Global Warming - Can it be stopped?

Is it possible?

No.

yep. stop using and electric. we'll on electric soon anyway with the outrageous prices and the resources arent gonna last us much longer.

Actually, they have ways to deal with it and slow it down at least. But so far, it seems to come at a cost for other environmental issues. And of course the money costs that comes with it, politics would rather let the world go to hell than pay a cent too much in actually fixing the world. >_>

@Aiden Cross said:

Actually, they have ways to deal with it and slow it down at least. But so far, it seems to come at a cost for other environmental issues. And of course the money costs that comes with it, politics would rather let the world go to hell than pay a cent too much in actually fixing the world. >_>

This. Unfortunately, I don't think global warming will ever be stopped. It seems people are just letting it go to waste. If we try to slow global warming, we'll just get another problem. Poor polar bears in the Arctic. I wish Mr. Freeze would make it more cold there. >_<

What if I told you it was only a theory, and there are more than one theory that it isn't true, but this one makes a lot of money?

@Samimista said:

@Aiden Cross said:

Actually, they have ways to deal with it and slow it down at least. But so far, it seems to come at a cost for other environmental issues. And of course the money costs that comes with it, politics would rather let the world go to hell than pay a cent too much in actually fixing the world. >_>

This. Unfortunately, I don't think global warming will ever be stopped. It seems people are just letting it go to waste. If we try to slow global warming, we'll just get another problem. Poor polar bears in the Arctic. I wish Mr. Freeze would make it more cold there. >_<

It's basically a never ending cycle (so far). We fix one problem, the next will pop up. And they should send the Penguin as well, now we're at it...

No it's literally impossible.

@VyseCarma said:

What if I told you it was only a theory, and there are more than one theory that it isn't true, but this one makes a lot of money?

Actually this one makes very little money and for the record technically gravity is only a theory as well. Pretty sure that's real

I hate that climate change has been used for political agenda's. Regardless of whether you believe it's caused by man it's clearly real. I live in Massachusetts, and in the last few years we've had some freak weather occurrences. Tornado's (actually through my town), freak blizzard in October last year that left over a foot of snow on the ground and knocked down power lines leaving our house with no power in freezing cold temperatures for two weeks. This was fallowed by a winter with basically no snow (very odd for New England), a spring and summer with practically no rain and there was a drought throughout our country. We also had record breaking heat for certain months this year. And that's only one part of a country in one part of the world.

@Vortex13 How many companies are "going green" by law? This does rake in money for those who make green products. Now I'm not saying that was the original intention of global warning, lets call that a happy side-effect shall we?

Last year we had the coldest winter in recorded history across the U.S. On top of this the Ice Caps are in the north are growing for every cap that shrinks in the south and vice versa. Now tell me how Global warming is going to lead us into the second Ice Age 'cause I have heard this theory too, in fact it was broad cast at the last GW Convention (Bet that didn't bring in any money either did it?). Please explain to me how warming leads to all of us freezing. Also did you know our earth rotates not on a circle but its more of an oval where every few hundred years it moves closer to the sun which in essence heats up our planet, is that our fault too? Should we as man kind be blamed for the fact that the moon is pulling away too?

@VyseCarma: Sigh, did you miss the part where I said regardless of whether you think it's caused by man or not it's happening? It actually cost companies more to go green than it does to stay the way they are. They do get somewhat of a tax relief but that doesn't really earn them money it basically just keeps them from loosing them money. Energy plants that aren't green spend less money on waist disposal and less on actual cost of output of pollution. Going green cost companies more money then not.

I'm not sure where you heard the ice caps at the north pole are growing but that is simply not true. Both polar ice caps are shrinking. And global warming isn't even the actual name anymore, it's climate change which is far more accurate.

As to the subject of how climate change would cause another ice age, it's rather simple. The ice shelves melting causes an increase of fresh water in the golf stream. The golf stream is what allows the British Isles to have a temperate climate rather then an arctic one, it also does this for New England (where I live). The more fresh water that interrupts the golf stream triggers a lower flow of warm oceanic water to these regions. This is what can help the start of another ice age, along with other mitigating factors such as atmospheric change and what not.

