Global Warming Discussion (2 Viewers)

[Enron]

The biggest issue in my opinion, is not about whether the climate is changing or not. It's whether we do something about it or not. The time table we have to react is not as dire as some would make it out to be. The counter-issue is that some say changing over technology or investing in R and D on the large scale isn't worth it. Too much money spent over too short of a period of time. That said, why does the switch or more efficient technology and a more responsible way of using our resources have to be instantaneous. Why not set reasonable goals over a span of say 20 or 30 years? Why not involve the private sector? You can't tell me that Exxons and Shells of the world don't want something to do when the crude runs out.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Bjerknes]

The real purveyor of the climate is the Sun. Solar activity can increase and decrease in magnitude just like everything in nature, making our solar system depend on its life-giving light and radiation. When solar activity (solar flares, et cetera) increases, the amount of radiance emitted from the sun to particular spots on Earth increases. One can easily experience this sitting outside on a sunny day, and also the benefits of cloud cover during times of extremely toasty days. The more cloud cover, the more radiation is projected back towards the sun through the processes of absorption and scattering of radiance.

If the Sun were to ignite massive, historic solar flares for a along period of time, the Earth would naturally absorb more radiance, and hence have a higher temperature. But right now it is the complete opposite -- the sun has become quite calm over the past decade, with solar activity at a minimum in recent history. So we have actually experienced somewhat of a global cooling trend recently.

It's very hard to come to a decent conclusion on the hypothesis of man-made global warming because trends show us that CO2 actually lags temperature. When temperatures increase, CO2 levels seem to increase. But nothing is conclusive the other way around. What does contribute to a small portion of Global Warming is deforestation and the "urban heat effect" which has to do with more reflecting of radiation instead of absorption because of the lack of green space. But that is just a minimal contribution, with heat escaping at night anyway.

CO2 is critical to the Earth's atmosphere. It is essential for vegetation to receive copious amounts of CO2 during photosynthesis, basically their own oxygen, so that they can provide plentiful greenery and also food. I find it quite strange, morbid, even, to suggest that CO2 is a poison gas, because without it we wouldn't exist.

And considering this, the last thing I'd want to do is destroy an economy because of a theory that has not been proven. If the Sun were to explode with vicious solar flares over the next year, no amount of CO2 conservation is going to help us because we'd most like fry anyway. To think we could halt that is human hubris at best.

 

[Bjerknes]

You can't do anything about changing climates. They change naturally, and it is out of our control. As I said, it's hubris to suggest we could control the climate, because more likely we're going to do more harm than good.

 

[Enron]

I guess what I will be looking out more for is what nations will do now as a result of this story, if they do anything different...etc etc. Such as China/India not signing the Copenhagen Agreement....I don't presume to have the slightest inclination that those two walking out was triggered by this story, but needless to say I am curious to see how this affects future policy making. Such as the UN...USA...Europe, etc.

Well the Copenhagen meeting turned out to be nothing but a bunch of posturing and nations like Sudan and Chad (fuck both those countries hardcore) blaming the US and Europe for our current situation (which is obviously is, but the logical reaction is to make the exact same mistakes we did just cause you can ). No one really wanted to say what was needed to gain a positive result. Instead the nations that didn't walk out all signed an agreement to have another meeting in the future.

The funny thing about China is they are very quietly on their way to becoming a leader in sustainable technology manufacturing. India on the other hand isn't really doing anything. But it's not like the world needs those two to go forward with some sort of agreement.

 

[David01]

You can't do anything about changing climates. They change naturally, and it is out of our control. As I said, it's hubris to suggest we could control the climate, because more likely we're going to do more harm than good.

and yet that is exatly what we have done in what? 30 years

 

[Enron]

The real purveyor of the climate is the Sun. Solar activity can increase and decrease in magnitude just like everything in nature, making our solar system depend on its life-giving light and radiation. When solar activity (solar flares, et cetera) increases, the amount of radiance emitted from the sun to particular spots on Earth increases. One can easily experience this sitting outside on a sunny day, and also the benefits of cloud cover during times of extremely toasty days. The more cloud cover, the more radiation is projected back towards the sun through the processes of absorption and scattering of radiance.

If the Sun were to ignite massive, historic solar flares for a along period of time, the Earth would naturally absorb more radiance, and hence have a higher temperature. But right now it is the complete opposite -- the sun has become quite calm over the past decade, with solar activity at a minimum in recent history. So we have actually experienced somewhat of a global cooling trend recently.

It's very hard to come to a decent conclusion on the hypothesis of man-made global warming because trends show us that CO2 actually lags temperature. When temperatures increase, CO2 levels seem to increase. But nothing is conclusive the other way around. What does contribute to a small portion of Global Warming is deforestation and the "urban heat effect" which has to do with more reflecting of radiation instead of absorption because of the lack of green space. But that is just a minimal contribution, with heat escaping at night anyway.

CO2 is critical to the Earth's atmosphere. It is essential for vegetation to receive copious amounts of CO2 during photosynthesis, basically their own oxygen, so that they can provide plentiful greenery and also food. I find it quite strange, morbid, even, to suggest that CO2 is a poison gas, because without it we wouldn't exist.

