Global Warming

[The boy formerly known as Evil Muzz 27]

The Earth goes through cycles. It goes through cycles of hot weather, it goes through cycles of cold weather. We get warm spells, and we get ice ages. What we have now is a warm spell. It is perfectly natural that the world should experience different climate patterns.

In my opinion, Global Warming is an invention of over-reaction. Of course humans contribute to this warm spell, but not as much as everyone thinks, we are NOT killing our planet. Surely it is relatively impossible for an airplane crossing the atlantic to spew out enough fuel to take a chunk out of the environment...?

Don't you guys think this is just a huge over-reaction to a perfectly normal period of the Earth's life?

[coolotter88 2]

so your saying like a teenager eats chocolate and it causes acne, but he's gonna get acne anyway so it doesn't really affect anything since he'll get over that part of the life cycle.

[confused04 14]

No, its not an over-reaction. The Earth does indeed go in cycles, but this cycle isn't natural and at the current speed it isn't natural. Catastrophes do happen, but human caused ones shouldn't be one of them. Had this been a natural cycle, we should see CO2 concentrations decreasing (increased weathering and uptake of carbon into the solid phase of the carbon-silicate cycle). This decrease in CO2 SHOULD be leading to a decrease in temperatures and eventually a new glaciation. But humans have increased concentrations to levels that are almost 30% higher for CO2 and 120% higher for methane... undoubtedly this will have an affect. For all the variables that go into the global temperature, only one can explain the warming trend, which is disasterous, humans. The background exctinction rate for non-catastrophe related time periods is 1-2 species per year. In the 20th century, that exctinction rate has climbed to 1 to 2 per DAY. I'm not saying that creatures shouldn't go extinct, but premature extinction is unhealthy and in my opinion immoral. If creatures go extinct before their ecosystem has adapted to exist without the said species, it can lead to devastating events.... Deer is all I have to say.

The climate of Earth is inherently variable... but we certainly are making it happen too much too fast.

[coolotter88 2]

Deer? do you imply that deer is going extinct? the population is growing? if you're in lack of deer, just give me a call and we'll ship you some or something, i mean, deer is getting run over daily where i live. but anyway. how can you prove that the extinctions are premature? and besides, the extinctions per day are only insects/plants in the rainforests...how do we prove that they are becoming extinct? what about the definition of extinction because we see extinct animals coming back from the dead alot these days.

[Easy Bakes 253]

And isnt extinction a natural prosses anyway?

Im not talking about the destruction of habitats and such that cause them, thier millions of insect species around, dont you think some of them die out naturaly? casue they cant compete? even in places were there no human influence? and how do we know?

[paperboy15 4]

Humans aren't causing global warming. The blame goes to dolphins. See, when dolphins travel on land they use cows. They go SO fast that you can't see them traveling on land. This explains why cows pollute so much. So, I want all of you who are blaming human pollution (more specifically, car loving Americans), to stop and in turn blame dolphins. Or at least stop feeding them free fish.

[Bongoswimp 14]

[coolotter88 2]

methane gas released from the cows are a taxable product. we need to calculate how much is released so we can tax it.

okay okay, new solution. we take sheets of magnesium, put it in a chamber, fill the chamber with co2 until its 100% of the air inside. then we burn the magnesium. magnesium can burn in CO2 and it turns into MgO and C! i'm so smart, so smart, i'm smarter than you.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Methane gas is a natual product of all carbon-based life as we know it.  If it could be captured, I could be used for energy.  Some landfill sites actually do this.

As for cows and dolphins, you forgot the lemmings.  In their rush to the sea cliffs, they exude more CO₂ than can be absorbed by the nearby forest and the meadows.  However, since this rush to the sea causes the death of the little darlings, I guess we can support it once in a while.

For you Douglas Adams fans, don't forget that the real owners of the Earth are the mice.  They do not appear to be upset by global warming.  Mice like warm climates.

If the dolphins get too much blame, it will be "Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish."

