Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Global Warming


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#46    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 22,005 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • Dysfunctional you can fix, ******** can't be.

Posted 08 August 2006 - 06:13 PM

Quote


True, but our older generations were not aware of the impact on the environment.

The difference is that we have pretty much known since the 60s and certainly since the 80s that there could be a relationship between our living and environmental impact, but nothing is particularly moving forward to help.

What is really awkward is that USA/ UK etc.... Had their industrial revolution with all the pollutants, which has lead us to where we are today.
Yet we look at China and frown on their actions. Has to be an air of bad taste if there is too much involvement.....

What I have learned this week is that the USA (and Germany) and pumping a huge amount of money into making homes more environmentally healthy..... whether by aid or grants etc.... The UK is lacking behind somewhat.

Where did you learn this ...America as a whole with the exception of a few states DENYS there is a problem.......




#47    Celumnaz

Celumnaz

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,039 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I don't know what I don't know.

Posted 08 August 2006 - 06:23 PM

no we don't, we just don't agree on the causes.  ever since we learned about ice ages in elementary school we've known there are major climate changes.  I don't think there is another nation that has spent more on global warming research... follow the money.


#48    Roj47

Roj47

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,149 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newton Aycliffe, Leeds and Middlesbrough

  • If I believed the world was going to end in the next 10 years..... I would sell up and travel to see as much of it as I could.

Posted 09 August 2006 - 08:26 AM

Quote


Where did you learn this ...America as a whole with the exception of a few states DENYS there is a problem.......


I used the word could have impacted on the environment.

When talking about the industrial revolution leading us to where we are today I meant in terms of technology rather than environmental.

original.gif

Posted Image
Posted Image

#49    Sherapy

Sherapy

    Sheri loves Sean loves Sheri...

  • Member
  • 22,005 posts
  • Joined:14 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:At the Beach-- San Pedro, California

  • Dysfunctional you can fix, ******** can't be.

Posted 10 August 2006 - 04:28 AM

Quote


no we don't, we just don't agree on the causes.  ever since we learned about ice ages in elementary school we've known there are major climate changes.  I don't think there is another nation that has spent more on global warming research... follow the money.

LOL the last thing money was being spent on is researchoiing global warming...now that global warming is a serious concern the gov't will be putting the cost on the tax payer...You don't know how it works yet  eh lol????




#50    Celumnaz

Celumnaz

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,039 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I don't know what I don't know.

Posted 10 August 2006 - 01:52 PM

Quote


LOL the last thing money was being spent on is researchoiing global warming...now that global warming is a serious concern the gov't will be putting the cost on the tax payer...You don't know how it works yet  eh lol????

I don't think there is another nation on this planet who has spent more on researching it.

But I do agree, whatever happens, the govt will tax and spend tax and spend and won't solve a thing.  They don't want to fix problems or they wouldn't have a reason for a job.


#51    Roj47

Roj47

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,149 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newton Aycliffe, Leeds and Middlesbrough

  • If I believed the world was going to end in the next 10 years..... I would sell up and travel to see as much of it as I could.

Posted 10 August 2006 - 02:05 PM

Quote


I don't think there is another nation on this planet who has spent more on researching it.



I still believe the USA heads the research, but I wonder in terms of population or income how far this expenditure is in real terms.

Posted Image
Posted Image

#52    zukie&jim

zukie&jim

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 886 posts
  • Joined:17 Jul 2004
  • Location:somewhere on earth

  • nothing PC about a sidwinder exploding in a hot tail pipe !

Posted 10 August 2006 - 02:23 PM

global warming-- well it's hard to say it don't exist . temps as a whole have been rising  overall since 1983.  

i would say that global warming is caused by several things . the number one thing is a natural trend twards warmer winters and summers that is aggravated by pollution.  

so the warming is not caused by mankind--just aggravated by hydrocarbon emissions. = humans contribute to global warming --but are not the cause of such.


#53    Roj47

Roj47

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,149 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Newton Aycliffe, Leeds and Middlesbrough

  • If I believed the world was going to end in the next 10 years..... I would sell up and travel to see as much of it as I could.

