Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: New information surrounding global warming

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vermont
    Beans
    864
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    So, you are telling me that the permian life forms did not change their behavior and it led to their extinction?
    What do you think? I guess all those permian denialists won the argument, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    I firmly believe that man should do what it can to not 'add' to any natural cycle of warming or cooling, but I am still not sold that man is the cause.
    The current levels of CO2 are entirely man made. The evidence for this is as solid as a heliocentric solar system. If you don't know this already, then clearly it would be a waste of my time to point you to the evidence.

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    The Permian extinction supports both the fact that 'we have an issue' and the fact that it might not be caused by man.
    No. It supports the fact that CO2 levels change our climate, but it does not, in any way, support denialist claims that current CO2 levels aren't man made.


    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    Really? Fox News? Your first link is from Fox News? The channel that claimed that Germany's solar industry is possible because it's one of the sunniest nations on earth? I mean... Really? And your second article is from a web site that lists, among other interests, "Multidimensionality?" or "Aliens and Ancient Engineers"?


    • Might the tools and technology of ancient builders have come from distant galaxies?
    • Evidence suggests that an ancient mountaintop fortress in Peru was constructed with laser-like tools.
    • Temples at Vijayanagara India were built to harness cosmic energy.
    • An acoustic chamber in Malta enabled interplanetary communication.
    • If the ancient builders did use advanced technology, could it prove that aliens visited Earth thousands of years ago?


    Right.

    So, the first thing I would recommend is to recognize reliable sources when you see them. The only way to do that is to learn (or familiarize yourself with) the science behind the stories. For instance, I know that Phil Plait, of Bad Astronomy, knows his science and reports responsibility because I understand the science behind his reporting. He also reports the facts. Here is what he has to say about your articles:

    "this study shows that under the conditions of the experiment, the effect of cosmic rays by themselves is too low to trigger cloud formation at the rates actually seen in our atmosphere. What is very clear is that any claims at this time that cosmic rays definitely affect global warming are baloney. As the authors of the experiment say, this is a good first step but there’s a long way to go to understand this problem, and as the website PhysOrg reiterates, "Though this most recent experiment doesn’t really answer the question of whether cosmic rays are having an impact on our weather, it does open the door to more research."



    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    There are of course articles disputing those above.
    No, there aren't. There are articles that debunk those above. There's a difference. We're not talking about two equally valid viewpoints that can enter into a "dispute". Science doesn't work that way. One is factual and one is not. One is evidence based and one is not.

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    What impact does the change in the earth's rotation have?
    None that need concern us. The earth has been slowing down ever since it was created. It's tied into the reason the moon is further away today than yesterday.

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    What about the Earth's orbit... I have read that it is getting further from the sun.
    http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/ba...-earths-orbit/

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt View Post
    There are a great many factors... playing the 'blame' game just makes people argue the point.
    Science isn't a blame game. Science is about gathering the evidence and drawing conclusions based on that evidence. Denialists might try to frame it as a "blame game", but that's just more denial. it's about the evidence. Evidence. Evidence. Evidence. And the evidence conclusively ties humanity to the increase in CO2. Period.
    Linux: You reap what you tweak.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Vermont
    Beans
    864
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Quote Originally Posted by jockyburns View Post
    Can you explain what the dinosaurs etc did to cause this global warming , during the Permian period?
    is that a trick question? Because, you know, there weren't any dinosaurs around during the Permian period.

    Moving on...

    Quote Originally Posted by jockyburns View Post
    Yep I'm a bit sceptical about "Man made" climate change. I reckon it's a cyclical thing , over which we have very little (if any) control whatsoever.
    Is climate change cyclical? Yes. What has caused climate change in the past? CO2 concentrations. Does the current spike in CO2 coincide with that "cyclical thing"? No. No. And no.

    So, where is the CO2 coming from? What has knocked the earth out of its usual cycle? The evidence points conclusively to mankind.

