I need evidence that man is causing the alleged global warming "crisis". Every time I try to check out the scientific "data", it is flawed or proven false. I suspect the whole thing could be a hoax. If I'm wrong, give me the correct info.
Global Warming: Myth or Fact
This topic is locked from further discussion.
=============================
I have mixed feelings on this. I've heard a couple studies which said that we are still emerging from the ice age, which does make sense to me. However I do think that with the high pollution emissions we are also speeding up this process.
i doubt its a hoax. i think that its just hard to prove either way.
meh. It will only affect my grandchildren ;p
Global Warming is a fact. At times it may seem that its just some myth that pople have made up cause we dont feel or see immediate effects from it but, there has been studies that have shown this effect does exist.
Ok big example: Look at the weather events from each year and watch how their increasing. Hurrican Katrina, California fire, e.t.c
The California fire came from a accident but the events that took place during the season was Global warming related. Also look at the glaciers that is so famously known thats melting due to global warming.
POHOCOM says:
"I need evidence that man is causing the alleged global warming "crisis". Every time I try to check out the scientific "data", it is flawed or proven false. I suspect the whole thing could be a hoax. If I'm wrong, give me the correct info."
If you look at the statistics in Bangladesh, you will see that there has been a sharp increase in the severity of flooding in the tiny central Asian country.
I have some information from some studies I did last year, I just need to find them. If you need more information let me know, but if you look at Bangladesh you will see it is the one country that has clearly suffered the direct effects of global warming
BatgirlBabs says:
"POHOCOM says:"I need evidence that man is causing the alleged global warming "crisis". Every time I try to check out the scientific "data", it is flawed or proven false. I suspect the whole thing could be a hoax. If I'm wrong, give me the correct info."If you look at the statistics in Bangladesh, you will see that there has been a sharp increase in the severity of flooding in the tiny central Asian country.
I have some information from some studies I did last year, I just need to find them. If you need more information let me know, but if you look at Bangladesh you will see it is the one country that has clearly suffered the direct effects of global warming"
Thanks. My main questions are 1. Before man even existed there were several Ice Ages which came to an end. Each Ice Age came to an end because the Earth got WARMER. If science has proven that the Earth has gotten substantially warmer on its own several times BEFORE man even existed, why did it happen and how do we know it's not happening again. Man may have nothing to do with it. 2. I have heard that depending on how large a time frame you consider, the Earth has actually gotten COOLER. Are they judging the past 10 years? The past 50 years? The past 100 years? And are they looking at only a time frame that "fits" their claim? 3. I have heard of a million theories that would explain global warming, assuming that it even exists. Most of them have to do completely with NATURE. Why do I only hear Al Gore blaming man? I suspect he may have a financial motive behind his agenda.
The basic explanation I've always heard for Global Warming comes down to the Greenhouse Effect. Humans are putting a lot of pollution into the air, from cars, trucks, factories, anything that puts gunk into the air. It builds up in a thick layer, even if we can't clearly see it, which holds in all the heat, or at least most of it, that Earth gets from sunlight. The light can get in, the heat it gives off can't get out. It's like what happens in a greenhouse, hence the Greenhouse Effect. That's what causes Global Warming, or at least it's the main cause. This seems to be much more severe then what nature has caused before, even if nature has a part in it, it can't be the only thing causing this.
POHOCOM says:
"White Phantom says:"The basic explanation I've always heard for Global Warming comes down to the Greenhouse Effect. Humans are putting a *lot* of pollution into the air, from cars, trucks, factories, anything that puts gunk into the air. It builds up in a thick layer, even if we can't clearly see it, which holds in all the heat, or at least most of it, that Earth gets from sunlight. The light can get in, the heat it gives off can't get out. It's like what happens in a greenhouse, hence the Greenhouse Effect. That's what causes Global Warming, or at least it's the main cause. This seems to be much more severe then what nature has caused before, even if nature has a part in it, it can't be the only thing causing this. "Why not? That's my point. There was enough warming of the Earth to end the last Ice Age prior to pollution! Where do they get their "facts" that it is caused by man. I'm not even sure there's enough data to say the Earth is actually warming."
How do you know there isn't enough data, they've got data that the arctic is shrinking, there are a lot more hurricanes, and you'll notice there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for it, why would people make up something like this if it isn't really happening? What proof and data do you want?