Posted 10 August 2006 - 02:28 PM

Quote


global warming-- well it's hard to say it don't exist . temps as a whole have been rising  overall since 1983.  

i would say that global warming is caused by several things . the number one thing is a natural trend twards warmer winters and summers that is aggravated by pollution.  

so the warming is not caused by mankind--just aggravated by hydrocarbon emissions. = humans contribute to global warming --but are not the cause of such.


You may like this report.....

http://www.livescience.com/environment/060...ifferences.html

Posted Image
Posted Image

#54    Celumnaz

Celumnaz

    Telekinetic

  • Member
  • 7,039 posts
  • Joined:22 Aug 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

  • I don't know what I don't know.

Posted 10 August 2006 - 04:56 PM

lol I loved that report... basically "we don't know, no data is conclusive... but we're confident it'll get warmer" (as long as the grants keep coming in)

yesterday, they said it would be partly cloudy today... there's not a single cloud in the sky.

There's global warming on mars and jupiter.

Admitted sensationalization (can't find the quote, but somewhat related) http://www.physics.emich.edu/mthomsen/resn2.htm from those who brought out the research.

Thousands of scientists like http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008597 who http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/st...3d6&k=42927 disagree with it.

It's like people don't even know http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0050727-11.html exsists... or just remember to forget about it.

Maybe they've never been allowed to consider if true, it might be a Good thing? http://www.stanford.edu/~moore/health.html  All kinds of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_all-t...atures_by_state good stuff out there.

We need to be more like the naitives who climed elevation when the tsunami hit, and less like the people of new orleans, waiting for someone Else (govt) to rescue us.


#55    Startraveler

Startraveler

    Fleet Captain

  • Member
  • 4,524 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New England

  • Knowledge Brings Fear.

Posted 10 August 2006 - 05:13 PM

Gotta love that Lindzen editorial.

Quote

There is also little disagreement that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have risen from about 280 parts per million by volume in the 19th century to about 387 ppmv today. Finally, there has been no question whatever that carbon dioxide is an infrared absorber (i.e., a greenhouse gas--albeit a minor one), and its increase should theoretically contribute to warming. Indeed, if all else were kept equal, the increase in carbon dioxide should have led to somewhat more warming than has been observed, assuming that the small observed increase was in fact due to increasing carbon dioxide rather than a natural fluctuation in the climate system.


Maybe it was protons from across the galaxy and not our tremendous output of greenhouse gases. Yeah, that works.

Edited by Startraveler, 10 August 2006 - 05:14 PM.


#56    poleshift

poleshift

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 209 posts
  • Joined:13 Mar 2004

Posted 11 August 2006 - 05:38 PM

Quote

The atmospheric abundance of free oxygen in later geological epochs and up to the present has been largely driven by photosynthetic organisms, roughly three quarters by phytoplankton and algae in the oceans and one quarter from terrestrial plants.


Hang mirrors on airships at high attitude high latitude. After sunset or before dawn, adjust the angle of the mirrors to reflect sun light to the surface of the ocean. Just let the phytoplankton and algae work overtime by 1~2 hours/per day.

Edited by poleshift, 11 August 2006 - 05:52 PM.


#57    Doug1029

Doug1029

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Joined:18 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma

Posted 11 August 2006 - 09:15 PM

Quote


Really?  Where?  Everywhere?  Somewhere?  Overall?  If it isn't getting warmer everywhere, how do you know it is getting warmer anywhere?  

I submit to you all that there is no collective data even remotely suggesting that the Earth is in a cycle of warming.  If there is:

SHOW IT





I refer you to Jim Hansen's website at the Goddard Institute:

     http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts######

Warming is not spread evenly over the world.  I have been working with data from the cities of Fort Smith, Arkansas; Meridian, Mississippi and Wilmington, North Carolina.  Fort Smith has warmed about 1.5 degrees F. in the last 40 years.  Meridian and Wilmington temperatures are moderated by the ocean and have changed little, if at all, in that time.  If you are from the American southeast, you will not have noticed anything.

Human memories for weather and climate are pretty poor, anyway.  Do you remember the cold wave in the late '70s?

The big issue with global warming is no longer is it happening?  It is.  The relevant questions are what is causing it, what will happen in the long run and what, if anything, can we do about it?

