Carl_S Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 based on a point by point analysis of these two gentlemens' ties coupled with the design and level on tint on the older man's glasses with the younger man's initial expression, I think they are lying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 For some weird reason, I can't see Carl_S's post, but I have a feeling it's not going to add much to the debate so I will leave it this way. Is this the only factor in the cause and effect type of analysis? Is there not one other factor that has influenced climate and how certain can we (you) be about that? The amounts of methane that are measured from cows (beltching, not farting btw) agree with estimates when scaled up to the world measurements. The amounts of CO2 measured are far beyond what anything 'natural' on this earth can emit (short of all volcanoes erupting... which they are not). CO2 needs to be emitted from somewhere to have an effect. It's coming from incomplete combustion. Fossil fuels. Nothing natural has produced that much. It's just a plain, simple fact that nobody can argue: We are producing more CO2 than we were 500 years ago. There are less]sinks of CO2 than there were 500 years ago (forests etc). It's just simple maths as far as our input goes. As to what the overall effects of the increased CO2 levels and temperatures will be... that is what I study, so I will let you know It doesn't just disappear. 500 years ago, levels were lower because it was before we started using energy in this manner. It's not so much pissing in the sea, as pissing in a pool... day, after day, after day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soop Dogg Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Real scientists only have one agenda. To better understand. That's why there's a Large Hardon Collider. That's why the International Space Station exists. That's why I do what I do. Eh?????? You collide your hardon with whatever you like, just don't involve me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Eh?????? You collide your LARGE hardon with whatever you like, just don't involve me! You missed a bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alaing Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 The amounts of CO2 measured are far beyond what anything 'natural' on this earth can emit (short of all volcanoes erupting... which they are not). CO2 needs to be emitted from somewhere to have an effect. It's coming from incomplete combustion. Fossil fuels. Nothing natural has produced that much. It's just a plain, simple fact that nobody can argue: Out of interest what are the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere at present? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 Out of interest what are the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere at present? The atmospheric CO2 concentration has increased from the pre-industrial concentration of about 280 μmol mol−1 to its present concentration of over 350 μmol mol−1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl_S Posted July 9, 2009 Share Posted July 9, 2009 On a lighter note, is there anything we can do when the sun turns into a red dwarf? Also, cow's farts must play some role, why don't you factor them into your equations before you present your studies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJI Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Why can't we just adapt to the warming instead of trying to control the weather and climate? I'm sure there are many benefits of a warmer planet. If the MMGW effects are to be simply accepted as fact then warmer winters would be a benefit, meaning less need for heating which would be cheaper on the pocket. More rain meaning less chance of drought in the summer time. Those are just two and only looking from a UK perspective. Rising sea levels and more water in the air would supply water to some drought ridden areas in the 3rd world...... I did read that somewhere but lost the internet link. More CO2 content in the atmoisphere is great for plant life, and crops. To feed a 10+ billion population planet in the future then I would say a richer CO2 atmosphere would be needed to ensure crops are grown more quickly and efficiently. Greenland may return to being green and it would open up huge areas for land use and crop growing (same applies for northern russian continent). We may (but highly fooking unlikely) see car insurance premiums lower due to less ice and snow related winter accidents. Anyone like to add more to give 'balance' ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lbm Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 On a lighter note, is there anything we can do when the sun turns into a red dwarf? Get out the marshmellows on sticks and enjoy the last supper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ellis Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 Have a read of Micheal Crichton’s 'State of Fear' - a novel based on years of research of the facts about so called Global Warming - very, very interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fizzle Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 i couldnt be arsed to read this thread but felt the need to say that it's a big scam to make us pay more taxes etc. usual government bullshit to control the population, scare mongering etc etc.. cars etc could be run on other sources, but governments buy the technology to keep it hushed because they make so much money on oil etc etc im boring myself now and could rant about conspiracies for hours so i'll nip it in the bud now.. GROW MORE HEMP !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted July 10, 2009 Share Posted July 10, 2009 i couldnt be arsed to read this thread but felt the need to say that it's a big scam to make us pay more taxes etc. usual government bull$#@! to control the population, scare mongering etc etc.. cars etc could be run on other sources, but governments buy the technology to keep it hushed because they make so much money on oil etc etc im boring myself now and could rant about conspiracies for hours so i'll nip it in the bud now.. GROW MORE HEMP !!! Where are the facts to back up your claims? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.