White Phantom says:
"The basic explanation I've always heard for Global Warming comes down to the Greenhouse Effect. Humans are putting a *lot* of pollution into the air, from cars, trucks, factories, anything that puts gunk into the air. It builds up in a thick layer, even if we can't clearly see it, which holds in all the heat, or at least most of it, that Earth gets from sunlight. The light can get in, the heat it gives off can't get out. It's like what happens in a greenhouse, hence the Greenhouse Effect. That's what causes Global Warming, or at least it's the main cause. This seems to be much more severe then what nature has caused before, even if nature has a part in it, it can't be the only thing causing this. "
Why not? That's my point. There was enough warming of the Earth to end the last Ice Age prior to pollution! Where do they get their "facts" that it is caused by man. I'm not even sure there's enough data to say the Earth is actually warming.
White Phantom says:
"POHOCOM says:"White Phantom says:"The basic explanation I've always heard for Global Warming comes down to the Greenhouse Effect. Humans are putting a *lot* of pollution into the air, from cars, trucks, factories, anything that puts gunk into the air. It builds up in a thick layer, even if we can't clearly see it, which holds in all the heat, or at least most of it, that Earth gets from sunlight. The light can get in, the heat it gives off can't get out. It's like what happens in a greenhouse, hence the Greenhouse Effect. That's what causes Global Warming, or at least it's the main cause. This seems to be much more severe then what nature has caused before, even if nature has a part in it, it can't be the only thing causing this. "Why not? That's my point. There was enough warming of the Earth to end the last Ice Age prior to pollution! Where do they get their "facts" that it is caused by man. I'm not even sure there's enough data to say the Earth is actually warming."
How do you know there isn't enough data, they've got data that the arctic is shrinking, there are a lot more hurricanes, and you'll notice there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for it, why would people make up something like this if it isn't really happening? What proof and data do you want?"
I never said there was not enough data. That's why I started this topic. I said that I've looked for certain data and I've found it misleading and often totally unscientific.
For example, if a scientist says "Ooh, the Arctic has melted 1% every 5 years since 1990." What the heck does that prove? Nothing. Under Bush the stock market was soaring throughout much of his term. Now its bad. That's the nature of the economy. It ALWAYS goes up and down. Every scientist would admit that the weather has ALWAYS gotten warmer and then colder, for millions of years. I want proof that this is not simply the natural warming cycle of the planet. I want proof that that man is a substantial contributing factor. I want to know how they are actually defining "global warming". It recently snowed in Africa for God's sake! Just because the Arctic is shrinking, doesn't mean the ENTIRE PLANET is getting warmer. As I said, I have not found scientific answers to these legitimate questions. That's why I suspect a possible hoax. But, I'm keeping an open mind about it.
Fact.
I saw it in Europe.
I am seeing it in Southeast Asia.
You do not need to see the scientific data to prove it to you, you just have to see your own environment to notice the weather change, the increase and decrease of number of certain animals, among other things.
IcePrince_X says:
"Fact.I saw it in Europe.I am seeing it in Southeast Asia.You do not need to see the scientific data to prove it to you, you just have to see your own environment to notice the weather change, the increase and decrease of number of certain animals, among other things."
But, "my environment" isn't the WHOLE PLANET. As I said, it snowed in Africa last year. What should Africans believe? The subject MUST be approached scientifically.
We would know if Global Warming was an actual fact is our President would show some initiative and we wouldn't have to hear about it from random scientists,Arnie,and Al Gore.
NEW VENOM says:
"***FACT*** if it wasnt why would they talk so much about it?year after year after year"
Do I need to make a list of things the media and others have talked about for years that turned out to be completely false or badly exaggerated? Politicians also do it to further personal agendas which may not be in our best interest.
POHOCOM says:
"NEW VENOM says:"***FACT*** if it wasnt why would they talk so much about it?year after year after year"Do I need to make a list of things the media and others have talked about for years that turned out to be completely false or badly exaggerated? Politicians also do it to further personal agendas which may not be in our best interest. "
I am a biologist as one of my profession. So, what I stated is just a generalized answer from what I have seen, experienced, learned and studied. I do not need to bring in a lot of statistical data or photographs to convince a lot of people what has the world has become rather I would rather do my thing in protecting the planet.
You are a skeptic and I do not need to push you to change your view. You were posting a question on global warming and I answered. But put it this way, try to breathe in Carbon Monoxide, will you live? Are you familiar with the Nitrogen Cycle? The Carbon-Oxygen Cycle? The Potassium Cycle? among other things? It is funny that people think that these nutrition and environmental cycle has no effect in our weather and environment. You will be surprised some of these cycles causes the air we breathe in or the fire we light up or even the movement of the ocean current. Each cycle has a certain number needed to keep ecological balance, pollution causes excess or diminishes the number needed, how? try to add more carbon in the air by adding up all the smoke produced by vehicles or adding too much nitrogen in the soil through inorganic fertilizers making the soil too rich for the plant to grow in.