    Quote Originally Posted by jockyburns View Post
    However, our politicians will find a way to extract even more money from us, meanwhile.
    Scientific evidence is not political. The only question worth answering is this: How do we reduce the spike in CO2 (that we have created)?

    Quote Originally Posted by jockyburns View Post
    PS I see a lot of governments have introduced a so called "Carbon Tax" Very apt that all life on earth is carbon based then isn't it.
    It's not a political issue. The question is this: Would a carbon tax reduce CO2 emissions? If yes, then it's a good thing. If no, then it's a bad thing. What does the evidence suggest? That's all that matters. We need evidence based solutions and lawmaking. Whether those evidence based solutions come from the left or right is irrelevant. Good science is good science.
    Linux: You reap what you tweak.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Kansas City, KS
    Beans
    1,289
    Distro
    Ubuntu 13.10 Saucy Salamander

    Thumbs up Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Should be noted that methane is an extremely powerful greenhouse gas, but that it also cycles out of the atmosphere naturally in a way that CO2 doesn't.

    As for terminology: it's not that global warming is an inaccurate description of one element of global climate change, but it's just one part. While my understanding was that the politics had worked the other way - that opponents to action thought climate change a less ominous term than global warming and adjusted accordingly - the former is simply a more accurate term no matter what stance or politics it's coming from. NASA prefers it.

    Quote Originally Posted by cprofitt
    So, you are telling me that the permian life forms did not change their behavior and it led to their extinction?
    It isn't as funny in the Permian, since the life forms we consider to have been the "dominant" ones had nothing to do with the climate change that killed them. The Oxygen Catastrophe offers up a much more ironic parallel.

    I firmly believe that man should do what it can to not 'add' to any natural cycle of warming or cooling, but I am still not sold that man is the cause. The Permian extinction supports both the fact that 'we have an issue' and the fract that it might not be caused by man.

    There are articles talking about the sun being part of the cause:
    http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/...ole-in-global/http://wakeup-world.com/2011/09/02/c...ed-by-the-sun/

    There are of course articles disputing those above.

    What impact does the change in the earth's rotation have?
    What about the Earth's orbit... I have read that it is getting further from the sun.

    There are a great many factors... playing the 'blame' game just makes people argue the point. Simply stating that global warming is happening and that it is bad is enough. Then identify what man might be able to do to slow the process down.
    VTPoet nicely addressed each of your individual points here, but I think that one thing to really consider is that long-term causes are not likely to effect sudden inflections like the one we've seen. We still don't really know what caused the changes at the end of the Permian, but we don't look to changes in the sun's radiation or the Earth's orbit; there are possibilities in volcanic activity and, as always, the possibility of an impact of some kind (which wouldn't leave a crater we could see; thanks to ongoing subduction of non-continental crust, the sea floor is much younger than the Permian.)
    I know I shouldn't use tildes for decoration, but they always make me feel at home~

  4. #24
    cprofitt's Avatar
    cprofitt is offline νόησις νοήσεως - nóesis noéseos
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    平静
    Beans
    1,449
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    VTPoet and Copper Bezel... I think you both missed my point. I was not clear in the first one... I think man has an impact, but I am not able to say that man is the sole cause.

    Let me be a bit more clear. I do think we have a problem. I do not think it matters if man is the sole cause or just one factor in it; the world needs to reduce any impact man has on the process.

    Copper Bezel:
    Yes, the Permian extinction could have been caused by an impact or volcanic activity. My point about rotation and orbit is just to show that there are other factors that may be adding to the problem -- I truly doubt anyone of them is the root. The one piece that I do believe points to man is the fact that the temperature has continued to rise even after the sun activity has gone down... over time, to my understanding, the two have been closely related.

    For the record the source I try to look at most is:
    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cmb-faq/globalwarming.html

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    WI USA
    Beans
    10,539
    Distro
    Ubuntu 15.04 Vivid Vervet

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Science is science and contributing to an increasing understanding of what is being investigated is not political , How science is interpreted by those who make socioeconomic and environmental regulatory policy as it relates to climate change is political .
    Infinite diversity in infinite combination.