[jglei701 8]

For those saying that the earth is heating up too fast, or whatever... what's your proof? How big is your sample size? Scientists have been measuring weather for the past, oh, I dunno, 100 years, and they've guessed what happened for thousands of years before. In fact, this week, in many places, it snowed the EARLIEST it ever has!

And what happened to this hurricane season? I thought this was supposed to be worse than last year's... but we've barely had any named storms. As I said when discussions about the hurricane began in the spring, we statistically do not have a large enough sample size to be able to make predictions about this type of weather with any real accuracy.

[coolotter88 2]

shhhhhhhhhhh....sorry to rain...er snow....on your party here but thats called a lake effect snow...really....it doesn't count as real snow.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

jglei701 has a good point.  Everyone by now must be aware that the Kyoto Protocol is based on very speculative, if not truly bad, science. 

Has anyone asked the geology crowd about global warming?  The meteorologists are only dealing with part of the subject.  The paleontologists only deal with the layer of slime of the surface.  To get the whole picture, try the people who work with the whole picture, the geologists.

[PhilsCafe 8]

Well, I'm sure that even Geologists would admit that there is a change of climate. There always has been ever since the "big bang", otherwise the earth wouldn't look like it does today. Rivers, and particularly glaciers have terraformed the surface with ice ages coming and going. So I think global changes in climate aren't really that disputed among scientists. It's a natural process after all.

The only question that isn't answered yet is to what extent humanity has influenced global warming. In my opinion, there are signs that we have accelerated that natural process of global warming... I'm not talking about single events like Hurricane Katrina or eraly snowfall though, things like these did happen before, but generally the fact that average temperatures are rising, more than they did like 50 years before. But of course, things like that always are speculative, because science is only an approximation of nature.

Despite of that I think the Kyoto protocol is a good thing, not only to slow down global warming (as I said, it can't be stopped because it's a natural process), it's also a good start to conserve natural resources and reach better air quality. I mean we have to start somewhere...

[Camaron 1]

Originally posted by: PhilsCafe Despite of that I think the Kyoto protocol is a good thing, not only to slow down global warming (as I said, it can't be stopped because it's a natural process), it's also a good start to conserve natural resources and reach better air quality. I mean we have to start somewhere...quote>

 

I agree, IMHO the Kyoto Protocol is not pointless. Its effect will be limited because major polluters like the United States have not ratified the treaty, and growing polluters like China and India have been made exceptions due to their economic state, even those that are involved might not meet the set targets before the agreement expires in 2013. Despite these set backs, it will pave the way for further treaties to be made in the future which, I hope, will be more effective.

Finally, here is a world map showing the status of the Kyoto Protocol from around the world,

(Credits for the picture go www.wikipeia.org.)

[moganite 4]

Coollotter:

You are forgetting to make magnesium it takes carbon dioxide emmisions more than you extract from the air. Also it would be pointless as there would be no gain in useful materials and it would only be cleaning up the emmisions already made.

Wouldn't the vesel also oxidise and become more brittle?

[confused04 14]

I hate having to repeat myself... so I won't. For those saying for the twentieth time that "we've only been recording for 100 years", please read earlier posts I've made, and a few others have also repeated this. When it comes to climatological sciences regarding global warming... scientists aren't going to be stupid and use flawed data! Just cause you learn in school that you need replicates, doesn't mean that scientists suddenly forget. If we are going to have an intelligent conversation, everyone should read everyone elses posts.

Geologists have been chiming in... they have said that the amount of CO2 released annually is not attribituable to volcanic processes and their knowledge of the carbon-silicate cycle has proved more than damaging to the "global warming will fix itself" kinda thing.

I thought lemmings used renewable resources

The original predictions by the NHC were for a somewhat above normal season (13-16 named storms) and Dr. Gray predicted 17 named storms, never have they predicted for a season worse than 2005.  Not to say they were still wrong, but never have they connected a PARTICULAR hurricane season a result of global warming and thus is not relevent.  Its true, no one event can be tied to global warming, but frequencies of such events will increase, but again, frequencies rely heavily on chance. 