This is clearly happening. And the whole US did not experience one of the coldest winters on record it actually experienced on of the warmest.

Doesn't need to be stopped as it hasn't even started.

Only way to know that it isn't cyclical is to go about 10,000 years into the future...so ask the Doctor next time he stops by. =)

@Vortex13 Based on NASA/GISS data going back to 1880:

• The trend of annual mean temperatures since 1880 is warming of 0.59 degrees Celsius per century.
• The trend over the last nine years (since 2002) is one of cooling.
• There has been no statistically significant (at 95% confidence level) warming in 14 years (since 1997).
• The trend in March temperatures for the last 12 years (since 2000) is one of cooling.
• There has been no statistically significant warming in March for 17 years (since 1995).
• March 2012 was the coolest March in 13 years (since 1999).

Of course NASA could be wrong, but I trust NASA more than Al Gore

@VyseCarma: I don't care about Al Gore. Send me you're sources please. And again I told you it's not necessarily warming it's climate change.

@Vortex13: Honestly I'm really not THAT interested but hasn't "Climate Change" always been happening? Won't it always continue to occur? Isn't that new trendy catchphrase totally vague and leaning towards being misleading and disingenuous? Isn't what is really meant by it is that there is a disasterous warming trend which is globe-wide ? I mean come on.

@VyseCarma: Here are my sources.

http://www.edf.org/climate/climate-facts-dangers-and-what-you-can-do?s_src=ggad_climatechange&gclid=CKiz49n2nrICFekQNAodsVYAZA

http://epa.gov/climatechange/impacts-adaptation/

http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

@kuonphobos said:

@Vortex13: Honestly I'm really not THAT interested but hasn't "Climate Change" always been happening? Won't it always continue to occur? Isn't that new trendy catchphrase totally vague and leaning towards being misleading and disingenuous? Isn't what is really meant by it is that there is a disasterous warming trend which is globe-wide ? I mean come on.

It has, man kind is accelerating the process in which is going to lead to a drastic global climate shift. This will probably be the next mass extinction that occurs. Human's will survive, but many animal species will die. That being said, I honestly don't think it can be stopped. Slowed down yes, stopped? Not likely.

I also just want to include that although I don't think there is any whoopdidoo over what is called "Global Warming" or "Climate Change" is certainly doesn't follow that we as a race can just keep on exploiting the earth.

Once a month I make a special trip (usually 2) to my local recycle station where I drop off all the cardboard, glass, plastic, paper, tin and aluminum that I have collected into three specially designated bins in my garage. We have special bags in the kitchen where these items are initially collected. I seem to be the only person on my block that does this. I am amazed by how infrequently I have to put out my "actual" garbage.

Now doing all this is a pain in my ass, and I am amazed by the amount of my neighbors recyclables that are sent with the "regular" trash. And truth be told I have considered stopping many times. But I believe in recycling, I have all the "special" lightbulbs in my house etc.

So i'm just saying that the actions don't necessarily follow from the belief in either direction.

@Vortex13 I can not find the article about it on MSN I read. The only reason I read that one is because MSN is usually pro-Warming.

I'm just giving the other side of the arguement. I couldn't care less on way or another. I think Global Warming is another political topic that both sides are arguing to death.

Yes the climate is changing, no its not almost always warming for example: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19163119 The world just goes through odd phases, otherwise what caused the Ice Age in the first place? I'm sure we've all been hit in the head with at least one astronomy book to know the earth turns in an elipses but do you want a picture?

Trust me. Global Warming is the least of our worries. In 20 years we won't have natural gasses to destroy the planet. We have bigger things to worry about if you ask me.

@VyseCarma: I know that the earth turns on a tilted access and that it doesn't orbit in a perfect circle... what is your point?

Like I said in my first post, it really shouldn't be a political topic because it's not up for debate. It is happening. It's the same reason it bugs me that evolution is used as a political subject, it's science not politics.

@NlGHTCRAWLER said:

Trust me. Global Warming is the least of our worries. In 20 years we won't have natural gasses to destroy the planet. We have bigger things to worry about if you ask me.

Such as?

@Vortex13 said:

@VyseCarma: I know that the earth turns on a tilted access and that it doesn't orbit in a perfect circle... what is your point?

Like I said in my first post, it really shouldn't be a political topic because it's not up for debate. It is happening. It's the same reason it bugs me that evolution is used as a political subject, it's science not politics.

I agree with this but once the appeal was made to begin making changes by political means (and I can't see how it could be changed other wise ) and once it was revealed that there was a potential racket between politics and the "Green Agenda" it really climbed into bed with politics.

Oh and for the record Climate Change (by this I mean that the climate changes) can not be stopped! =)

@kuonphobos said:

Won't it always continue to occur? Isn't that new trendy catchphrase totally vague and leaning towards being misleading and disingenuous? Isn't what is really meant by it is that there is a disasterous warming trend which is globe-wide ? I mean come on.

They've dropped 'Global warming' in favor of simply 'Climate Change' because the range of effects is far wider than simply increased temperature. Winters are getting hasher, monsoons are getting wilder, etc.

@AtPhantom: But aren't those effects the results of the current globe wide increase in temp? And isn't "Climate Change" extremely vague and easily conflated with the truth that "yes ladies and gents climate does change?" and hence easier for the masses to swallow and therefore slightly cynical and disingenuous aka politcally agenda driven? Seems there are at least two issues under discussion. Whether the globe is warming and whether there is a political agenda at play that will create millions in revenue and line the pockets of the rich whatever their political persuasion.

Sorry, I realize that I am way off thread here...so....

WE ALL GONNA DIE

The Earth undergoes Climate Change.

No such thing as Global Warming.

@kuonphobos said:

@AtPhantom: But aren't those effects the results of the current globe wide increase in temp? And isn't "Climate Change" extremely vague and easily conflated with the truth that "yes ladies and gents climate does change?" and hence easier for the masses to swallow and therefore slightly cynical and disingenuous aka politcally agenda driven? Seems there are at least two issues under discussion. Whether the globe is warming and whether there is a political agenda at play that will create millions in revenue and line the pockets of the rich whatever their political persuasion.

Sorry, I realize that I am way off thread here...so....

Meh. I don't know the underlying political reasons behind it, but from what I gathered they're evading the term to ward off attacks along the lines of "HURR DURR THIS WAS THE COLDEST WINTER EVER, NO SUCH THING AS GLOBAL WARMING!" from the anti-science crowd, and I know for a fact that such attacks were made.

Nope. we're screwed.

@AtPhantom: Totally agree...the political poison flows both ways on this issue. I just say even if the globe is only warming up because it has entered into a cycle of warming we should act responsibly toward the planet because it is in our best interest to do so. We shouldn't shit where we eat so to speak. But we should also be wary of those who are profitting from our fear and who seem to be willing to gamble away global fiscal resources on junk science. These seem to be two paths to destroying the future.

@kuonphobos: Well I don't know. I don't have all the data or the expertize to analyze it to determine if the climate change we're going through is natural or man-made. But there was recently a worl wide climatologist congress which did conclude that humanity is most likely responsible of it, so I'm guessing it's probably true.

Is it possible to stop something when it isn't happening? 0-0

It's impossible to stop, but it can be prevented.

@AtPhantom said:

@kuonphobos: Well I don't know. I don't have all the data or the expertize to analyze it to determine if the climate change we're going through is natural or man-made. But there was recently a worl wide climatologist congress which did conclude that humanity is most likely responsible of it, so I'm guessing it's probably true.

The only problem with some of those "Congresses" is that they are not necessarily impartial. They can be funded by "Green" agenda groups or have their whole annual budgets depend upon their "results". Some can even be "fanatics" in their own right fudging results to sway opinion like they found in the case in England (with which admittedly I am not very familiar) so just because they say so....not with the potential for corruption. Look into the financial underpinnings of the Green Movement. Hell, if you are Green and play your cards right you can even win the fekin' Nobel.

@kuonphobos said:

The only problem with some of those "Congresses" is that they are not necessarily impartial. They can be funded by "Green" agenda groups or have their whole annual budgets depend upon their "results". Some can even be "fanatics" in their own right fudging results to sway opinion like they found in the case in England (with which admittedly I am not very familiar) so just because they say so....not with the potential for corruption. Look into the financial underpinnings of the Green Movement. Hell, if you are Green and play your cards right you can even win the fekin' Nobel.

Well, hell, at this point we reach the problem that if they're untrustworthy, who isn't?

Nevertheless, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a UN scientific body with scientists from all over the world, have reached a concensus in 2007 (Which is what I was talking about) that there's a 90% chance the climate change is man-made. This concensus is agreed upon by every major climate research organization in the world and I highly doubt that all of them have an ulterior motive.

@AtPhantom: I was only trying to point out that one needs to consider the motives behind even scientific studies. At at the risk of sounding like a troll let me just say that you can't move the anti-Green movement with appeals to the United Nations. But I do see your point.

" Well, hell, at this point we reach the problem that if they're untrustworthy, who isn't?"

to borrow a quote I love from HBO Rome "You touch it with a needle".

@kuonphobos: I perm\sonally think the Green Movements have peetered out and the people have overcome the sensationalist 'WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!' stage, and are now much more open to actually looking at what is true and what's not regarding global warming and climate change.

I mean, the last sensationalist I've heard of was Al Gore, and that was a painfully transparent attempt to stay relevant after loosing the presidential race. But apart from him all I've heard in the recent years are the relatively moderate and sound voices of scientists discussing the subject.

@AtPhantom: At the risk of beating a dead horse ( I use a lot of idioms) I am amazed by your positive attitude and faith in regards to the motives of anyone when not only billions of dollars, but prestige in their fields is at stake. I have spent many years within the halls of academia and trust me when I say peer pressure is just as powerful in one's professional life as it is in their adolescence. Maybe even stronger as the stakes are so much higher. Reputations and self validity are made and broken with a poorly written article or one wrong theory. But beyond this is the money. Many Billions stand to be made. The entire GDPs of nations depend upon certain lists which is fiscal death to be on or not on.

I had a thought recently it goes like this..."Liberals see Corporations the same way the Conservatives see Governments" in the case of the scientific community, it is beholden to both coorporations and governments. It is not free to follow truth. It is enslaved and merely follows the whims of it's masters. Sadly the same can be said of nearly everything. I understand that I am now meandering into metaphysics here, but freedom is an illusion.

@CaioTrubat said:

No.

@kuonphobos: Meh. I don't have any experience in the field to comment, but like I said, I have no problem believing some, or even a majority of scientists have ulterior motives, but there is literally no major climatologist organization in the world disagreeing with the 2007 consensus. The first thing you'd expect in a flurry of scientists covering their asses would be controversy up the wazoo. There isn't any in the scientific community.

@AtPhantom: I agree and it brings us to one of two conclusions: Either climate change as described by the various studies you have mentioned is happening or there really are no independant voices in the community sufficiently large enough (or brave enough) to challenge the status quo. As I somewhat facetiously stated earlier I don't think there is enough evidence to conclude that the current environment isn't just the result of natural cycles that will take thousands of years to confirm. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't at least act in a consevative and responsible way regarding the environment. But we should take care as we make bills and laws that place too much regulation and end up crippling coorporations and nations when the true motives may be greed, applause, awards and accolades.

Global warming was/is just a ploy to encourage environmentally-friendly actions. Climate change, however, is obviously real and occurring and has been occurring ever since the Earth was formed.

Nuclear Winter, I actually preffer cold weather more than hot, no matter how Cold it is

Unfortunately, I don't think we can do much to stop climate change other then use different fuel for cars in the future and stop smoking, littering etc, dirtying the water

I believe in science. There are studies and tests and data I can myself peruse and also, peer reviews and stringent standards applied to any interpretation of climate change/global warming, etc.

Just because an issue became politicized doesn't make it suspect. Just pay attention, question and learn. Then think for yourself. It is actually a very simple process.