So before you ask and start being to much of a critic with the reply here ... I ask you...have you done your own actual studies? are you really that involved? Because in the scientific community that is how we refute each others claim we just don't take is just given to us, unless it was already given as a natural law.
I can understand your sentiment, I was there before.
IcePrince_X says:
"POHOCOM says:"NEW VENOM says:"***FACT*** if it wasnt why would they talk so much about it?year after year after year"Do I need to make a list of things the media and others have talked about for years that turned out to be completely false or badly exaggerated? Politicians also do it to further personal agendas which may not be in our best interest. "
I am a biologist as one of my profession. So, what I stated is just a generalized answer from what I have seen, experienced, learned and studied. I do not need to bring in a lot of statistical data or photographs to convince a lot of people what has the world has become rather I would rather do my thing in protecting the planet.
You are a skeptic and I do not need to push you to change your view. You were posting a question on global warming and I answered. But put it this way, try to breathe in Carbon Monoxide, will you live? Are you familiar with the Nitrogen Cycle? The Carbon-Oxygen Cycle? The Potassium Cycle? among other things? It is funny that people think that these nutrition and environmental cycle has no effect in our weather and environment. You will be surprised some of these cycles causes the air we breathe in or the fire we light up or even the movement of the ocean current. Each cycle has a certain number needed to keep ecological balance, pollution causes excess or diminishes the number needed, how? try to add more carbon in the air by adding up all the smoke produced by vehicles or adding too much nitrogen in the soil through inorganic fertilizers making the soil too rich for the plant to grow in.
So before you ask and start being to much of a critic with the reply here ... I ask you...have you done your own actual studies? are you really that involved? Because in the scientific community that is how we refute each others claim we just don't take is just given to us, unless it was already given as a natural law.
I can understand your sentiment, I was there before. "
If you were really where I am, you would give me answers to my questions. You answered none of them. I don't need to be pushed to change my views. All I need are facts, or answers to questions that are reasonable. I become more skeptical when I get "answers" like this from someone claiming to be a scientist.
Fact...unless of course you're a climatologist on Chevron's payroll, in which case 'more research is needed!!'.
For goodness sakes, why would people just make up something like this? Sure we can't compare it to warming that's happened in the past, like prehistoric times, but in case you haven't noticed, time travel hasn't been invented, and I haven't heard of people who are that old. Anyway, what are you waiting for, what proof do you want? We have started putting more pollution into the air, the Earth starts to warm up. They just happened to occur around the same time. What would a person gain by making stuff up? And what questions do you want answered? Sure, it would be great if it was a myth, but it doesn't look like it is.
The earths gonna be burned in the end. But don't worry about it. It won't happen now.
Lantern Prime says:
"The earths gonna be burned in the end. But don't worry about it. It won't happen now."
No the earth will be pushed away from it's current orbit when the sun gets all bloaty as the sun will lose some of it's mass when it expands.
Any way I believe it's a fact but I believe we have less of a part of it than the earth itself. And also, it's not actually really a global effect right now. Some areas have a reverse effect. And also, farm animals are just as much to blame as our cars.
No the Farmers are at falt.
Dreadnaught says:
"Lantern Prime says:"The earths gonna be burned in the end. But don't worry about it. It won't happen now."No the earth will be pushed away from it's current orbit when the sun gets all bloaty as the sun will lose some of it's mass when it expands.
Any way I believe it's a fact but I believe we have less of a part of it than the earth itself. And also, it's not actually really a global effect right now. Some areas have a reverse effect. And also, farm animals are just as much to blame as our cars. "
I'm glad u realize the contribution that animals have contributed to the whole atmospheric situation. This is why I say it could be a myth though. No one has yet posted anything that even resembles an answer to any of my questions. I only see people asking "what proof do u need"? or saying "it's too obvious. You don't need proof." Mabey it's me, but I can't think of ANYTHING that I believe in which I cannot explain with at least some sort of real info. Signs of mass hoax, but I'll still try to keep an open mind.
POHOCOM says:
"Alexander Anderson says:"Fact...unless of course you're a climatologist on Chevron's payroll, in which case 'more research is needed!!'."Just some scientific data is needed. Haven't seen any yet. You probably haven't either."
Start here:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/recentcc.html
or here:
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch09.pdf
or here:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v329/n6138/abs/329414a0.html
or here:
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Report/AR4WG1_Print_Ch02.pdf
or here:
http://royalsociety.org/displaypagedoc.asp?id=13619
or here:
http://royalsociety.org/downloaddoc.asp?id=1630
or here:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686
or...you get the picture.
In fact, I'm a little curious as to what information you have found proven to be false? And who it was "proven false" by...
Post Edited:2008-04-15 22:19:24
His problem lies he doesn't do his own work.
give him an equation and he will tell you something else.
it is like one of my professor in physics that stated that there is no such thing as dinosaurs and presented 5 volumes of computations and soil analysis of why they did not exist. too far fetch but at least he has something. this person wants to just say its a damn myth because he just say so.
it is fine to say that global warming is still a theory. theory is still a fact but not a general fact accepted by the entire scientific community but a fact that can be applicable to certain situation. meaning it undergo the actual scientific process.
Yes, I've encountered that phenomenon myself. All too often. It seems in the U.S. we have have this attitude that if science doesn't fit in with our beliefs, then it's the science that is wrong, not our deliberate ignorance or misinformed beliefs.
Two billions bits of data to support a theory, such as evolution, dinosaurs, or climate change, and they chose instead to pay attention to the crackpot that says "Ha! We didn't have a bad hurricane season last year! Global Warming must be a hoax!"
America became great because we embraced scientific knowledge and change. Sadly, we're becoming stagnant and quite medieval in our cowardice to have our world view challenged. One of the first signs of cultural decline: The inability to apart and change.
Pania says:
"Yes, I've encountered that phenomenon myself. All too often. It seems in the U.S. we have have this attitude that if science doesn't fit in with our beliefs, then it's the science that is wrong, not our deliberate ignorance or misinformed beliefs.Two billions bits of data to support a theory, such as evolution, dinosaurs, or climate change, and they chose instead to pay attention to the crackpot that says "Ha! We didn't have a bad hurricane season last year! Global Warming must be a hoax!"America became great because we embraced scientific knowledge and change. Sadly, we're becoming stagnant and quite medieval in our cowardice to have our world view challenged. One of the first signs of cultural decline: The inability to apart and change. "
I don't mind mind people being condescending, but at least make sense. When did I say that if science doesn't fit in with my beliefs then it's wrong? If you bothered to read, you would know that I base my beliefs off of pure science, facts and/or logic. Second, when have I ever displayed "misinformed beliefs"? None of my stated beliefs, in any topic, can be shown to be false. Again if you actually READ my posts again, you would know that. It seems that you are the one who's misinformed if you believe that there are
"two billion bits of data" that support what you believe. It would seem that you are the one who is ignorant if you believe that a scientist who believes differently than your preferred scientists are "crackpots". If you knew anything about science you would know that VERY often, the "crackpots" are right because they don't get caught up in politics.
Finally, I did read some of the material you posted. It CONFIRMED WHAT IVE SAID. Maybe U should read your own data. It was acknowledged that it can't be determined what part of global warming, if any, can be attributed to man! It also conveniently OMITTED many environmental factors such as sun spot activity, and human and animal bodily emissions into the air. Why OMIT that? This is important because it's been proven that the emissions from cows are more damaging to the environment than cars! Also, we now have 6 billion people on Earth now. Where is the accounting for the massive population increase? You may find that if you open your mind a little more, like me, you might start to have a few questions of your own about the global warming controversy. But, that would require being open to hearing BOTH side of an argument before forming opinions and labeling others. Give it a try. Also, thanks for taking the time to get the "info". It was appreciated, believe it or not, because it did answer a couple of my questions. It proved that some "scientists" who believe in global warming have not taken many pertinent facts under consideration.
Oh really, I haven't seen any of your facts, only that you think it's just a myth. So what if it snowed in Africa, the Arctic is melting for goodness sakes! That place hardly gets above freezing, that's why it's stayed a lot of snow and ice for centuries. But now it's starting to melt, it's been melting. If this was just like the Ice Ages, then this would be temporary, probably only lasting a few years, but this has been going on for longer then a few years. Your mind isn't open, if it was open you'd admit that this is really happening. Your mind is shut. I haven't come across anything where Global Warming hasn't been attributed to the massive amounts of pollution that man is putting into the air. Sure, other things may cause some of it, but the pollution is what's different now, when Global Warming is occurring. We've given information to show that Global Warming is a fact, and you haven't really given any solid, believable information to counter it. Give us some, something to support your theories that this is a hoax. Do something to back up your claims, I haven't seen anything.
White Phantom says:
"Oh really, I haven't seen any of your ***facts***, only that you think it's just a myth. So what if it snowed in Africa, the Arctic is melting for goodness sakes! That place hardly gets above freezing, that's why it's stayed a lot of snow and ice for centuries. But now it's starting to melt, it's been melting. If this was just like the Ice Ages, then this would be temporary, probably only lasting a few years, but this has been going on for longer then a few years. Your mind isn't open, if it was open you'd admit that this is really happening. Your mind is shut. I haven't come across anything where Global Warming hasn't been attributed to the massive amounts of pollution that ***man*** is putting into the air. Sure, other things may cause some of it, but the pollution is what's different now, when Global Warming is occurring. We've given information to show that Global Warming is a fact, and you haven't really given any solid, believable information to counter it. Give us some, something to support your theories that this is a hoax. Do something to back up your claims, I haven't seen anything."
Hello? Did you read my opening post? If not, no prob. Sometimes I do the same thing. I said from the beginning that I had heard conflicting data, and that the purpose of this thread was for me to hopefully LEARN SOMETHING and possibly change my view. The absence of factual data behind a theory is arguably "evidence" of a hoax in itself. I need no furter proof and as I said, I wasn't trying to prove anything. I had questions that I think any fair minded, thoughtful person could have. When I had questions about religion I asked my family and clergymen for answers. When I got none, I changed my religion to a more suitable belief system. The same applies here. I've legitimate questions which have yet to be answered and apparently many scientists have similar questions. No need for hostility in an open dialog.
POHOCOM says:
"White Phantom says:"Oh really, I haven't seen any of your ***facts***, only that you think it's just a myth. So what if it snowed in Africa, the Arctic is melting for goodness sakes! That place hardly gets above freezing, that's why it's stayed a lot of snow and ice for centuries. But now it's starting to melt, it's been melting. If this was just like the Ice Ages, then this would be temporary, probably only lasting a few years, but this has been going on for longer then a few years. Your mind isn't open, if it was open you'd admit that this is really happening. Your mind is shut. I haven't come across anything where Global Warming hasn't been attributed to the massive amounts of pollution that ***man*** is putting into the air. Sure, other things may cause some of it, but the pollution is what's different now, when Global Warming is occurring. We've given information to show that Global Warming is a fact, and you haven't really given any solid, believable information to counter it. Give us some, something to support your theories that this is a hoax. Do something to back up your claims, I haven't seen anything."Hello? Did you read my opening post? If not, no prob. Sometimes I do the same thing. I said from the beginning that I had heard conflicting data, and that the purpose of this thread was for me to hopefully LEARN SOMETHING and possibly change my view. The absence of factual data behind a theory is arguably "evidence" of a hoax in itself. I need no furter proof and as I said, I wasn't trying to prove anything. I had questions that I think any fair minded, thoughtful person could have. When I had questions about religion I asked my family and clergymen for answers. When I got none, I changed my religion to a more suitable belief system. The same applies here. I've legitimate questions which have yet to be answered and apparently many scientists have similar questions. No need for hostility in an open dialog. "
I read it, we've given you proof, and you're still being a pain in the neck who is convinced that there isn't any evidence that humans play a big part in this.
White Phantom says:
"POHOCOM says:"White Phantom says:"Oh really, I haven't seen any of your ***facts***, only that you think it's just a myth. So what if it snowed in Africa, the Arctic is melting for goodness sakes! That place hardly gets above freezing, that's why it's stayed a lot of snow and ice for centuries. But now it's starting to melt, it's been melting. If this was just like the Ice Ages, then this would be temporary, probably only lasting a few years, but this has been going on for longer then a few years. Your mind isn't open, if it was open you'd admit that this is really happening. Your mind is shut. I haven't come across anything where Global Warming hasn't been attributed to the massive amounts of pollution that ***man*** is putting into the air. Sure, other things may cause some of it, but the pollution is what's different now, when Global Warming is occurring. We've given information to show that Global Warming is a fact, and you haven't really given any solid, believable information to counter it. Give us some, something to support your theories that this is a hoax. Do something to back up your claims, I haven't seen anything."Hello? Did you read my opening post? If not, no prob. Sometimes I do the same thing. I said from the beginning that I had heard conflicting data, and that the purpose of this thread was for me to hopefully LEARN SOMETHING and possibly change my view. The absence of factual data behind a theory is arguably "evidence" of a hoax in itself. I need no furter proof and as I said, I wasn't trying to prove anything. I had questions that I think any fair minded, thoughtful person could have. When I had questions about religion I asked my family and clergymen for answers. When I got none, I changed my religion to a more suitable belief system. The same applies here. I've legitimate questions which have yet to be answered and apparently many scientists have similar questions. No need for hostility in an open dialog. "
I read it, we've given you proof, and you're still being a pain in the neck who is convinced that there isn't any evidence that humans play a big part in this."