    Ubuntu Documentation Search: Popular Pages
    Ubuntu: Security Basics
    Ubuntu: Manual

  6. #26
    cprofitt's Avatar
    cprofitt is offline νόησις νοήσεως - nóesis noéseos
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    平静
    Beans
    1,449
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Quote Originally Posted by Frogs Hair View Post
    Science is science and contributing to an increasing understanding of what is being investigated is not political , How science is interpreted by those who make socioeconomic and environmental regulatory policy as it relates to climate change is political .
    Yes, the one problem we have though... is that the published science has to go through politics to be published.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
    Beans
    Hidden!
    Distro
    Ubuntu

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Quote Originally Posted by VTPoet View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by VTPoet View Post
    Politics.

    Nobel Prize-winning scientist Ivar Giaever put it best, in my opinion- "Global warming has become a new religion." (citation)
    Random fact: water vapor is a far more effective radiative than even the most vilified bugaboo; Co2- its contribution to the greenhouse effect is over double that of Co2. (citation)
    Seems to me the real problem is all this water laying around the place! Stop the water cycle!

    Oh, and-

    Quote Originally Posted by VTPoet View Post
    Consider this about the Permian Extinction:
    Planetsave.com? You can hardly claim unbiased citation, and therefore I don't see much validity in your protestations against citing Fox News. Especially when I am greeted with the headline "Rat On Mars — NASA’s Mars Rover Curiosity Captures “Rat” In New Image" on the front page of Planetsave.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Beans
    5

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Quote Originally Posted by cortman View Post

    Random fact: water vapor is a far more effective radiative than even the most vilified bugaboo; Co2- its contribution to the greenhouse effect is over double that of Co2. (citation)
    Seems to me the real problem is all this water laying around the place! Stop the water cycle!
    Humans release 30 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere per year. We don't do that with water. Even if methane/water/other are stronger greenhouse gases than CO2, CO2 is the one we're pushing out the most, and so the one that gets focused on.(http://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/index.cfm)

    Your logic is akin to making a list of the 10 most deadly poisons, then saying it's safe to consume entries 2 - 10, because they aren't the MOST harmful. Strongest != only.

  9. #29
    cprofitt's Avatar
    cprofitt is offline νόησις νοήσεως - nóesis noéseos
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    平静
    Beans
    1,449
    Distro
    Ubuntu Development Release

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    dwaite:

    Agreed even if man is not #1 we should seek to cut down our impact.

    Here is some other data on the web:
    Agriculture is responsible for an estimated 14 percent of the world's greenhouse gases. A significant portion of these emissions come from methane, which, in terms of its contribution to global warming, is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide.
    Some experts say 100 liters to 200 liters a day (or about 26 gallons to about 53 gallons), while others say it's up to 500 liters (about 132 gallons) a day. In any case, that's a lot of methane, an amount comparable to the pollution produced by a car in a day.
    In New Zealand, where cattle and sheep farming are major industries, 34 percent of greenhouse gases come from livestock.
    source

    Globally, ruminant livestock produce about 80 million metric tons of methane annually, accounting for about 28% of global methane emissions
    source

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Beans
    27

    Re: New information surrounding global warming

    Quote Originally Posted by Paqman View Post
    Increased global mean temps won't mean everywhere gets nicer weather, it means everywhere gets more weather. Sure, sometimes that weather will be nice, but sometimes it'll be bad. Global warming means bigger storms, more rain, more wind, etc, etc. Weather patterns will change, which means some places are getting warmer, some colder, and some a bit of both. It's not as simplistic as warm = sunny.
    Yeah, I think that's something that some people don't understand. Some places that are normally warm will get very cold at times. Global warming doesn't mean that the whole planet will get hot.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •