deleted thread al gore

[GordMay]

The Arctic Climate Impact Assessment is an international project of the Arctic Council and the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC), to evaluate and synthesize knowledge on climate variability, climate change, and increased ultraviolet radiation and their consequences. It released its report in 2004, showing that the Arctic is warming at a faster rate than the rest of the globe. The ACIA predicts that summer sea ice levels will decline by half by the end of the century, with some models showing near-complete disappearance of summer sea ice. The consequences of warming in the Arctic will include: a rise in global sea levels, an increase in arctic marine traffic, a decrease in available food supplies for animals and indigenous peoples and other environmental impacts, according to the ACIA report.
Goto: Welcome to ACIA

The United States Climate Change Program is the US's top federal climate change research initiative. It's most recent report resolved apparent discrepancies in climate data that showed warming and cooling in the earth's atmosphere and on the surface. These discrepancies had been cited by sceptics of climate change, but the Program's research effectively reduced those differences, and both atmospheric and surface temperature data now show a warming trend. The agency noted that "the evidence continues to support a substantial human impact on global temperature increases."
Goto: US Global Change Research Program

[Maddog]

Is this thread still going on?

Take this over to Sailing Anarchy in the political section and have some fun.

[waterworldly]

That's the big point, I think. This is not political, this is environmental, and sooner or later that point should be made. There is nothing political about a volcano erupting, or an earthquake, or the melting going on in at the north pole. Making it political doesn't affect the eventual outcome, no matter how hard you try to paint it that way. Politicians come and go, the environment is what your grandkids inherit.

[Alan Wheeler]

The planet has been around for millions of years, not thousands. At some point during that time, Anarctica was tropical, Hawaii had snow. Change happens. How fast, who knows. But if the gulf stream is altered by the flow of fresh water from the melting glaciers at the north pole (which is happening before our eyes, the Northwest Passage opened this summer),

Several points to consider here. Firstly, Antartica was indeed once tropical. But that was because of it's position, not because it was hotter. Antartica has moved to the bottom of the world. It was once way up here with us.
The gulf stream moves more to the spinning and tilting of the earth than the sea temp. The Sea temp does have a small impact on it, but not to the extent of the earths rotation.
For some reason, know one knows why yet, but the Sun has increased it's output dramaticly in the last 100yrs. Enough increase to raise the earths temp by 1deg. Is this a Sun cycle?? no one knows. Experts consider it a cycle because on the scale of the Sun, measuring such an increase in energy over such a short time scale (solar speaking) is like measuring a very short spike. 100yrs for the Sun is like a burp. Maybe it will lower it's output again, maybe it will increase further. It takes about 10,000yrs for something that happend in the Suns core to reach it's surface.
Have we had an affect on the Earths Polution?? Absolutely. Should we do somethign about it?? Absolutley. Is the sky falling down like certain politicians suggest???Personaly I don't think so. Do some people stand to make a lot of money from so called Global warming?? Absolutley. And guess where that money will come from, the poor folks like us.

[Fishspearit]

Do some people stand to make a lot of money from so called Global warming?? Absolutley. And guess where that money will come from, the poor folks like us.

Perhaps you could tell us how people are going to make money off of Global warming. Maybe if I lived in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela I would feel differently, but it seems to me that shifting from oil consumption to alternative energy would be good for us economically. Isn't that what we are doing when we move onto a sailboat and put up wind generators and solar panels? What's wrong with trying to shift from oil to alternative sources of energy, even if global warming turns out to be total crap it still seems like the right economic move for countries that are net importers of oil.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Fishspearit

. . . it seems to me that shifting from oil consumption to alternative energy would be good for us economically. Isn't that what we are doing when we move onto a sailboat and put up wind generators and solar panels? What's wrong with trying to shift from oil to alternative sources of energy, even if global warming turns out to be total crap it still seems like the right economic move for countries that are net importers of oil.

Fishspearit, your post is so reasonable and rational, it seems out of place on this thread.

TaoJones

[OldSarg]

One great way to feel better about global warming and to help "someone" make some money is to buy a TerraPass when you travel. It looks like you can buy one when you travel by air and auto. Looks like sailing has been left out in the cold (or heat).

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by Fishspearit

Perhaps you could tell us how people are going to make money off of Global warming. Maybe if I lived in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela I would feel differently, but it seems to me that shifting from oil consumption to alternative energy would be good for us economically. Isn't that what we are doing when we move onto a sailboat and put up wind generators and solar panels? What's wrong with trying to shift from oil to alternative sources of energy, even if global warming turns out to be total crap it still seems like the right economic move for countries that are net importers of oil.

The issue in my mind is the tremendous amount of pseudo science and guesswork.

On the surface solar panels and a sailboat makes sense. But how are the solar panels made? What happens to them when they are past their useful life? This is the concept of externalities and unintended consequence. Some would argue that the oil and polutants that go into making a 24W panel far outweigh the green benefits of the panel.

Additionally, what was used in making that plastic hulled boat? What happens to the boat afterwards? Is sailing even an endeavor that provides any use to the planet other than oneself? If not should the activity be banned?

Absolutely not. The activity should be taxed!

This is where people are saying there is money to be made. Carbon credit will be traded. It doesn't mean you can't pollute, you just have to buy credits to cover the pollutants. It's a revenue scheme.

Now having said that...

Making a smaller personal footprint is a good thing. No one can argue that. Pick up your trash and scoop up any plastic bags you can as you sail along. Don't buy inneficient cars. Turn lights off and keep heat and air conditioning at reasonable levels.

As I have said many times before, I don't really care if the human race becomes extinct. The planet will be fine.

BTW - The planet is cooling. It absolutely has to be. The air may lose it's protective atmoshpere but someday this place will be a cold rock.

Oh and the planet is billions of years old, not thousands or even millions. Mammals have been around about 65 million of those years. We are but a spec in the timeline of Earth.

[Trim50]

The entire Al Gore issue boils down to a very simple but nearly impossible to prove argument. Are humans causing Global Warming...more specifically, can a 70,000 foot column of 300 - 450ppm carbon dioxide with air cause the Earth (due entirely to IR radiation from the Earth) to warm faster than it would by natural forces?

For over 100 years it has been accepted that it could not...then came the all knowing computer climate models & IPCC...oh, and some guy named Gavin at NASA.

Ex-Calif is absolutely correct...the Earth is cooling and no reasonably educated scientist or engineer would argue otherwise.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

Oh and the planet is billions of years old, not thousands or even millions. Mammals have been around about 65 million of those years. We are but a spec in the timeline of Earth.

I was wondering if anyone was going to point out that earth is billions of years old. Atta boy, Dan.

Mammals, however, have been around much more than 65 million years. Without going into paleontological minutiae, I will just quote from the Wikipedia entry for mammals:

"One synapsid group, the pelycosaurs, were the most common land vertebrates of the early Permian and included the largest land animals of the time.[5]

Therapsids descended from pelycosaurs in the middle Permian, about 260M years ago, and took over their position as the dominant land vertebrates."

Further:

"The Permian-Triassic extinction ended the dominance of the therapsids, and in the early Triassic all the medium to large land animal niches were taken over by archosaurs, which were the ancestors of crocodilians, pterosaurs, dinosaurs and birds."

Further:

"The first true mammals appeared in the early Jurassic, over 70 million years after the first therapsids and approximately 30 million years after the first mammaliaformes."

If my arithmetic is correct, then, the first true mammals appeared ca. 190 million years ago.

What did occur ca. 65 million years ago was the "extinction event" that ended the dominance of the dinosaurs, creating a vacancy in the higher niches. Again, from Wikipedia:

"The traditional view is that mammals only took over the medium- to large-sized ecological niches in the Cenozoic, after the extinction of the dinosaurs; but then they diversified very quickly, for example the earliest known bat dates from about 50M years ago, only 15M years after the extinction of the dinosaurs.[14]"

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

Didn't dinosaurs kinda like it hot? Maybe a little warming would cause a resurgence in them bad boys.

Perhaps, Dan, but one branch of dinosaurs did quite well after the extinction event. The theropod dinosaurs survived, even into the present day. In fact, I have one in a cage, but rather than calling her a theropod dinosaur, I prefer Double Yellowhead Amazon parrot, or simply "bird."

TaoJones

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by Fishspearit

Perhaps you could tell us how people are going to make money off of Global warming. Maybe if I lived in Iran, Saudi Arabia, or Venezuela I would feel differently, but it seems to me that shifting from oil consumption to alternative energy would be good for us economically. Isn't that what we are doing when we move onto a sailboat and put up wind generators and solar panels? What's wrong with trying to shift from oil to alternative sources of energy, even if global warming turns out to be total crap it still seems like the right economic move for countries that are net importers of oil.

People make money off of events throgh donations and support of activist groups.

When we move into sailboating with windgens and solar panels it is due to the lack of fuel supply and space to carry it. Let alone the wear and tear on small motors, which one would rather save for emergancies, docking or that badly needed battery charge. I think a lot of us would own powerboats if they didn't burn so much fuel.

When someone can come up with an alternative fuel to replace oil that will put out the energy that oil will, then we'll have something.

And it takes energy to make windmills and solar panels along with sail materials, resins and fiberglass. We'd be better off going back to wooden boats and cotton sails. But then the tree huggers and farmers would be on our case.

It's a never ending cycle, just like the weather

BTW It cost just as much to make Bio-diesel, it's just the lack of dependance on imported oil that we're after............................_/)

[Capct]

Originally Posted by northerncat

ok so now my thread on why the al gore thread should be discussed has been deleted, im slightly miffed not even a pm explaining that this forum is also the al gore fan club supporters base therefore anti al gore sentiment is not allowed. anyway i just wanted to add this

British judge says Al Gore's climate change film contains 9 scientific errors - International Herald Tribune british judge finds 9 scientific errors


Probably the worst thing you can do for the environment is to jet around for business or holidays (or green crusading). Air travel produces about as much carbon dioxide as each passenger driving their own vehicle the same distance. Though jet aircrafts emissions, released high in the atmosphere, have a greenhouse effect three times greater than road emissions

another reason to get out the sails and let the recycled co2 take you where you want to go
sean

Your thread should not have been deleted IMHO.
Especially being in off topic area ...but hey....no one ever intimated free speech was website specific in this case.

On this topic,global warming
The biggest lie told is that temperature rises followed rises in co2.The truth is temperature rises first and then is followed by co2.

Essentially this means the whole theory that co2 is the main culprit is complete bull$hit.It also leaves a tremendous amount of people who are looking pretty stupid in face of what now appears to be the truth.

[Trim50]

You got it! Co2 is released from the ocean in response to water temperature increase at a rate that makes ALL anthropogenic Co2 meaningless.

[Celestialsailor]

My big question is...What will end first...The Earth from global warming or this thread?

[David M]

If the ocean does rise? ...who cares? A rising tide floats all boats.