You don't understand what I'm saying. You apparently believe that your "proof" means something. It is merely EVIDENCE. I just said that the scientists have ADMITTED that they can't determine how much influence man is contributing. I read that in the info Pania says I didn't read. If they admit it, why am I a pain in the neck for acknowledging this. That attitude contributes to the doubts of some people. There are people who have dismissed the the whole global warming thing outright. I'm trying to learn if there is some solid data that I haven't heard yet, and get attacked. The evidence provided is appreciated but still left me with questions.
Let's put it this way, before the Industrial Revolution, the planet would go through climatic changes, ice ages and warming trends, but they would take tens of thousands of years to cycle.
Since the Industrial Revolution, the planet is going through temperature fluctuations in decades that it used to take a thousand-plus years to produce.
And this is somehow a coincidence? That temperatures started rising extremely rapidly just happened to coincide with the time we started dumping massive amounts of pollutants into the air?
The evidence in there, it's all the links I provided. You are just in denial.
BTW-You haven't shown us anything of the facts that have been proven "false".
Post Edited:2008-04-17 17:01:36
Pania says:
"Let's put it this way, before the Industrial Revolution, the planet would go through climatic changes, ice ages and warming trends, but they would take tens of thousands of years to cycle.Since the Industrial Revolution, the planet is going through temperature fluctuations in decades that it used to take a thousand-plus years to produce.And this is somehow a coincidence? That temperatures started rising extremely rapidly just happened to coincide with the time we started dumping massive amounts of pollutants into the air?The evidence in there, it's all the links I provided. You are just in denial.BTW-You haven't shown us anything of the facts that have been proven "false".
Post Edited:2008-04-17 17:01:36"
Again, unwarranted hostility. How am I in denial? When did I say anything you said was false? Is that in any of my posts? What I said was that I have unanswered questions. In other words, wouldn't you agree that there are more humans alive on Earth than at any time in history? Billions more in fact. Wouldn't you wonder what effect that enormous increase in people have on the environment? Wouldn't you be curious why certain parts of the planet are cooler than others? Unless you believe that ALL countries have are warmer average temperature than they did 50 years ago. I, unlike you, wish to see the best arguments and questions from both sides to form an opinion. Incidentally, I don't think that dumping massive amounts of pollution into the air is a good thing at all, and would like to see a movement towards a more clean environment. I love nature. I'm just not clear on the global warming thing. I had heard that the 99% of the atmosphere which is responsible for the warmth retained in the planet is water vapor and other natural gases.
I don't know if that's true, but if it is true that the planet is getting warmer and its in our power to stop it, then I want a solution based on facts, not political correctness. We may have to do some sort of population control. Who knows? Let's keep ALL things on the table.
Scientists had a hard time figuring out fot a long time how the Ice Age ended. Since the Earth was completely covered in ice and snow, it would had reflected most of the Sun's rays which would had otherwise started to melt the ice. However, it finally dawned on them... carbon-dioxide. Carbon-dioxide is something produced by living creatures, fires, and volcanoes. Plants breathe carbon-dioxide and exhale oxygen, but plant-life wasn't very plentiful during the Ice Age. It built up in the atmosphere over thousands of years and intensified the Sun's heat.
What's the point of that? Carbon-Dioxide. Under normal conditions, it took thousands of years to create a greenhouse effect, but humans are speeding up the process exponentially. There are over 6 billion humans on the Earth (and counting), we burn gasoline in all of our engines and smoke cigarettes 24 hours a day, and we're systematically tearing down all of the trees and clearing out all the grass and bushes.
In other words, we produce massive amounts of carbon-dioxide and we're getting rid of the things that purify our air.
