Global Warming

[vtec]

As things stand, I'm still not convinced about global warming being caused by humans for the aforementioned reasons. However I do have one interesting (scaremongering) thing to add.

Have any of you heard of tipping points? That is a point where the earth reaches a certain temperature, and thus gets to a point where it can no longer be reversed due to it causing the release of a huge amount of Greenhouse gases,... After which the temperature of the earth could accelerate away to uninhabitable levels. Hence the term tipping point. however, I'm not currently that phased, cause I know that it's not proven or properly researched just yet. There's usually something else that happens to keep earth in balance, like one of these articles mentions with increased warmth comes increased cloud that repels more sunlight thus cooling the earth again. Keep it coming, I like these sciencetific fings.

Info here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...546824,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...012801021.html

I'll do some more research on tipping points in a while, just got to go to the gym.

[Skyryder]

For those that believe that global warming is a just a natural phase that the earth inflicts on itself every so often............no one has been able to explain the speed of the current gloabal warming that is now taking place. Watched a programme on this a few years back, before gloabal warming became a 'fashonable' subject. One of the 'experts' listed a number of changes that was taking place along with a timetable..................not one of the opposing 'experts' could give a 'natural' answer for the speed (global warming) that was taking place............even then. The planet is not fucked and it has a great resiliance to change................but a lot of shit is going to happen in the next century or two untill some form of stabilisation takes place.

The ozone hole is a real problem.................if earth loses the van Allen belts...........better get on a shuttle.

Skyryder

[ZorsT]

Raised CO2 levels in the atmosphere cannot stay raised.

Anything that does photosynthesis will do photosynthesis faster with higher CO2 levels, and faster still if the raised CO2 level cause a rise in temperature.
This will, in turn lower the CO2 levels in the atmosphere. When the oxygen levels get too high, fires will start and burn very quickly, which will release more CO2 into the atmosphere. As you can see, the system keeps it at a nice balance.

[ZorsT]

Methane levels in the atmosphere...

The Amazon Basin produces a large percentage of the methane in the atmosphere. (its not the basin itself, but the ants and termites that live in it.)

Humans are not responsible, so why (and if we should, how) should we try to change it?

Global warming will not end life on earth.

[Street Gerbil]

These give me cause for concern:
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0409/feature1/

Just one question: could somebody please estimate the amount of co2 EVER produced by humankind and compare with the amount of co2 released to the athmosphere in ONE HOUR by a single volcano?

[terbang]

I dunno a lot about the warming but I have noticed that out lil corner of the planet is getting dirtier. I have been flying in the atmosphere over NZ for the past 25 years and I have noticed that the pollution levels have steadily risen especially in the last 2 years.

[Big Dave]

World awake to climate change but not us - report

THE rest of the world has woken up to the urgency of climate change, giving the topic front-page attention, but Australia's lack of action has left it economically and politically vulnerable, a new report warns.

The report by the Climate Institute, a division of the Australia Institute, a long-term critic of the Federal Government, said the debate about climate change had reached a tipping point, with multinational companies investing billions of dollars in renewable energy and carbon trading schemes.

The report details a sharp turnaround in attitudes in overseas business, government and media in the past 12 months, and concludes climate change is no longer just a "green" issue.

"Companies around the world are using climate change as a strategic business driver across not only emissions reductions but also the development of new markets, technologies and other areas of investment," it said.

"The prevailing view that reducing greenhouse gases harms economies and profits is being superseded by significant corporate activity to exploit the upsides of climate change."

Wal-Mart has committed $US500 million ($673 million) to cutting its greenhouse gas emissions; power giant GE expects to double revenues from cleaner technologies to $US20 billion by 2010; and Microsoft's founder, Bill Gates, has invested $US84 million in bio-fuels.

There has also been a dramatic turnaround in US media coverage, with 600 stories in The New York Times and The Washington Post alone in 2005. Climate change also made it onto the front page of Vanity Fair, Time and The Economist.

But the Australia Government, much of the business sector and some parts of the media remained "in denial" about the economic and social implications of climate change, said the Climate Institute's chief executive, Corin Millais.

"These overseas trends, the sheer velocity of them is staggering. Every day, people overseas are trying to find an upside to climate change. If you don't do it, your competitor will do it," he said.

[Mr. Peanut]

Just one question: could somebody please estimate the amount of co2 EVER produced by humankind and compare with the amount of co2 released to the athmosphere in ONE HOUR by a single volcano?

Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.

Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1992). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year (24 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 1998) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2.]. Human activities release more than 150 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes–the equivalent of nearly 17,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 13.2 million tonnes/year)!

[Wolf]

Global Warming or Global Freezing?

There are so many conflicting theories about what is goin gto happen. I've heard global warming will melt the ice caps and raise the levels of our seas, flooding coastal areas and decreasing the salinity of our oceans with catastrophic effects, I've heard that "ironically" global warming could be preventing a mini ice age that "should be due about now" and I've seen "The Day After Tomorrow" based on the book "The Coming Global Super Storm" that propounds the theory that our warming will change oceanic currents that will shift the weather and cause snap freezing of most of the planet.