[coolotter88 2]

it was just a joke.

[panthersimcity4 162]

God gave us the respondibility to take care of his creation. Now look what we've done with it!!

[JDRCRASH 53]

ANSWER:
COLD-FUSION

[paperboy15 4]

I'm glad to see Australia hasn't ratified the Kyoto Protocol also! It is terribly weighted against the USA.

LOL panther...I would say we are multiplying and filling the earth as He wished. Global warming is not caused by humans, in my opinion.

I also think this is one big over-reaction.

[cifa 7]

Uhm...We are not really sure if this warming is all caused by humans, the history of the Earth is all made by colder periods and some hotter and warmer ones ... so this could be a normal climatic cycle ... and maybe after that there will be a colder one, and again a hotter one and so on... the weather is changing, that's for sure, but it's might not because us...

[confused04 14]

For the nay-sayers... why CAN'T it be us. Saying natural variation exists doesn't mean that unnatural variation DOESN'T exist. Thousands of independent studies concur with anthropogenic forcings ranging from geologists, volcanologists, paleoclimatologists, statisticians, astronomers, chemists and biologists. Yes, natural cycles exist, scientists don't doubt that, but the speed at which this is happening IS unnatural and in no circumstances has such a warming been observed (only a few instances of dramatic cooling have expressed higher values of magnitude). The relationship between CO2 concentration and average global temperature is unmistakable... the fact we are converting "inert" carbon to CO2 via combustion is also unmistakable... so why is it all of a sudden that we can't put those two facts together and say... "Hey, WE are at fault for this". Generally speaking, the cycles of variation are caused by the Milankovitch cycles, which the relationships for global warming are not exactly attributeable to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovich_cycles

Notice that the last "bottoming out" of CO2 occured at the advance of the Wisconsin Glaciation about 16,000 years ago.  Its apparent that as CO2 decreases, so does temperature.  Now if we notice the concentration of CO2 has increased dramatically since the 18th century in a regime that saw a generally stable (in the short term) trend.   Now... we can say that CO2 concentration has ALREADY surpassed ANY of the last natural interglacial period. How is this possible if the Milankovitch cycles were indeed responsible for global warming?  Chances are its not.  Not only has our interglacial period been warmer than any of the previous interglacial periods, its certainly on pace to outlast in terms of duration.  The biosphere would theoretically be responsible for changes in CO2 concentration, as we can see annualy with a decrease of CO2 during the Northern Hemisphere's summer where most of Earth's vegetation resides, compared to winter when we see an increase in CO2, but the magnitude we are looking at doesn't make sense, especially when additional research has already shown that we've probably already surpassed our biological productivity maximum.  The data only makes sense in light of anthropogenic warming, otherwise, we are forced to shrug our shoulders and allow lawmakers to do as they please.  The media loves to portray this as a "controversy" yet in the scientific community, its not and I'll put it bluntly... I'd rather listen to the scientific community talk about this subject than some politician or lobbyist.

[thundercrack83 0]

Originally posted by: N_O_Body ....As for cows and dolphins, you forgot the lemmings.  In their rush to the sea cliffs, they exude more CO₂ than can be absorbed by the nearby forest and the meadows.  However, since this rush to the sea causes the death of the little darlings, I guess we can support it once in a while...quote>

As long as one of the lemmings isn't a digger or a floater... (Sorry.)

[fate556 5]

~Please, qoute what your friend said instead of giving out his personal information~

[hamsterTK 93]

Whether its a natural cycle or we're causing it, does it matter?

I mean were all boned either way right?

[Bach2Baroque 168]

I believe its a natural cycle.

The dinosaurs were wiped, animals get extinct, now humans are getting wiped and who knows what new human species will form in the future.

Proposing all these green campaign only extends the time when a climate change occurs, not stopping it. You can't stop global warming, its impossible, it will occur.