And considering this, the last thing I'd want to do is destroy an economy because of a theory that has not been proven. If the Sun were to explode with vicious solar flares over the next year, no amount of CO2 conservation is going to help us because we'd most like fry anyway. To think we could halt that is human hubris at best.

Oh word. Problem solved. Now I can go work on something else.

 

[Hust]

Ahhh sorry for posting this thread, hope I don't get into trouble because I've never done it and I looked deep into the realms of the community threads to spawn it


Looks like some scientists have "altered" climatic data to seemingly show favoritism for global warming. So now we have data that is skewed and weather/temp stations all around the world and some of them have been moved into warmer areas to also skew the data to make it seem that temperatures have been increasing around the world.

This honestly pisses me off and I wonder if anyone else has the same reaction.

I am also curious as to know what Andy thinks about it being the community weather man and all.

The real purveyor of the climate is the Sun. Solar activity can increase and decrease in magnitude just like everything in nature, making our solar system depend on its life-giving light and radiation. When solar activity (solar flares, et cetera) increases, the amount of radiance emitted from the sun to particular spots on Earth increases. One can easily experience this sitting outside on a sunny day, and also the benefits of cloud cover during times of extremely toasty days. The more cloud cover, the more radiation is projected back towards the sun through the processes of absorption and scattering of radiance.

If the Sun were to ignite massive, historic solar flares for a along period of time, the Earth would naturally absorb more radiance, and hence have a higher temperature. But right now it is the complete opposite -- the sun has become quite calm over the past decade, with solar activity at a minimum in recent history. So we have actually experienced somewhat of a global cooling trend recently.

It's very hard to come to a decent conclusion on the hypothesis of man-made global warming because trends show us that CO2 actually lags temperature. When temperatures increase, CO2 levels seem to increase. But nothing is conclusive the other way around. What does contribute to a small portion of Global Warming is deforestation and the "urban heat effect" which has to do with more reflecting of radiation instead of absorption because of the lack of green space. But that is just a minimal contribution, with heat escaping at night anyway.

CO2 is critical to the Earth's atmosphere. It is essential for vegetation to receive copious amounts of CO2 during photosynthesis, basically their own oxygen, so that they can provide plentiful greenery and also food. I find it quite strange, morbid, even, to suggest that CO2 is a poison gas, because without it we wouldn't exist.

And considering this, the last thing I'd want to do is destroy an economy because of a theory that has not been proven. If the Sun were to explode with vicious solar flares over the next year, no amount of CO2 conservation is going to help us because we'd most like fry anyway. To think we could halt that is human hubris at best.

It's damn nice to have your here, Andy. Thanks and I knew you would be around sooner or later

 

[Enron]

Andy does have a point about the Sun's effect on the climate. The Sun is the major catalyst of just about every natural cycle from the carbon cycle to the water cycle. At the same time it's undeniable that the climate is changing. It's really a question of what we do now if anything. Some, like myself, believe that innovation and integration of new, more efficient technology into our current system is the way to go regardless of what people say about climate change. Others believe that we should do nothing that we are fine with our current efficiency level, and some more radical (crazy) thinkers call for a complete overhaul of our current energy production system as well a many other facets of our day-to-day lives.

 

[Hust]

Personally I feel that whatever we do on earth will pale in comparison on what the Suns power can do. All our hard work could mean nothing tomorrow if the Sun explodes, wears out, etc.

I know Andy has a point, that's why I asked him his opinion Local Juventuz Weather Man

 

[Enron]

Personally I feel that whatever we do on earth will pale in comparison on what the Suns power can do. All our hard work could mean nothing tomorrow if the Sun explodes, wears out, etc.

I know Andy has a point, that's why I asked him his opinion Local Juventuz Weather Man

Yeah, especially considering how the sun will swallow us sometime in the next million years.

 

[Raz]

Personally I feel that whatever we do on earth will pale in comparison on what the Suns power can do. All our hard work could mean nothing tomorrow if the Sun explodes, wears out, etc.

I know Andy has a point, that's why I asked him his opinion Local Juventuz Weather Man

And we could run in with some rogue blackhole too. But chances aof that happening are realy slim, so I would rather go with doing something than continue like this waiting for mother nature to solve our own made problems.

 

[IrishZebra]

Hey dudes let's pump poison into the atmosphere, side-effects? nah.

 

[X Æ A-12]

Sounds pretty chillin, brah

 

[Enron]

Hey dudes let's pump poison into the atmosphere, side-effects? nah.

CO2 isn't a poison, it's good for plants.

 

[IrishZebra]

You're forgetting N2O, O3 and good old CH4

 

[Enron]

N,P,K you sonofabitch.

 

[IrishZebra]

Typical Am

 

[Enron]

But it's good for plants!

 

[IrishZebra]

 

[David01]

Personally I feel that whatever we do on earth will pale in comparison on what the Suns power can do. All our hard work could mean nothing tomorrow if the Sun explodes, wears out, etc.

I know Andy has a point, that's why I asked him his opinion Local Juventuz Weather Man

you guys sound like those damn Jehova witnesses. Going door to door telling about the end of the world, all you have to do is buy a pamflet, pray and the world is saved.