We're certainly not starved for options.

Why is this?

I read an interesting treatise that I do believe to be true:

Back in the bad old days, books took some time to publish, even scientific journals and researchers could take their time testing their theories before publishing them. At the time of writing the article, TV was the main medium, the internet wasn't as big so bear in mind that the issue is now compounded by the internet -

The theory expounded is that the medium of television is fast, dynamic and immediate, it has an insatiable hunger for subject matter and people have to work faster to provide newsworthy stories. Ergo, research is often a matter of a couple of quick inconclusive tests and be the first to get your theory out on Prime Time TV. (Now add the internet where publishing requires only a simple word processor and a modem and the medium is even more insatiable than TV.)

Now any crackpot can publish their theories around the globe and try to compete for funding (it's tempting to think of scientists, doctors and psychologists as altruistic people out to help the world, but, while some may be, the bottom line is they want to eat which means keeping their jobs which means getting funding for whatever crackpot or misguided theory they've come up with).

And we've seen so many: "Cut salt out of your diet", "eat only polyunsaturated fats", "polyunsaturated fats are harmful", low-carbs, high GI, "are we killing our children?", the world is warming, we'll freeze to death.

Just recently on TV - from the country who gave us Dr Susan Forward and Dr John Bradshaw, champions of taking responsibility for ones own actions, words and feelings - a new "disease" called "Intermittent Explosive Disorder" (IED) that claims that we are not in any way responsible for our temper tantrums, sudden violence, road rage etc - total unmitigated crap spread around the globe by television (and no doubt the internet) just because some retard in the States wants to absolve everyone of responsibility for their lack of self-control (and make himself mega rich in the process).

I've pretty much given up on taking anything seriously. Modern innovations in electronic typesetting and computer-controlled production lines have made book publishing easier so now the bookstores are overwhelmed by a glut of printed books expounding every crackpot half-baked unresearched bit of drivel as well.

Research? Study? Testing? Fuck all that, get published as fast as possible, get on TV and plug your book, put up a website and try and shut down anyone whose theories differ from your own. The media wants to be fed, we can get a spot on Prime Time and we have 10 gigabytes of server space to fill with wahtever we want.

The rate things are going we'll all be affected by "Information Overload" - and yes, there are lots of conflicting theories about that, too...

[ManDownUnder]

Dunno about global warming - I see a lot of arguments both ways.

Something that DOES concern me is the abaility of people to use the irriplaceable like it's going out of fashion in the interests of profit, and the hope that science will "find a solution one day"

Oil? Yeah - just dig it up, use it - hell go for gold.

Trees, forestry? Drop the bastards, mill them use them. Sure they put out Oxygen but there's plenty in the Amazon or wherever... right?

Roads - build more, build more.

Transport, just keep building more cars. We all want to get around and there's money to be made. Public transport's ok if you can't afford your own.

Meanwhile the planet's slowly crawling to hell in a handbasket.

I love the "killing the planet" theory too. We're not killing the planet. The planet will do just fine no matter what we do to it. We're actually killing the planet's ability to sustain us...

I.e., we're killing us. But unfortunately it's human nature to "worry about that when it becomes a problem"...

rant over - sorry

[Pixie]

Gaia's way of removing several billion excess humans.

[Pixie]

How do we KNOW it's global warming, and not just part of the planets natural cycle????

Because if it is part of the normal cycle,the global warming industry will lose all it's funding.
And that couldn't be countenanced

[Pixie]

As the the greenhouse gas that has the most effect, well that is water vapour, simple evaporation, and that is not man made.

Wait for the hydrogen economy....

[Pixie]

The ozone hole is a real problem.................if earth loses the van Allen belts...........better get on a shuttle.

Skyryder

The Van Allen Belt is generated by the Geomagnetic feild-nothing to do with ozone.
-however the magnetic feild does fall to zero and reverse regularly

[Wolf]

Because if it is part of the normal cycle,the global warming industry will lose all it's funding.
And that couldn't be countenanced

And the gummints wouldn't be able to control everything we do with legislation based on the Kyoto Agreement and similar.

Stop using that, you're warming the planet!

All we have is a pile of theories all presented as fact. Nobody knows for sure and even those who are truly altruistic and not pushing their agendas to get money can still be misguided or flat-out wrong.

The only practical use for any of the shit is to provide grist for Hollywood's mills - lots of great topical movies about TEOTWAWKI (The End Of The World As We Know It, for those who have not seen the acronym before) through various human-made disasters. Makes me wonder what the fuck they'd be doing for plots and stories if there weren't all these conflicting theories filling our news programmes every day.

I'm now waiting for "IED - The Movie" about a bunch of people who really can't help the fact that they're abusive, violent dumbfucks prone to sudden tantrums (Sony Pictures, 2008, staring Tatum O'Neil, Sean Penn and John MacEnroe - no acting required, filming now.)