There are probably many causes.  Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is having an effect:  note that warming is occurring most-rapidly in the driest areas, just as CO2 warming would predict, but in the geologic record and currently, it would seem, the planet warms first, THEN CO2 levels rise.  This is clearly opposite of what is predicted by cause-and-effect.  It appears that the warming of the planet is releasing CO2 from natural sources.  Isotopic studies seem to bear this out.  The natural sources are the ocean and permafrost areas in the Arctic (As permafrost melts, trapped vegetation thaws and decays, releasing CO2.).

Humans may be having an impact.  Industrial pollution probably is to blame for some of the rise in CO2, but I suspect the effect is a lot smaller than general climate models predict.  Deforestation by people cutting firewood for cooking is a major source (Over half the world's population heats and cooks with wood and/or wood charcoal; deforested areas give up soil carbon to the atmosphere, increasing the effect further.).

Beware of general climate models.  The assumptions used in them are unrealistic.  Short-term climate simulations have not proven very accurate; how can we trust them for long-term results?  Also, these models do not consider the effect of AIDS which will have a major impact on human population, nor do they consider the effect of declining population growth.

Several recurring cycles are discernable in proxy data (tree rings, sediment cores, etc.).  These range in length from 1500 years to 14 months.  There have been about 30 climate shifts since the last Ice Age.  In these, temperatures first rise sharply over a period of usually less than 40 years, then gradually drop back over a period of 80 to 100 years.  We appear to be at the top of the rise right now.  I have two proxy-based models (based on sea sediment cores taken from the Sargasso Sea).  One predicts that 2006 will be the high-temperature year and the other says 2012.  It will probably be 2020 or later beforre we can tell if either of them are right.  Anyway, I expect to see declining temperatures beginning soon, but it will take careful record keeping and analysis to know that it is happening.  In day-to-day life, you won't notice any change.

Whether or not warming reverses itself, temperatures will still be warmer than they were 30 years ago.  This will cause problems no matter what the trend is.  Arctic ice will continue to melt off until temperatures drop back to 1950s levels and that probably won't happen for decades.  Melting ice will change the earths reflectance (albido).  Darker water absorbs more energy than white ice; the result is a warmer sea surface that results in increased evaporation.  The additional water in the air could increase the albido effect, reflecting more solar energy into space, cooling the earth and triggering an ice age, OR the warmer water could become heavier due to salt retention, sink to the bottom and draw warmer water northward from the tropis, resulting in permanent warming of the Arctic.  These are opposite results and we can't say which will happen, if either.

What can we do about it?  The Kyoto Accords are hopelessly inadequate.  If they were implemented completely, the result would be temperature reduction of about 0.07 degrees (four years' warming at the current rate, barely measureable).  Reducing carbon emissions seems to be a good idea whether it reduces warming or not:  less fuel use means fewer petroleum wars.  There is, to date, no hard evidence that anything we do will have a significant effect on warming.  Even if we could shut down all industry it is not certain that warming could be reversed.

Either Al Gore hasn't done his homework, or he is just trying to scare up a few votes for somebody.  He doesn't seem to know what he's talking about.  At the same time, there is legitimate cause for concern.

--DJS


#58    Doug1029

Doug1029

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Joined:18 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma

Posted 11 August 2006 - 09:18 PM

UM's system doesn't like that url.  In place of #####, put ######

--DJS


#59    Doug1029

Doug1029

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 412 posts
  • Joined:18 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma

Posted 11 August 2006 - 09:30 PM

Quote


UM's system doesn't like that url.  In place of #####, put ######

--DJS




UM's system STILL doesn't like me.

That should read:  (dot) t x t


Also, there are a number of scientific journals dedicated to the study of climate.  If you want, I'll send you the names of some.  You will find your proof in there.  Subscriptions, however, can be expensive.  I would suggest access through a university library.  Also, you may need a Masters in statistics to understand what they are saying.

You can access some articles through Ingenta (Type it into your browser.).  They have some research articles available for free.  You can also download abstracts, usually for free.

Good luck.  You have a lot of reading to do.

--DJS





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users