Global Warming

[SkiDog]

Are you really providing a high school student's paper as evidence?

Where does it state that this is a high school students paper? Nonetheless...if you look at the resources the subject matter was derived from the conclucsions are the same...its not like the author is making this up..

I truly don't have time to do the research for you..I know what I have read..go out and search you'll surely be enlightened to the fact that this planet goes through warming and cooling cycles all the time and well before the introduction of man and or industry these cycles existed...what makes you think this wasn't going to happen anyway? this is a "the sky is falling" mentality that just doenst ring true with me...

this planet will be around long after we're gone...meaning MANKIND not just you and me..

Anyway..lets keep it going..

M

 

[SkiDog]

We can go back and forth about this endlessly which is why I do not believe we understand the mechanics of this process. You are correct about aerosol propellants like CFC being partly responsible for the holes in the ozone. But those holes have been there in the ozone, growing and shrinking over time, since man started studying the ozone layer in a way that allowed us to visualize these changes. That's been for less than 50 years. Not statistically significant in terms of climatic or geologic time.

There's no doubt that humans burning fossil fuel contributes to CO2 in the environment. But how long have humans been burning fossil fuels? Being generous, the last 300 years?
That's not particularly significant when dealing with these time references either. And how do you explain the warming patterns that there is proof existed long before any human interaction?

I don't deny that man has some impact on this issue. There is no doubt that smart environmental practices should be a part of everyone's life. But there is a big and totally unresolved question of the degree of our effect. We just don't know enough about the phenomenon to say we are responsible to a definite degree, and it really worries me to hear folks say we can control it or even stop it. Who is to say that is good? Who put us in charge of the planet's cooling and heating cycles?

Thanks..this is my whole point....we have hardly began to scratch the surface of this topic scientifically speaking....1000 or years of data still need to be complied for me to believe that humans have that large an impact on this planet....we havent been around long enough...like mentioned MANY TIMES...this planet went through many of the "changes" we are currently going through well before man existed..

M

 

[YardSaleDad]

So why do so many folks feel that man is responsible? Or that man should try to stop it? Or that it's even a good idea to stop it?

From a scientific standpoint, what are those viewpoints based on?

I gave you one of the links to the raw data collected by scientists. I agree with you Jim, that in a geologic terms and time scale the man made changes to the earth are just a blip, but from an ecological standpoint we are having an substantial impact on the atmospheric systems. The "scientific" debate is not whether it exists, but to what degree.

 

[SkiDog]

I gave you one of the links to the raw data collected by scientists. I agree with you Jim, that in a geologic terms and time scale the man made changes to the earth are just a blip, but from an ecological standpoint we are having an substantial impact on the atmospheric systems. The "scientific" debate is not whether it exists, but to what degree.

I will state now and would never claim that man doens't contribute..we certianly do..but as mentioned to what extent is the actual question....

Would the removal of man STOP the process...not likely..slow it...MAYBE..

M

 

[from_the_NEK]

Other things to consider:

1. Jet contrails reflecting sunlight and masking effects of global warming.

2. Increase in cloud cover as more water is evaporated into the atmosphere. Clouds may reflect sun but water vapor (transparent) is the largest contributer to the Earth's natural greenhouse effect. Warmer temps mean that air can hold more water vapor.

3. Changes in ocean currents may temporarily slow noticeable climate changes.

4. I am sick of breathing brown air!!! Even here in Vermont, it seems like haze is steadily becoming discolored brown and more dense. This has more to do with large particulate matter than CO2, but I just want to state this.

5. Trailboss, the huge snow winter of 2000-2001 can be thrown in there as well. I will argue that the above average snow conditions that the East experienced during the 90s-early 2000 years was the icing on the cake. That year global warming kept it from getting consistantly too cold to snow (it was actually a rather mild winter). Very cold air (0 to -30) contains far less moisture than air that that is in the mid-upper 20s. These higher temps are where the big snow falls are. The last few years have been good examples of when we have passed the point where is is just slightly too warm (lots of rain/snow mix events) to maintain a consistant base of snow. Only the highest mountain areas had any sort of snow preservation this year. This is where mountain ranges above 8000' are going to be able to survive the global warming longer than low elevation regions. Air still cools when it is forced up.

 

[YardSaleDad]

Where does it state that this is a high school students paper?

The link you provided was to a paper presented at the 40th Session of the:

Model United Nations of the Far West
​

Are you aware of the charter of this Tempe, AZ based "corporation"?

I truly don't have time to do the research for you..

I think I was doing yours.

 

[JimG.]

The "scientific" debate is not whether it exists, but to what degree.

This we should all agree on. And we should all agree that conservation is essential.

