Global Warming! We're all going to die!

[rockytriton]

Finally someone with some sense.

 

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110008220

[C1ay]

There is also news that global warming ended in 1998....

 

There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998

 

For many years now, human-caused climate change has been viewed as a large and urgent problem. In truth, however, the biggest part of the problem is neither environmental nor scientific, but a self-created political fiasco. Consider the simple fact, drawn from the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero).

 

Yes, you did read that right. And also, yes, this eight-year period of temperature stasis did coincide with society's continued power station and SUV-inspired pumping of yet more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

 

More....

[rockytriton]

Did anyone see that south park global warming episode? It was great, it also did a good job of making fun of that rediculous movie "The Day After Tomorrow".

[Pyrotex]

Finally someone with some sense....

The Wall Street Journal article suffers from all the faults that it accuses the proponents of global warming. It conveniently ignores that the opponents of global warming ALSO have huge financial and political incentives to remain "in denial", and leaves the impression that ONLY the proponents have agendas. It ignores the attempts of the Bush administration to edit, rewrite or trash environmental studies by well respected and fastidiously "neutral" agencies just trying to do their jobs.

 

Compare with the recent Time Magazine article on global environmental changes. One or the other is lying. My money is on Time.

[ipruul]

Well, "The Day After Tomorrow" was quite ridiculous movie, but no one is telling that it might happen.

But has anyone heared that theory, which tells that earth is in a loop. Now we are in a warming state, but sooner or later, we have to face another ice age. But for that, we will have to wait for about million years.

[InfiniteNow]

The Earth, and all things that exist for that matter, can be described in terms of cycles. There is validity to the concept that ice ages and heating cycles are occurring every so often, and not that far apart when held relative to geological time scales.

 

The Day After Tomorrow, while somewhat silly, at the VERY least brought these issues to the attention of an audience who might not otherwise pay much attention. It is (loosely) based on fact, and I enjoyed it myself. Had wonderful graphics... like the sequence where the tidal wave came in over Manhattan... that was righteous. :steering:

 

The bigger issue raised when Global warming is discussed is our impact on it. Clearly, millions and millions and millions of cars and factories (and...) burning fossil fuel are having an impact, and the shifts are more than just nature cycling.

 

Anyway, welcome to Hypo ipruul. It's a bit like walking through the halls of multiple great universities and discussing ideas with those around you... but all from your computer. Enjoy!

 

 

Cheers. :confused:

[chamilton333]

There is also news that global warming ended in 1998....

 

how can you say global warming stopped? the global temperature raised by about 1.08 degrees farenhiet last year...... the equivalant of if every person had 42 heaters!

 

Source: Popular Science Magazine

[Pyrotex]

There is also news that global warming ended in 1998....

I'm sorry C1ay, but that "news" seems to missed Scientific American magazine, several planetary science journals, Av Week, a whole bunch of CNN style news broadcasters and news websites, Science Weekly, National Geographic and numerous other venues of current scientific information.

 

Could it be, possibly, that you have fallen victim to...

 

...The Ultra-Conservative Press ???? :eek: :) :eek:

[Wondering]

There is also news that global warming ended in 1998....

 

I read that 2005 that NASA announced that 2005 was the warmest year on record. It was very close to the last warmest year (which was in the ninties, i forget which one right now) but since 2005 didn't have an el nino and the last warmest year did, it has concerned scientists. I definetly don't think that global warming has ended. How could it?

[pgrmdave]

Could it be, possibly, that you have fallen victim to...

 

...The Ultra-Conservative Press ????

Could it be that you've fallen victim to the Ultra-Liberal Press? The truth is, we don't know why the temperatures were/are raising. We know that the gasses produced by industry and automobiles tend to increase the greenhouse effect, but we have a very limited amount of data to work with, and so we really can't know exactly what is going on.

[Zythryn]

Could it be that you've fallen victim to the Ultra-Liberal Press? The truth is, we don't know why the temperatures were/are raising. We know that the gasses produced by industry and automobiles tend to increase the greenhouse effect, but we have a very limited amount of data to work with, and so we really can't know exactly what is going on.

 

Because we don't know exactly what is happening should we all bury our head in the sand and pretend nothing is happening?

 

Personally, the ONLY reason I care about the cause, is finding the cause will help us find a solution (or at least something that may mitigate the climate change).

 

All of the evidence I have seen, seems to point to human activity having SOME affect (how much varies from source to source). Since human behavior is easier to change than the wobbles in the earth's orbit, that may be the most promising thing we can work on.

 

We aren't looking for who to bring to court, we are looking for a solution.

 

Although, it may be too late with the Atlantic gulf stream breaking down.

 

All I know is I need to get to Alaska before the glaciers all disappear;)

 

Mark

[TheFaithfulStone]

Could it be that you've fallen victim to the Ultra-Liberal Press? The truth is, we don't know why the temperatures were/are raising. We know that the gasses produced by industry and automobiles tend to increase the greenhouse effect, but we have a very limited amount of data to work with, and so we really can't know exactly what is going on.