The only thing is 'when'.

You can't turn back time, things change. If those green campaign are successful, we might live for another 100years, but that doesn't stop the cycle.

All you can do now is enjoy your life, die happily. Forget about global warming, thats nature's job.

[hamsterTK 93]

what makes you think we'll be go extinct?

We lived through one ice age, why not another? The neanderthals in europe died eventually, but the africans made it once they figured out how to farm. We already know how to farm... thats one down.

as for the dinosaurs, thats a poor comparison. Nearly all species got wiped by what most scientists agree was a huge asteriod hit. thats not a natural occurance, and its something  that could wipe us out randomly next thursday, not a cycle we know about 75 years in advance

[fate556 5]

i asked vinnie and he said i could copy and paste it however he did want more people to read his pieces as he writes numerous pieces which is why he wanted his screen name out and essentialy his webpage - http://hometown.aol.com/fateridder/myhomepage/profile.html - just copy and paste that , anyway here it is and remmber i didnt research it vinnie did so if you have questions feel free to send them to him -

global warming - well actually the truth of global warming

in this piece { and yes i like calling it that , it gives it a sense of importance } you will learn how global warming started , y global warming is a myth { however the symptoms of global warming are not , not in the wildest imagination } u will also learn what are actually causing these so called symptoms , so keep reading .

to understand global warming we have to go back in time { so slip in the new clay aiken cd , because a thousand days and a thousand nights are not enough } and off we go . welcome to february 1972 where an article sponsored by the world association of world federalists appeared in a magazine titled the humanist { the magazine of the american humanist association } in this article the world association of world federalists said and i quote -

" world federalists belive that the environmental crisis facing planet earth is a global problem and therefore call for a global solution - a worldwide united nations environmental agency with the power to make decisions stick . wawf has submitted a proposal for just such an agency to be considered at the 1972 u.n. environmental conference to be held in stockholm . "

the momentum gathered from the u.n. environmental conference and because of the power the wawf held led to { u guessed it } the united nations environmental program or unep { which officially started the global warming movement and debate } . the first executive director of unep was the canadian millionaire who made his money in oil - maurice strong , the man who was the secretary general of the stockholm conference . anyway lets move on , in 1990 in a speech addressing the global forum conference mikhail gorbachev said and i quote -

" the ecological crisis we are experiencing today - from ozone depletion to deforestation and disastrous air pollution is tragic , but convincing proof that the world we all live in is interrelated and interdependent . this means that we need an appropriate international policy in the field of ecology . only if we formulate such a policy shall we be able to avert catastrophe . true , the elaboration of such a policy poses unconventional and difficult problems that will affect the sovereignty of states . "

then in 1991 a good friend of maurice strong named lester r. brown a member of the council on foreign relations { cfr } , put out a report which stated and i quote -

" the battle to save the planet will replace the battle over ideology as the organizing theme of the new world order , with the end of the ideological conflict that dominated a generation of international affairs , a new world order , shaped by a new agenda , will emerge . "

then in 1992 came the united nations earth summit which was held in rio de janerio and brought together the world governments and the best known environmentalists and who was the secretary general at this conference { yes u guessed it , gold star for you } maurice strong . at this very conference came a speech from the former secretary of state of the united states under richard nixon - henry kissinger - which stated and i quote -

" today americans would be outraged if u.n. troops entered los angeles to restore order , tomorrow they will greatfull. this is epically true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond , whether real of promulgated , that threatened our very existence . it is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil . the one thing every man fears is the unknown . when presented with this scenario , individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government . "

i'm sure ur thinking what is the point of all this , well the point is if u haven't noticed my little green bugs of displeasing , that global warming was started to control , period . that is its purpose . there is no truth what so ever to global warming , it was , is and will probably always be , used to control other countries , average peoples lives and everything in between , its that simple . it has nothing to do with particles of dust in the air . if it did then how come people cant see the hollywood sign in california and can clearly see straight ahead in new york , the answer - because the earth is self sufficient . the politicians who constantly talk about global warming know this , that is the only reason they are pushing this , unless of course they are totally brainless and the media pushes it because they do what there told , and the celebrities who push global warming either don't know and are being manipulated or actually belive that they are doing a good thing . so now lets get down to the symptoms of global warming which u most likely won't see on the news and the u.n. , politician's , etc. has known about for years .

hold onto your hats and strap in those seat belts because here we go - the symptoms of global warming is caused by { get ready } - the earths energy field { yes u read that right } , we are now according to a number of scientists experiencing a cycle called procession something that happens every 26,000 years where the earth will stop spining and half the earth will be left in darkness for a number of days - just let me explain . the earth is a giant magnet with different levels rotating to create a magnetic field . however the earth is spining faster and faster and the more powerful it spins the more dense the magnetic field . two thousand years ago the earths rotations reached its peak according to a california scientist named gregg braden and has been falling ever since . the earths rotation called base resonant frequency or schumann cavity resonance was first identified in 1899 . between 1899 and the mid 1990's the earth maintained a constant pulse of around 7.8 hertz or 7 cycles a second . by the end of 1995 it had increased to 8.6 last i checked it was 12 and still rising . gregg braden says that the earth is spinning out of control and will indeed stop , he say's this will happen he belives on december 12 , 2012 . he calls this zero point when the earths magnetic field will disappear because the planets rotation will have stopped . however before u go jump out that window my friend this does not mean we will fall off the earth as gravity is a different energy all together . the earth will spin again , however the other way around and east will become west and west will become east . this has happened in history at least 14 times in the last 4.5 million years , the last one is said to have happened in about 11 - 13,000 bc . this is essentially what is causing floods , famine , the melting of the polar icecaps , ozone depletion and terrible weather around the globe - the earths rotation or lack there of . this according to gregg braden and many scientists who have been told to shut up and keep quiet when they present this fact to government officials who don't want to hear it , y ? well scroll up and read y and next time try and pay attention .

[hamsterTK 93]

Maybe he has a point about some things, but I dont trust a lot of that

[confused04 14]

Many astronomers have already discounted the Milankovich cycles which I've already addressed as the primary reason for the events in the past 100 years (particularly the last 50). Most of the cycles occur in tens of thousands of increments, but not within a timescale of 50 years. The amount of solar energy reaching Earth's surface, though variable, has not been significant enough nor follows a logical trend in increasing global temperatures. There are many corporate studies, government funded studies, and independently funded studies that arrive at the same conclusion, anthropogenic forcing.

Plus, a few of the facts are just out there....

A) When the magnetic poles switch, the Earth doesn't stop spinning.

B) Earth is actually rotating slower and slower as some of its rotational energy is absorbed by the movement of the moon away from the Earth. It is indeed NOT spinning faster.

C) Earths history has never seen a orbital lock with the sun... ever, otherwise we'd probably be a fairly sterile planet.

The reason why that entire "hypothesis" has been disregarded is because the science is not sound by ANY stretch of the imagination. I mean, he uses ONE mayan calander to justify as "archeological evidence" when somehow every other culture missed this.  If such a catastrophic "reversal of spinning" has occured 14 times in the past 4.5 million years, you would probably think mass extinctions have occured 14 times in the past 4.5 million years, which is indeed not true by ANY stretch of the imagination.  Ignoring the ongoing mass extinction, the previous mass extinction occured 65 million years ago (we all know this one).  This theory is by no means sound and I have yet to find a scholarly article even supporting one facet of this theory.

http://www.2012.com.au/SchumannResonance.html

I found the site which tries to prove the occurences with what many people regard as "absurd".

http://sacredspaces.org/greggbraden.aspx?Affiliate=1

Lets look at what Gregg Braden has written... seem kinda suspect to you even to the LEAST bit.

http://www.skepticreport.com/mystics/braden-book.htm <--- this sums it up a lot better.