But before humans start to play around with "controlling" climate changes, I'd like to have some scientific data on the degree of our impact and that's a totally unanswered question.

Warming/cooling cycles exist...they have for eons and were there long before man came along. Before we decide we're in charge of fixing something, can we at least figure out if it's really broken first?

 

[from_the_NEK]

I will state now and would never claim that man doens't contribute..we certianly do..but as mentioned to what extent is the actual question....

Would the removal of man STOP the process...not likely..slow it...MAYBE..

Like I said, I think a lot of people in this discussion are UNDERESTIMATING the amount of influence humans have. I'm not saying that we completely remove humans. We just need to reduce our portion of the impact on the atmosphere. We need to get below that point of Earth's natural ability to annually remove the same amount of CO2 that was added.

The probablity of the Earth's seemingly sudden warmup (ignoring whatever portion of it is natural) at the exact same time as the explosion of human population and human based greenhouse gas emissions is too small to say that humans aren't having a rather large impact on the atmosphere.

I am really not getting any work done :-o :evil:

 

[SkiDog]

The link you provided was to a paper presented at the 40th Session of the:

Model United Nations of the Far West
​

Are you aware of the charter of this Tempe, AZ based "corporation"?





I think I was doing yours.

Yeah and from what I saw of that "model UN" it was for College level and teaching community..thats what I saw anyway...

Regardless...there is a bibliography and referenced materials...again...this was the first quick link I came across...this certianly isnt the only text available nor is it the primary one that I have drawn my conclusions on...I have read many different texts both in favor and against mans involvement in global warming..so I dont feel the need to "prove" where I draw my information from...go search...but if you only look for what you believe in..you'll miss the stuff I've found...

not trying to get snippy...but really...I totally dont need you to tell me that im wrong or right...I can read and decide for myself...I care not what you believe really. I'm going to do what im going to do either way..

M

 

[SkiDog]

I am really not getting any work done :-o :evil:

work schmirk....isnt this much more productive/fun??? Ha

M

 

[from_the_NEK]

Who put us in charge of the planet's cooling and heating cycles?

We did! When there are 6+ billion eating, breathing, pooping, consuming, polluting members of our species.
:beer:

 

[from_the_NEK]

Cripes, I'm am starting to sound like a total tree hugger, which I'm not.

 

[JimG.]

We did!

Precisely!

And that's exactly what worries me.

 

[from_the_NEK]

Time for lunch break

 

[JimG.]

Like I said, I think a lot of people in this discussion are UNDERESTIMATING the amount of influence humans have.

Underestimating based on what? Without a proven theory of exactly how we are changing the climate and to what degree, how can anyone under- or overestimate anything?

We're just guessing.

 

[YardSaleDad]

This is almost as productive as an Intelligent Design thread.

Source Data: http://www.venganza.org/

 

[from_the_NEK]

Underestimating based on what? Without a proven theory of exactly how we are changing the climate and to what degree, how can anyone under- or overestimate anything?

I agree that we are just guessing. There may never be any indisputable numbers that say exactly how much influence we are having. There are too many variables and we don't have the technology to take all of those variables into account. This is why every Global Warming "theory" can be shot down. I still stand behind my theory that...

The PROBABILTY of the Earth's seemingly sudden warmup (ignoring whatever portion of it is natural) at the EXACT same time as the explosion of human population and human based greenhouse gas emissions is TOO SMALL to say that humans aren't having a rather large impact on the atmosphere.

Again I have no numbers to back this up :sad:

 

[highpeaksdrifter]

Underestimating based on what? Without a proven theory of exactly how we are changing the climate and to what degree, how can anyone under- or overestimate anything?

How do you suggest we prove it? Do nothing and see what happens? The results of that could be disasterous. Stop adding manmade levels of CO2 to the atmosphere at the high amounts that we are doing know? Even if that had no effect what would be the harm besides minor adjustments in the way we live our lives?

.We're just guessing.

I like to think of it more as scientific hyposthesis.

 

[JimG.]

This is almost as productive as an Intelligent Design thread.

Source Data: http://www.venganza.org/

Here we go! Now this makes sense, that as the number of pirates decreased global warming increased. Thanks.

There is evidence that cows contribute alot to greenhouse gases with methane emissions. Now considering how hopelessly addicted to junk food our society is, I'm perfectly willing to accept that humans have contributed to global warming as a result of all the fast food (hamburgers) we eat. More hamburgers mean more cows which means more methane.

This makes intuitive sense to me.

 

[YardSaleDad]

Again I have no numbers to back this up :sad:

The link I gave above has them.

No not the spaghetti monster one....