 

Irrelevant. Doesn't matter if we are the CAUSE of Global Warming or not, we have certainly pumped a bunch of carbon into the air in the last hundred years or so.

 

There is no way that can be a good thing. So even if removal of green house gases from our atmosphere doesn't mitigate global warming (which it WILL, but that's not the point) it's a good thing to do anyway.

 

Besides, the general consensus is in, and humans are the cause of Global Warming.

 

http://www.realclimate.org

 

TFS

[Cedars]

99% of the atmosphere is two components. Nitrogen at 78.08% and oxygen at 20.95%. Among the trace elements and compounds are the greenhouse gasses which include: water vapor, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, nitric oxide, and ozone.

 

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

 

one website places the CO2 at 0.0360%

http://www.geog.ouc.bc.ca/conted/onlinecourses/geog_210/210_7_1.html

another website with atmospheric composition information:

http://www.ace.mmu.ac.uk/eae/Atmosphere/Older/Trace_Gases.html

 

Snippet from an easy to read paper on temperature and carbon levels. I do not know if this has been refuted;

 

"Carbon dioxide levels are now at 380 ppm. When the level gets to 1000 ppm, the level will be one tenth of one percent of the air - yes, it will reach 1000, maybe even two or three thousand, no one knows for sure how high the level will go up. Sixty million years ago the level was 3500 ppm and as far as we know no beasts were hurt, but then we don't know everything from back then. I have read that levels of fifteen percent CO2 will be dangerous to us."

 

Read the entire paper here:

http://www.mich.com/~donald/globalwarming.html

 

Here is an easy to read article on the natural cycle of carbon exchanges:

http://www.cmdl.noaa.gov/info/testimony.html

 

I do not know if this has been refuted:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/358953.stm

 

Several articles I have read indicate this is a natural cycle. Heres one I found today:

 

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/enviro/EnviroRepublish_233658.htm

 

I have read a few convincing articles about the ocean currents being more involved in our global climate than greenhouse gasses. Heres another:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4928010.stm

 

I cant figure out all of what this document says, but it appears from the pictures and what I could understand, the amount of ice in antartic region has varied greatly in the last 35 million years.

 

http://www.hi.is/~oi/quaternary_glacial_history_of_antarctica.htm#Fig.%201

 

I also looked up the atmosphere of venus, which is often used as a comparison for runaway greenhouse gases. The problem is you cannot compare this planet and venus due to the location of venus, and the natural condition during planet formation and after, any water would have been boiled away by exposure to the sun thereby preventing a key element which allowed the water to stay on earth, namely the natural effects of the sun on these two planets during their early years due to their proximity to the sun and the huge difference in the rotation of venus compared to earth. As I understand it anyways.

 

http://gpc.edu/~pgore/astronomy/astr101/venus.htm

[Michaelangelica]

Ian Plimer in his book "a short history of planet earth" (ABC press, Sydney 2001)

Says a lot of intersting things about climate change on planet Earth.

 

"there was surface warming until 1944 followed by 32 years of slight cooling before reumed warming from 1977. There was a single warming step in 1976-1977"

..."the effects of natural variability in orbit, solar activity, the lunar tides, ocean currents, ice sheet dynamics, volcanicity, sedimentation, mountain building, subsidence and continental drift are far greater for temperature changes than those calculated for the worst human-induced greenhouse senario."

. . .

"We live in the last days of our normal ration of 10,000 years of benign climate in a 100,000 year cycle driven by orbital changes. Orbital variations change the length of the day. The orbital drivers of our current greenhouse/icehouse cycle is well past its zenith and summer reflection of solar energy at higher latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere is now waning. The Armageddon we humans face is not a pleasant greenhouse warming but a bitter and prolonged icehouse. The fourteenth century was our wake-up call"

PP213-215.

 

He then goes on to give "a number of possible scenarios for 'minor mass extinctions' of humans"

asteroids

geomagnetic reversal

major volcanic eruption (Taupo is a good candidate)

anti-biotic-resistant plague bacteria (recently found in Madagascar)

 

bacteria and virus jump from one species to another (eg AIDS, west nile virus, mad cow disease, Bird Flu +?)

 

I am not doing him justice. Anyone with an interest in global climate should read this book.

Michael

[rockytriton]

It just seems weird to me all the doomsday stuff people throw around. I mean, the earth was hit by a giant meteor that whiped out most of the life on it, and now it still sustains life... People have to get over this idea that the earth is this static sphere where all changes are irreversable by nature. You don't run around talking about the oxygen levels and how much we breath is going to affect how much oxygen is left on the earth, it will be replenished naturally.

[TheFaithfulStone]

Oh the earth isn't in much danger from Global Warming, but we sure are.

 

If we get to be too big a hassle, ol'Terra will just kill us off.

 

TFS

[pmaust]

Here is a really good site to take a look at. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

 

:confused: