Climate Change

[Viking Sailor]

Serendipity strikes again! Just found this recent article in Spiegel online:

Global Warming: Not the End of the World as We Know It - International - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News

[senormechanico]

Benny,

I'm going to do my best to prevent the spread of CO2 today by trying to breathe as little as possible.

Maybe you could do the same!

[NoTies]

A vested interest because I know a lot of these guys but this programme is a multinational effort to find the truth. Watch this space.
ANDRILL

[Benny]

seniormechanico - do you have any more intelligent contributions to this thread?

[Benny]

Delmarrey - no question developing countries are polluting alot. We do too. Maybe the developed countries can help those others with the technology to help them become more environmentally friendly - we may have to pay a little more for their cheap imports but it's a cost I'm willing to pay.

To the others asserting that co2 is not the cause - it is true that in historical periods of warming, co2 level increases lagged the rise in temperature and these changes occured over many years. What is occuring now is that co2 levels are rising in conjunction with the temperature increases which are occuring over a very short period of time. Therefor, this is not a normal cycle and because man has caused alot of co2 and carbon to be released during this short period, the most likely conclusion is that we are helping to either cause the rise or help speed it up. There are other gases and particulate matter which is released by human processes which also help to trap heat.

The thrust of my view is that our polluting ways - air, water and earth are changing the natural cycles of the earth and causing unfavourable consequences. We now have the knowledge and technology to change this effectively over time and frankly I have trouble understanding the resistance to it.

I have read all the submissions and links with interest and acknowledge that this issue has valid arguments on both sides. Personally I would rather err on the side of having reduced our human impact on the environment and climate change than make a sweet wild assed gamble on being wrong.

[Zach]

Originally Posted by Benny

I have read all the submissions and links with interest and acknowledge that this issue has valid arguments on both sides. Personally I would rather err on the side of having reduced our human impact on the environment and climate change than make a sweet wild assed gamble on being wrong.

I have too.

I don't think we should have a battle to the death when either side has made up their minds. At this point neither is wrong; all things are not absolute especially when in a state of change.

Put catalytic converters on cars, cut down on volatile hydrocarbon emissions in paint... but let’s not recreate Caligula's attack on the English Channel. Share ideas, but let’s not attack each other… as Aggression does no good for civil conversation.

[never monday]

Dose anyone see that an increase in CO2 will result in an increase in plant growth?

[delmarrey]

[quote=TaoJones]And while the poor, misguided ostrich has his head safely buried in the sand, what part of his anatomy will bear the brunt of the attack that he can't even see coming?

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by never monday

Dose anyone see that an increase in CO2 will result in an increase in plant growth?

Yep!
I was always told in science classes that plants live off of CO2 and then produce oxygen. That's a good thing, right?

Or maybe not? That could cause more forest, inturn, more forest fires and then there would be more CO2........Ooops! that gets us nowhere.

I guess we'll just have to stick to the earth cycling mode again.......
The earth just seems to take care of her self, or is that some supreme being? Maybe she has a Sugar Daddy.

[camaraderie]

BTW...it has been pointed out that I failed to cite a source for my last post above on "The Faithful Heretic"
Here's the link: WECN May 2007
Wisconsin EnergyCoopNews...Current Issue
Sorry for the omission.

Never Monday...you said "Have ya'll heard about the problem with dihydrogen monoxide in the oceans?It's killing people all over the world."

Damn...and I was going to go sailing this weekend! (G)

[ssullivan]

Originally Posted by Benny

The thrust of my view is that our polluting ways - air, water and earth are changing the natural cycles of the earth and causing unfavourable consequences. We now have the knowledge and technology to change this effectively over time and frankly I have trouble understanding the resistance to it.

I have read all the submissions and links with interest and acknowledge that this issue has valid arguments on both sides. Personally I would rather err on the side of having reduced our human impact on the environment and climate change than make a sweet wild assed gamble on being wrong.

This is a good point of view. I think the idea goes a lot farther than the heating of the planet. It's that we are polluting our fish (mercury), polluting our drinking water (PCBs, etc...) and can't enjoy a good life without these things. Something has to be done about those that waste. You absolutely cannot even live without clean fresh water to drink, yet people pour it all over their lawns and take showers with 6 heads spraying untold gallons everywhere. Water should be taxed at $1/gal.