DEADPOOL says:
"Scientists had a hard time figuring out fot a long time how the Ice Age ended. Since the Earth was completely covered in ice and snow, it would had reflected most of the Sun's rays which would had otherwise started to melt the ice. However, it finally dawned on them... carbon-dioxide. Carbon-dioxide is something produced by living creatures, fires, and volcanoes. Plants breathe carbon-dioxide and exhale oxygen, but plant-life wasn't very plentiful during the Ice Age. It built up in the atmosphere over thousands of years and intensified the Sun's heat.What's the point of that? Carbon-Dioxide. Under normal conditions, it took thousands of years to create a greenhouse effect, but humans are speeding up the process exponentially. There are over 6 billion humans on the Earth (and counting), we burn gasoline in all of our engines and smoke cigarettes 24 hours a day, and we're systematically tearing down all of the trees and clearing out all the grass and bushes.In other words, we produce massive amounts of carbon-dioxide and we're getting rid of the things that purify our air."
That's my point my friend. You just said carbon dioxide is produced by living creatures. Humans are living creatures. We have 6 billion people on Earth (twice as many than 50 years ago) That means more carbon monoxide, right? I'm not discounting the pollution. OF COURSE its there. But why don't I hear anything about the people and animals? Can we accommodate the current rate of population growth? How much carbon dioxide do humans naturally put out there, compared to 50 years ago? Get the point?
We're not talking about the difference between now and 50 years ago, we are talking about the difference between now and 300 years ago. In the geological times scale changes that previously were taking an hour and now taking place in seconds.
We just discovered global climate change is a problem (actually they were talking about this ten years ago), it not that it didn't exist before 50 years ago.
You are so clutching at straws to deny this is happening and that human industry is responsible along with the clear cutting of forests/jungles and polluting and killing of algae blooms that normally would have processed that CO2 into O2. We're destroying the natural air filtration system, while we dump tons of pollutants into the air.
And somehow climate change is because we breathe?
You asked for proof that it exists, we gave it to you. You keep screaming for proof, and now you want to blame the population numbers when it's pretty clear that industry is the big problem.
And you can't understand why people are getting a little frustrated discussing this with you?
Post Edited:2008-04-17 19:00:43
Pania says:
"We're not talking about the difference between now and 50 years ago, we are talking about the difference between now and 300 years ago. In the geological times scale changes that previously were taking an hour and now taking place in seconds.We just discovered global climate change is a problem (actually they were talking about this ten years ago), it not that it didn't exist before 50 years ago.You are so clutching at straws to deny this is happening and that human industry is responsible along with the clear cutting of forests/jungles and polluting and killing of algae blooms that normally would have processed that CO2 into O2. We're destroying the natural air filtration system, while we dump tons of pollutants into the air.And somehow climate change is because we breathe?You asked for proof that it exists, we gave it to you. You keep screaming for proof, and now you want to blame the population numbers when it's pretty clear that industry is the big problem.And you can't understand why people are getting a little frustrated discussing this with you?
Post Edited:2008-04-17 19:00:43"
Precisely my own sentiments
Can he even explain how cows can cause Green House Effect? Because I know the simple answer. It is not all about Carbon Dioxide it is in another compound, what is it then Pohocom? Gave the answer before that you said made you more confused or is it because you lack the real basis of nutrient cycle that has a direct effect on weather change. Did you know that even the slight change of salinity in the ocean can affect weather?
Ecology is all about the interaction of the biotic and abiotic things and how it can support life. It should be a near perfect equation otherwise, some species will die out.
Going back to your cows...how come there is a large number of cows? Because of humans using the cow to their benefit. Agriculture is born out of human need for food consumption ergo humans is a direct cause of why the cow population has gone big.
We are not discounting the effect of nature in the green house effect nor is the possible interplanetary interaction that can have adverse effect in our planet BUT what is constant is human activity that speeds up processes that normally takes years to happen.
Post Edited:2008-04-17 21:08:47
POHOCOM says:
"DEADPOOL says:"Scientists had a hard time figuring out fot a long time how the Ice Age ended. Since the Earth was completely covered in ice and snow, it would had reflected most of the Sun's rays which would had otherwise started to melt the ice. However, it finally dawned on them... carbon-dioxide. Carbon-dioxide is something produced by living creatures, fires, and volcanoes. Plants breathe carbon-dioxide and exhale oxygen, but plant-life wasn't very plentiful during the Ice Age. It built up in the atmosphere over thousands of years and intensified the Sun's heat.What's the point of that? Carbon-Dioxide. Under normal conditions, it took thousands of years to create a greenhouse effect, but humans are speeding up the process exponentially. There are over 6 billion humans on the Earth (and counting), we burn gasoline in all of our engines and smoke cigarettes 24 hours a day, and we're systematically tearing down all of the trees and clearing out all the grass and bushes.In other words, we produce massive amounts of carbon-dioxide and we're getting rid of the things that purify our air."That's my point my friend. You just said carbon dioxide is produced by living creatures. Humans are living creatures. We have 6 billion people on Earth (twice as many than 50 years ago) That means more carbon monoxide, right? I'm not discounting the pollution. OF COURSE its there. But why don't I hear anything about the people and animals? Can we accommodate the current rate of population growth? How much carbon dioxide do humans naturally put out there, compared to 50 years ago? Get the point? "
More people producing carbon-dioxide from breathing, aswell as the the number of cars they drive, how much and how many smoke, the amount of vegetation that's cleared out for towns and cities to "prosper," amongst other things. It's a domino effect.
How about this? A single tree makes enough oxygen for a famil of four to breathe for a year. So if that's how much oxygen a family of four requires, then that's also roughly how much carbon-dioxide a family of four produces. However, thousands of people are born every day and thousands of trees are cut down every day. Sounds unbalanced, huh?
Pania says:
"We're not talking about the difference between now and 50 years ago, we are talking about the difference between now and 300 years ago. In the geological times scale changes that previously were taking an hour and now taking place in seconds.We just discovered global climate change is a problem (actually they were talking about this ten years ago), it not that it didn't exist before 50 years ago.You are so clutching at straws to deny this is happening and that human industry is responsible along with the clear cutting of forests/jungles and polluting and killing of algae blooms that normally would have processed that CO2 into O2. We're destroying the natural air filtration system, while we dump tons of pollutants into the air.And somehow climate change is because we breathe?You asked for proof that it exists, we gave it to you. You keep screaming for proof, and now you want to blame the population numbers when it's pretty clear that industry is the big problem.And you can't understand why people are getting a little frustrated discussing this with you?
Post Edited:2008-04-17 19:00:43"
No I cant understand. I'm trying not to be "condescending" but it seems like these are valid questions I raise. That's how science works. Ask ANY scientists, and he/she will agree with me. It doesn't matter how much "proof" u think you have, if there are LEGITIMATE unanswered questions, then you only have a THEORY. The second source you were kind enough to provide stated that the past 50 years has been the warmest period since the last 1300 years. I'll accept that as FACT for the sake of argument. I also accept that the human population has DOUBLED in the past 50 years. Can YOU accept that? If the human population has doubled in the past 50 years, then wouldn't the level of carbon dioxide emitted by humans also DOUBLE? Furthermore, wouldn't the natural filtering system of the planet be diminished by the destruction of forests all around the world in the past 50 years? If you think these are senseless questions, then you are the one who's "clutching at straws". I won't even get into the other natural carbon dioxide emissions coming from other animals who's populations have grown in the past 50 years, or the solar activity of the past 50 years. None of these things have anything to do with pollution.
Again, I AM NOT SAYING GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT REAL? I NEVER DID. I am only saying that those things I mentioned are curiously left out of the rants of Al Gore when he discusses global warming. I have been trying to figure out what PERCENTAGE of the "problem" is truly pollution, and what percentage is the other natural things I mentioned. I've heard conflicting info. If you really care about the planet you should want the same answers I want. There's a difference between someone who's in denial, and someone who isn't gullible. I'm the latter.
We answered the "valid questions you raised" with scientific facts from globally and national recognized sources. You keep raising them.
And trying to blame everything else except industry, which is obviously the biggest problem since the sharp changes in global climate started after the Industrial revolution, not 50 years ago. Industry pours far more pollutants into the atmosphere than people do exhaling (C02 being only one "greenhouse gas"), and they are responsible to destroying the earth's natural air filtration system. (And P.S. In case you haven't noticed, most animal populations are on the decline, another by-product of mankind's housing/industry devlopment, hunting, and pollution. That's the reason we have that Endangered Species list.)
And you keep twisting the facts to suit your "anti-theories", like "The last 50 years" B.S. (Radical climate change has been happening for over 200 years. It's in the ice cores, which if had read the source I provided, you would know that.)
Because you're in denial.
And actually, you did start this thread by asking if "global warming was a hoax". In fact, "Global Warming was Myth or Fact" is the title you gave this thread.
Post Edited:2008-04-18 12:08:55
There is enough evidence that perhaps we (as humans) should reconsider using the earth as a toilet for the last hundred (or so) years.
Isn't that enough?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment