TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Global Warming
Pages (3): « 1 [2] 3 »
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Then I would still say, "China"? They're the world's manufacturer and I doubt they have any serious laws curtailing their carbon footprint... |
I mean do we really need reasons and excuses for the underlying principle that pollution is destroying our world?
No one can really argue that fact... and then there are unknowns. The increased rates of cancer, the higher depression rates, the fluctuations in pressure and temperature.
People have an interesting psychological virus sometimes to simply ignore what they know acts as a detriment, as long as it doesn't kill them quickly enough that can't semi-adapt to the new conditions, no matter how wretched they may be.
Why anyone would indirectly defend their need to pollute is beyond me.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by DJ Shibby I mean do we really need reasons and excuses for the underlying principle that pollution is destroying our world? No one can really argue that fact... and then there are unknowns. The increased rates of cancer, the higher depression rates, the fluctuations in pressure and temperature. People have an interesting psychological virus sometimes to simply ignore what they know acts as a detriment, as long as it doesn't kill them quickly enough that can't semi-adapt to the new conditions, no matter how wretched they may be. Why anyone would indirectly defend their need to pollute is beyond me. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by everett Pollution isn't good I agree and we need to take steps to reduce it however CO2 isn't the ONLY pollution. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by MrSquirrel In 99% of all cases, measures to reduce CO2 emissions will reduce overall air pollution from other man made gasses by a similar amount simply because the activities that create the majority of CO2 also produce the largest quantities of those air pollutants. Thus, reducing CO2 would invariably lead to an overall lower level of all air pollution. If you are going to agree on air pollution being curbed then you cannot possibly disagree with the idea that reducing CO2 emissions is a good thing. MrS |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by everett Reducing CO2 isn't necessarily a bad thing, but to go to the extreme that we have today isn't necessarily good either. Not letting countries develop, having stupid programs like "carbon credits" is a load of horse shit. |
I just got a brilliant idea!!!
Why the US doesn't invade the Iran to fight the Global Warming off?
I mean it's such a huge problemo I bet they need at least 200,000 troops, internet, satelite TV and a couple of McDonalds outlets to be able to hold the danger of Global Warming back!
Why G.Bush isn't so smart enough to do that? Doesn't eat enough bananas?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by star-traveller I just got a brilliant idea!!! Why the US doesn't invade the Iran to fight the Global Warming off? I mean it's such a huge problemo I bet they need at least 200,000 troops, internet, satelite TV and a couple of McDonalds outlets to be able to hold the danger of Global Warming back! Why G.Bush isn't so smart enough to do that? Doesn't eat enough bananas? |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by everett Bush looks like a monkey? Original pff |
whoever believes that global warming is not because of us, + is not a big problem atleast not for the next 100-200 years is a fucking ignorant brainwashed peace of cloth under my kitchen sink. In the last 10 years alone signs of intense global temperature increase has been obvious. The majority of the hottest years recorded have been sinse 1997, Natural disasters have been on the rise and not only that, the intensity of hurricanes and all this non-sense has progressively increased and its only going to get worse. Just think, in the last years how much has happened and things arent getting better, we are becoming more and more dependant on things that fuck up our planet, we are using more and more oil/gas products, driving bigger,faster cars, flying more,turning our ac's higher(as a result of this bloody planet heating up..quite a sense of irony). The sad thing is that there are so many people that are oblivious to these facts, and so many more that know it, but simply do not care because doing anything to help this planet means digging into our own pockets which most of this world will not do, this piece of shit sell-fish society we live in. quite pathetic, I dont even wanna have kids because I dont want to raise them in this shithole of a world..like fuck..my son probably wont even have a car to fuck his girlfriend in because oil will be a thing of the past?WTF man.
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shevchenko135 whoever believes that global warming is not because of us, + is not a big problem atleast not for the next 100-200 years is a fucking ignorant brainwashed peace of cloth under my kitchen sink. In the last 10 years alone signs of intense global temperature increase has been obvious. The majority of the hottest years recorded have been sinse 1997, Natural disasters have been on the rise and not only that, the intensity of hurricanes and all this non-sense has progressively increased and its only going to get worse. Just think, in the last years how much has happened and things arent getting better, we are becoming more and more dependant on things that fuck up our planet, we are using more and more oil/gas products, driving bigger,faster cars, flying more,turning our ac's higher(as a result of this bloody planet heating up..quite a sense of irony). The sad thing is that there are so many people that are oblivious to these facts, and so many more that know it, but simply do not care because doing anything to help this planet means digging into our own pockets which most of this world will not do, this piece of shit sell-fish society we live in. quite pathetic, I dont even wanna have kids because I dont want to raise them in this shithole of a world..like fuck..my son probably wont even have a car to fuck his girlfriend in because oil will be a thing of the past?WTF man. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Watch the video... |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by star-traveller pff, Are you from the past or something? Talk to Google, there have been a lot of things happening for the past 6 years or so http://www.google.com/search? hl=en...G=Google+Search It's even on mainstream news, pal! http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4117059.stm |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shevchenko135 tou fucking chez I feel like a retard. This video poses a much stronger arguement and I guess everyone who hasnt seen it is floating around in their blissful ignorance. You cant blame them though, our media is polluted with this garbage you dont think twice sometimes. Either way the planet is still warming up, our fault or not, and its not good. These effects are still very real. |
Im happy aswell. I hate yo admit but I was brainwashed, and dont say you werent before you seen this video, or before these facts were brought to your knowledge. Its true that the media makes global warming into such a big deal but you cant blame people for being compassionate about an idea that reflects a view that our planet is slowly dying you know what i mean?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Lira I don't see what good an alternate point of view would make, and that's exactly my whole point: things are messed up no matter what the causes were, and we'd better do something about it. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Watch the video... |
Jesus Murphey. I covered this so well in a different global warming threads ... but now it seems like there is a global warming of global warming threads. To make a brief introduction: Climate change it is, environmental destruction is the true issue that must be tackled, and the little warming of the planet has more to do with solar activity increase than greenhouse gas concentrations. Interesting to note that greenhouse gas concentrations have increased threefold since early 1800s, yet the temperature only went up by 8%. Hmmmm, where's the pattern in that? Al Gore got it all wrong. We also covered in detail exactly who Al Gore is trying to benefit with his silly campaign. When are we going to start caring about the environment? Kyoto Protocol is bullcrap and is blinders over your eyes because it cannot and has not tackled the situation and just can't (read the dam document).
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Magnetonium Jesus Murphey. I covered this so well in a different global warming threads ... but now it seems like there is a global warming of global warming threads. To make a brief introduction: Climate change it is, environmental destruction is the true issue that must be tackled, and the little warming of the planet has more to do with solar activity increase than greenhouse gas concentrations. Interesting to note that greenhouse gas concentrations have increased threefold since early 1800s, yet the temperature only went up by 8%. Hmmmm, where's the pattern in that? Al Gore got it all wrong. We also covered in detail exactly who Al Gore is trying to benefit with his silly campaign. When are we going to start caring about the environment? Kyoto Protocol is bullcrap and is blinders over your eyes because it cannot and has not tackled the situation and just can't (read the dam document). |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Yoepus Faces with such limitations would you: 1) Rather spend a billion dollars to curb a million tons of CO2 2) Spend a billion dollars to buy 1000 sq miles of rainforest and efforts to cleanup of plastic and chemical contamination of our oceans and drinking water? |
haha
| quote: |
| Originally posted by tathi i met a Shaman and bought some Ayahuasca off him, holy fuck that shits strong haha |
!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Magnetonium Jesus Murphey. I covered this so well in a different global warming threads ... but now it seems like there is a global warming of global warming threads. To make a brief introduction: Climate change it is, environmental destruction is the true issue that must be tackled, and the little warming of the planet has more to do with solar activity increase than greenhouse gas concentrations. Interesting to note that greenhouse gas concentrations have increased threefold since early 1800s, yet the temperature only went up by 8%. Hmmmm, where's the pattern in that? Al Gore got it all wrong. We also covered in detail exactly who Al Gore is trying to benefit with his silly campaign. When are we going to start caring about the environment? Kyoto Protocol is bullcrap and is blinders over your eyes because it cannot and has not tackled the situation and just can't (read the dam document). |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Clovis Isn't most action towards helping reduce global warming (regardless of who you think is to blame) action in favor of the environment? |
Man, we must really be doing some damage. Talk about galactic warming! Maybe we should send some saplings to Neptune on the next Voyager mission. We could send Al Gore to plant them.
http://www.worldclimatereport.com/i...8/neptune-news/
| quote: |
| May 8, 2007 Neptune News Filed under: Climate Changes � Neptune is the planet farthest from the Sun (Pluto is now considered only a dwarf planet), Neptune is the planet farthest from the Earth, and to our knowledge, there has been absolutely no industrialization out at Neptune in recent centuries. There has been no recent build-up of greenhouse gases there, no deforestation, no rapid urbanization, no increase in contrails from jet airplanes, and no increase in ozone in the low atmosphere; recent changes at Neptune could never be blamed on any human influence. Incredibly, an article has appeared in a recent issue of Geophysical Research Letters showing a stunning relationship between the solar output, Neptune�s brightness, and heaven forbid, the temperature of the Earth. With its obvious implications to the greenhouse debate, we are certain you have never heard of the work and never will outside World Climate Report. In case you have forgotten your basic science lessons on the planets, Neptune orbits the Sun at a distance 30 times the distance from the Earth to the Sun and Neptune revolves around the Sun once every 164.8 Earth years. Neptune has 17 times the mass of the Earth, its atmosphere is primarily composed of hydrogen and helium, with traces of methane that account for the planet�s distinctive blue appearance. It was the only planet discovered mathematically � scientists noted variations in the orbit of Uranus, they calculated the orbit and position of a yet undiscovered planet that could cause the variations noted for Uranus, they determined where the planet should be, and on the first night they searched for it (September 23, 1846), they discovered the large planet sitting within 1 degree of their predictions. The new planet was named for Neptune, Roman god of the sea, given its distinctive blue color. Observations from Earth and a 1989 Voyager 2 flyby have revealed that Neptune�s cloud tops are extremely cold (−346�F) being so far from the Sun while the center of the planet has a temperature of 13,000�F due to high pressure generating extremely hot gases. In the recent article, Hammel and Lockwood, from the Space Science Institute in Colorado and the Lowell Observatory, note that measurements of visible light from Neptune have been taken at the Lowell Observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona since 1950. Obviously, light from Neptune can be related to seasons on the planet, small variations in Neptune�s orbit, the apparent tilt of the axis as viewed from the Earth, the varying distance from Neptune to Earth, and of course, changes in the atmosphere near the Lowell Observatory. Astronomers are clever, they are fully aware of these complications, and they adjust the measurements accordingly. As seen in Figure 1, Neptune has been getting brighter since around 1980; furthermore, infrared measurements of the planet since 1980 show that the planet has been warming steadily from 1980 to 2004. As they say on Neptune, global warming has become an inconvenient truth. But with no one to blame, Hammel and Lockwood explored how variations in the output of the Sun might control variations in the brightness of Neptune. Figure 1 (a) represents the corrected visible light from Neptune from 1950 to 2006; (b) shows the temperature anomalies of the Earth; (c) shows the total solar irradiance as a percent variation by year; (d) shows the ultraviolet emission from the Sun (Source: Hammel and Lockwood (2007)).  What would seem so simple statistically is complicated by the degrees of freedom in the various time series which is related to the serial correlation in the data (e.g., next year�s value is highly dependent on this year�s value). Nonetheless, they find that the correlation coefficient between solar irradiance and Neptune�s brightness is near 0.90 (1.00 is perfect). The same relationship is found between the Earth�s temperature anomalies and the solar output. Hammel and Lockwood note �In other words, the Earth temperature values are as well correlated with solar irradiance (r = 0.89) as they are with Neptune�s blue brightness (|r| > 0.90), assuming a 10-year lag of the Neptune values.� The temporal lag is needed to account for the large mass of Neptune that would require years to adjust to any changes in solar output. Hammel and Lockwood conclude that �In summary, if Neptune�s atmosphere is indeed responding to some variation in solar activity in a manner similar to that of the Earth albeit with a temporal lag� then �Neptune may provide an independent (and extraterrestrial) locale for studies of solar effects on planetary atmospheres.� World Climate Report has covered many articles in the scientific literature showing that variations in solar output, including variations within specific wavelengths (e.g., cosmic, ultraviolet, visible, infrared) are highly correlated with temperature variations near the Earth�s surface. Believe it or not, when the Sun is more energetic and putting out more energy, the Earth tends to warm up, and when the Sun cools down, so does the Earth. The Hammel and Lockwood article reveals that the same is true out at Neptune; when the Sun�s energy increases, Neptune seems to warm up and get brighter given a decade lag. If for some reason you do not believe that the Sun is a significant player in determining the temperature of the Earth (after all, we are told repeatedly that humans are causing most of the observed warming on the Earth), then asked yourself if you believe that Neptune�s temperature is controlled by the Sun. How is it possible that the Earth�s temperature is so highly correlated with brightness variations from Neptune? The news from Neptune comes to us just weeks after an article was published showing that Mars has warmed recently as well. If nothing else, we have certainly learned recently that planets undergo changes in their mean temperature, and while we can easily blame human activity here on the Earth, blaming humans for the recent warming on Mars and Neptune would be an astronomical stretch, to say the least. Reference: Hammel, H. B., and G. W. Lockwood, 2007. Suggestive correlations between the brightness of Neptune, solar variability, and Earth�s temperature, Geophysical Research Letters, 34, L08203, doi:10.1029/2006GL028764. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Shakka Man, we must really be doing some damage. Talk about galactic warming! Maybe we should send some saplings to Neptune on the next Voyager mission. We could send Al Gore to plant them. http://www.worldclimatereport.com/i...8/neptune-news/ |
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.