Anyway, I also agree that the planet takes care of itself. If we introduct a lot of CO2 that is heating the planet, and it's too much for her, she'll kill us off through the climate changes. Problem solved.

[Capct]

Originally Posted by Benny

I have read all the submissions and links with interest and acknowledge that this issue has valid arguments on both sides. Personally I would rather err on the side of having reduced our human impact on the environment and climate change than make a sweet wild assed gamble on being wrong.

Personally I would prefer not to err.This issue does not have valid arguments on both sides.
Your side lacks a valid argument....period

lets here it....throw out some empirical evidence that shows you are right.

the only thing that is agreed upon is the temerature of the earth has risen around 1 degree Celcius.Your side benny cannot provide any evidence that man made CO2 [about2 % of the world total] is the cause of the one degree rise in temperature.
However the other guys can provide empirical evidence collected over decades that suggests the Suns Activity has increased that much.
Hell....Mars is getting warmer....what do the gullible ones attribute that to?.....CO2

[never monday]

Originally Posted by Capct

Personally I would prefer not to err.This issue does not have valid arguments on both sides.
Your side lacks a valid argument....period

lets here it....throw out some empirical evidence that shows you are right.

the only thing that is agreed upon is the temerature of the earth has risen around 1 degree Celcius.Your side benny cannot provide any evidence that man made CO2 [about2 % of the world total] is the cause of the one degree rise in temperature.
However the other guys can provide empirical evidence collected over decades that suggests the Suns Activity has increased that much.
Hell....Mars is getting warmer....what do the gullible ones attribute that to?.....CO2

Cap,
There ya go; leting the TRUTH get in the way of a good cause.
This is a political (control) issue untill the scientists can even agree on a single set of data to compare.

[Ed Steele]

Global warming is Europe’s answer to that humorous stunt that the USA pulled with Y2K. Remember how the former Soviet Union’s nuclear missiles were all going to launch at midnight Moscow time because the Russians were using IBM 360 rip offs? All of the worlds commercial airliners would plunge to earth at midnight GMT – Sorry !! Midnight UMT (The G is now politically incorrect) on December 31st. 1999. The world’s power systems would shut down and we were to be reduced to watching reruns of Mad Max? You have forgotten already!!?? Have you forgotten already how much money was spent on that one?

Global warming is much more sophisticated than the primitive Y2K scam, because the dopey USA put a deadline on Y2K. Global warming is much more sophisticated and advanced, as it cannot be proven or disproven to rigorous scientific standards and you can milk this sucker for decades.

I do have a couple of questions for the experts though. I have read that the methane produced by the digestive systems of herbivores is much more damaging than CO2 emissions from burning hydrocarbons. OK, if this is so, what was the climate effect of the destruction of the millions of plains buffalo in the 19th. Century? Also when the gasoline / petrol / diesel powered vehicles replaced the millions of transport horses at the beginning of the 20th century, what was the climate effect of the loss of all of those farting steeds? Just curious, that’s all.
Ed

[Capct]

Originally Posted by Ed Steele

I do have a couple of questions for the experts though. I have read that the methane produced by the digestive systems of herbivores is much more damaging than CO2 emissions from burning hydrocarbons. OK, if this is so, what was the climate effect of the destruction of the millions of plains buffalo in the 19th. Century? Also when the gasoline / petrol / diesel powered vehicles replaced the millions of transport horses at the beginning of the 20th century, what was the climate effect of the loss of all of those farting steeds? Just curious, that’s all.
Ed

Its true ....methane gas has around 20 times the concentration of CO2 than that of an automobiles exhaust.

Actually now that you mention it the quality of air and water in places like New York or London has improved dramatically since the mid 19th century.The air in these cities was choked with coal and wood smoke and the water ....well...was suspect at best.Not to mention the millions of tons of horseshit daily that had to be delt with.
The loss of the buffalo and their quota of atmospheric CO2 has probably been offset by the rise of domesticated livestock.

We forgot to mention Volcanic eruptions and the biggest contributor of CO2 to the atmosphere ....water vapour