more
like trickery to be used to CONVINCE people to take action on any issue.

Take the challenge.
Try using his method on other issues to see if it is a valid
tool to convince you to take action or not take action on
issues of the past that we now know the outcome of. See
if it is a good tool to convince you NOT to take action
on an issues we now now didn't need any action.

---pete---

[oracle128]

Pete, his logic does indeed make sense. The choices presented are the simplified versions of what is available. Logic can be twisted to produce any outcome, and the issue of climate change is no different, but when working with such a simplified system, that is what one gets (though that doesn't necessarily make it a suitable system, as you correctly pointed out with the witch hunt scenario).

This simplified reasoning falters, however, in the outcomes he presents. He assumes A(False) is better than B(True), because B(True) has the economic hit of A(False), plus other negative outcomes. This is not true. We can't predict what will happen in scenario A(False) any more than we can predict the outcome of B(True). What if, in attempting to save the environment, we actually make it worse? Hypothetical: the Sun is known to be increasing its output. The solution would seem to be to alter the Sun so it outputs less. What if, in doing so, we cool it down too much, or destroy it? What are the predictable outcomes if we turn the Sun into a supernova?

"What's the worst that could happen?"

[Vercades]

http://img255.imageshack.us/my.php?image=globalwarmingltrva5.png

Someone try and wrap their head around this one..

[Ed Williams]

dam. I live in New York, but in March snow was melting like crazy.... Usually its still snowing up until mid April.

[Miz]

Every year, without fail, southwest Kansas gets a week, sometimes two, of 70 to 80 degree weather in the middle of February. People used to say, "My, isn't this unusual weather for this time of year!" Now they're saying it's proof positive of global warming.

Every 30 years or so, southwest Kansas gets an inordinate amount of rain. This was the year. About 5 inches of rain fell in about 3 hours a few days ago and it's been raining off an on since. It hasn't been so much "flash" flooding as just good old-fashioned flooding.

Because it's been happening every 30 or so years since anybody's been keeping records, I find it impossible to blame it on global warming. I bet it will be, though. ;)

[oracle128]

Both global climate change advocates and skeptics alike agree that the 0.3-0.6C increase in average global temperature over the last 100 years, is not enough for any human to observe. The notion of "It feels warmer, it must be global warming!" is the price you pay for misrepresenting the facts and scaremongering.

[DJoe]

I know people believe that cardon dioxide (CO2) is causing Global Warming. But, what about if they found out it was a natural process. Maybe a new Ice Age will develop. Either that or theres a different source of the problem. Do we believe anything we watch on the news?

[oracle128]

I know people believe that cardon dioxide (CO2) is causing Global Warming. But, what about if they found out it was a natural process. Maybe a new Ice Age will develop. Either that or theres a different source of the problem. Do we believe anything we watch on the news?There is substantial circumstantial evidence to suggest it is in fact a natural process. There is also hard evidence showing that increasing CO2 levels have actually succeeded rising global temperatures, and vice verse for decreases, in past climate cycles, and that this cycle is no different. There's also evidence that the Earth is not the only planet experiencing climate change.

Yet none of these are ever mentioned when discussing climate change. The media you can forgive for this: their job is to make money, and scaremongering and baseless threats make money. But there are some supposedly respectable outlets which. more and more, follow this model of money-spinning propaganda; and I really don't see why people find this acceptable.

[Miz]

A question I never have heard asked is, "In exactly what state/condition/stage do we want the earth to remain?"

About 2,000 years ago, sea level was about 20 feet higher than it is now. Is that the level we want or do we want it to remain exactly as it is now?

I have heard it pointed out that the same data climatologists use to make their doomsday predictions is the same data meterologists use to predict next week's weather. Hmmmm.... :D

I'm pretty sure the planet is going to continue changing regardless what we want it to do. If humans believe they can bend the planet to their collective will, humans are more arrogant than I thought. ;)

[renegade600]

earth has been getting warmer since the ice age. has man been causing it since then? If it seems the polar areas are melting faster, its true but you gotta remember, the less ice, the faster it will melt. Think about it, which pile of ice will melt faster, a pile with two ice cubes or a pile with 100 ice cubes. The air around the 100 ice cubes will be cooler so it will melt a whole lot slower but as it melts, it will start melting faster because the air around the ice will be getting warmer since there are fewer and fewer cubes.

[Acrobaze]

There is substantial circumstantial evidence to suggest it is in fact a natural process. There is also hard evidence showing that increasing CO2 levels have actually succeeded rising global temperatures, and vice verse for decreases, in past climate cycles, and that this cycle is no different. There's also evidence that the Earth is not the only planet experiencing climate change.

Even a child knows that: he sees reindeers, mammoths and rhinoceroses painted in the prehistoric caves (in Europe). All the natural processes were always very slow. Several thousands, or million years.

There, we have to make with a process over hardly a century.

And I would like to know which is this evidence. I don't know it.

[PrinceOfNepal]

cool video,

Thanks for sharing
:wave:

[oracle128]

Even a child knows that: he sees reindeers, mammoths and rhinoceroses painted in the prehistoric caves (in Europe). All the natural processes were always very slow. Several thousands, or million years.

There, we have to make with a process over hardly a century.

And I would like to know which is this evidence. I don't know it.No problem.

There is substantial circumstantial evidence to suggest it is in fact a natural process.
Increased solar output (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/sun_output_030320.html)
Milankovitch Cycles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles)

There is also hard evidence showing that increasing CO2 levels have actually succeeded rising global temperatures, and vice verse for decreases, in past climate cycles, and that this cycle is no different.
Vostok Ice Core data: CO2 vs Temperature (http://seoblackhat.com/images/co2-vs-temp.jpg)
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/temp_vs_CO2.html
EPICA data source (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/domec/domec_epica_data.html)
Vostok data source (http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok_data.html)
There's also evidence that the Earth is not the only planet experiencing climate change.
Melting ice sheets and evidence of Global Warming (http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/msss/camera/images/CO2_Science_rel/index.html)! On Mars.
As compared to Earth's "melting ice sheets (http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N45/C2.jsp)".
Global Warming on Other Planets (http://motls.blogspot.com/2006/05/global-warming-on-jupiter.html)

[rwt325]

Connie from Arkansas must be the chief guru for the global waming crowd.

[DELTREE]

global warming: are we just in warming trend? is there anything we can do about it?http://bestsmileys.com/hot/3.gif
The U.N. wants to tax country's for global warming, that is just silly.
I know I can not do anything about it, so I am going to enjoy the warm weather.
Come winter the global warming folks will chill out!http://bestsmileys.com/cold/8.gif
As always your Friend DELTREE

[rwt325]

The debate is just starting, definitely not settled as the Global Warming Priests declare. See below - I hope that links work.

The Deniers: The National Post's series on scientists who buck the conventional wisdom on climate science.
The National Post is a Canadian national newspaper. Here is the series so far:
Statistics needed -- The Deniers Part I
Warming is real -- and has benefits -- The Deniers Part II
The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science -- The Deniers Part III
Polar scientists on thin ice -- The Deniers Part IV
The original denier: into the cold -- The Deniers Part V
The sun moves climate change -- The Deniers Part VI
Will the sun cool us? -- The Deniers Part VII
The limits of predictability -- The Deniers Part VIII
Look to Mars for the truth on global warming -- The Deniers Part IX
Limited role for C02 -- the Deniers Part X
End the chill -- The Deniers Part XI (http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/archives/story.html?id=216ca730-10f0-4614-9692-fc37d99cbac3)
Clouded research -- The Deniers Part XII
Allegre's second thoughts -- The Deniers XIII
The heat's in the sun -- The Deniers XIV
Unsettled Science -- The Deniers XV
Bitten by the IPCC -- The Deniers XVI
Little ice age is still within us -- The Deniers XVII
Fighting climate 'fluff' -- The Deniers XVIII
Science, not politics -- The Deniers XIX
Gore's guru disagreed -- The Deniers XX
The ice-core man -- The Deniers XXI
Some restraint in Rome -- The Deniers XXII
Discounting logic -- The Deniers XXIII
Dire forecasts aren't new -- The Deniers XXIV
They call this a consensus? - Part XXV
NASA chief Michael Griffin silenced - Part XXVI
Forget warming - beware the new ice age - Part XXVII

[rwt325]

Sorry, don't know why the links did not copy.

[zipulrich]

The links didn't copy because you didn't copy the links :)

I just edited your post above, to make the 'End the chill' a live link. Click the 'edit' button, and you'll see how it's done.

[Acrobaze]

The U.N. wants to tax country's for global warming, that is just silly.
I know I can not do anything about it, so I am going to enjoy the warm weather.


I am sure that indeed, if you are alone, that will not make anything...The same if I am alone..... But if all the developed states work together, we will be able to prevent the acceleration of the natural process. Look at this map : see what it remains of wetland (in green) . We must absolutely decrease CO2.

http://ecologie.nature.free.fr/images/dossier_rechauffement_planete/carte_afrique.jpg

You can always say that you have nothing to do with them...But when your continent will be the same, what will you do ?
To call the others with the assistance? You will not be credible.

Who is silly in this story?

[Miz]

While it's true deciduous trees make oxygen during the day, it's equally true they use oxygen and release carbon dioxide at night.

In addtion, decidious trees lose their leaves. Their decomposing leaves produce carbon dioxide.

Then there's the problem of dead trees. The insects and that live on dead wood use oxygen and release carbon dioxide, as do the bacteria that break down dead wood.

So, help reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere! Don't plant a deciduous tree! :D

Wetlands release both carbon dioxide and methane, you know.

[Acrobaze]

Wetlands release both carbon dioxide and methane, you know.

Of course I know. I'm graduate in Sciences (Not in English :D ).

But how many trees are present there, for example :
http://www.rtbf.be/stellent/groups/jsp/documents/imagephototheque/096371.jpg

[Miz]

All I'm saying is that while humans are undoubtedly contributing to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (they do that merely by breathing), there are are a seemingly endless number of factors that I don't believe we humans have identified, much less fully understand.

In addition, those seemingly endless number of other factors have seemingly endless interactions and interrelationships that I don't beleive we humans fully understand.

For example, carbon dioxide levels were as high, perhaps somewhat higher, 650,000 years ago than they are now. I think it can be said with some certainty that humans had nothing to do with those CD levels nor have I found anything indicating that we humans know the details of why the CD levels were so high 650,000 years ago. Is it possible things happen on this planet we don't fully understand?

Therefore, it's certainly possible that humans are pushing the panic button and considering/proposing actions and solutions that could make things worse, not better.

I guess it's the caution that's missing in this global warming debate that I find disturbing. History is full of humans jumping in to "fix" nature, only to make things terribly, horribly worse.

Is there not the possibility that the planet needs a period of high CD levels for some reason or another, much like some species of plants need fire to reproduce and survive?

It's the unintended consequences of rash actions stemming from panic that rise up and bite.

[Snurfen]

Whichever spin you put on it, we cannot continue pollutin in such a profligate manner.
There are strong argumets for and agin (which we like to believe is predominantly coloured by our political leanings), but I'm a keen watcher of weather as for 30 plus years I've spent my free time surfing, plus I was brought up on a farm, both of which are massively reliant on weather patterns.

In my lifetime, I've observed a significant shift in the weather becoming more unpredictable - this rate of change is accelerating. No more proof required for me!

[Acrobaze]

I do not think that breathing causes that :
http://www.italiq-expos.com/news/images/Environnement/fonte-glaces-groenland.jpg
Only ten years for that ?

Many things that we do not understand, that's true. Because all that was in the past. (650,000 years ago....how to know that exactly ?)

But a thing is sure. That is not good for the Earth :
http://jeremyah76.canalblog.com/images/fumee1.jpg
And if that continues, we go to a humane catastrophe.

All the pollutants must make an effort (Europe, US, China..).

[dammit]

650,000 years ago
Volcanoes?

[Acrobaze]

Volcanoes?

Perhaps...But not only : a cyclic disturbance of the parameters of the terrestrial orbit.

[dammit]

I tend to go with the natural cycle theory, although we haven't helped much with the industrial revolution. All that said....I don't think we can do anything about it now... it will take it's course. :hmm:

[Acrobaze]

I don't think we can do anything about it now

Haaa.....no ! Not that ! I read in other posts that "experts" are " not experts" and etc...Only with "I think that"...or "I don't think that"...But who is "I" in the planet ?

There is a natural process. We accelerate it. If there is a world effort, we can do something.

[rwt325]

Hello Zipulrich
Thanks for your post. I hate to be so dense , but where is the "Edit " button?.

[Snurfen]

bottom right hand corner next to "quote" and "reply"

[oracle128]

You only get 24 hours to edit your post, after which only a moderator/admin has the ability to do so.

[DELTREE]

In my part of the state this year we are having a great year for CORN and every other Veggie, so global warming can be a GOOD thing also. Our air is also clean. I lived in the BIG cities at one time, you can smell the funk in the air. GET OUT IN THE COUNTRY!!http://bestsmileys.com/happy/3.gif
My point of view:CARS put more crap in the air than anything else! BUT we are NOT going to STOP driving ARE WE?
As always your Friend DELTREE:wave:

[dammit]

It's the Cows (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/20070710/tuk-burping-cows-harming-environment-dba1618.html). ;)

[Acrobaze]

It's the Cows (http://uk.news.yahoo.com/itn/20070710/tuk-burping-cows-harming-environment-dba1618.html). ;)

We can for a long time manufacture clean cars. Simply a question of political good will (The taxes on oil pay so much to the states.).

Can we do the same thing with cows...not sure. :dizzy:

[Snurfen]

plug them into a methane burning generator :p

[Acrobaze]

Or perhaps we could bottle it and send it on another planet.

[dammit]

Then there is the sheep- goats-horses etc etc. Also Frenchmen farting. :D

[Acrobaze]

Then there is the sheep- goats-horses etc etc. Also Frenchmen farting. :D

Farting looks like a great part of your life. Isn't it ?

[dammit]

Not great... just a fact.

[Acrobaze]

Not great... just a fact.

I am reassured. That looked like an obsession.

[dammit]

Good ... glad you got over it.:happy:

[oracle128]

Or perhaps we could bottle it and send it on another planet.Don't do that! The other planets are globally warming up just fine already, thank you.

[DELTREE]

To me it sounds like global warming is some kind of a GAS thing!?
NOT to much we can do about that!?http://bestsmileys.com/silly/13.gif