User Tag List

First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 192

  1. #41
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    I'm willing to entertain the notion that the climate is changing. Our direct observations of climate conditions represent a very small sample size in geological time, after all, and because a planet's climate is a dynamic system, it would be highly unexpected for it to remain unchanging over any significant period. Why would we expect stability after all?

    Where the movement loses me is when they blame humans for climate change. It reminds me of the ancient pagans practicing their Yule rituals to convince the sun to return.

  2. #42
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    Our direct observations of climate conditions represent a very small sample size in geological time
    Would you mind elaborating on what you mean by 'direct observation'?

    Are you referring to what is available via analysis of recorded meteorological history, or what can be reasonably inferred from ancient evidence through the use of things like Radiometric dating / the science of paleoclimatology?

  3. #43
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    Would you mind elaborating on what you mean by 'direct observation'?

    Are you referring to what is available via analysis of recorded meteorological history, or what can be reasonably inferred from ancient evidence through the use of things like Radiometric dating / the science of paleoclimatology?
    I mean direct observations, in which we note that "The daily high at the Denver airport was 24.4 degrees C on June 3rd, 2006."

    But if we include reasonable inferences from ancient evidence, it still should not surprise us to note that the climate is changing. Why would we think it should be stable?

  4. #44
    Boring old fossil Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5/8
    Socionics
    ENTp None
    Posts
    4,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    I mean direct observations, in which we note that "The daily high at the Denver airport was 24.4 degrees C on June 3rd, 2006."

    But if we include reasonable inferences from ancient evidence, it still should not surprise us to note that the climate is changing. Why would we think it should be stable?
    Thanks for clarifying.

    I don't think stability in climate range is generally anticipated. Things like plate tectonics; the chemical makeup of glaciers/ice caps; volcanic history and the use of Radiometric dating show us that, prior to our ability to meaningfully record weather patterns, there was a great deal of instability. One need only look to Ice Age events / Medieval "warmth" period for evidence supporting a pattern of significant climate instability.

    It's the rate at which we are releasing Greenhouse gases into the atmosphere -- and the potential for catalyzing instability in climate as a result of this acceleration in emissions -- that has many worried.

    We know how these chemicals work and can track their behavior in our atmosphere. The threat of a Greenhouse environment is what many fear if we do not modify our approach.

  5. #45
    Senior Member Nonsensical's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    4,010

    Default

    To deplete the World of its resources by such a drastic amount within about 100 years is so insane to me.

    We're zoomed way in on little details. We're assuming that these little meaningless trends are bringing on something larger than life. If you zoom out a bit, it's happened quite frequently in the last millions of years. I know an Inconvenient Truth says otherwise, but it doesn't show the whole picture.

    I do think we need to be more environmentally friendly, but the thought of the world's supplies running out in the next 100 years is next to HILARIOUS!

    I think it's funny when people go off on insane tangents trying to be as environmentally conservative as possible, using special light bulbs, biking to work, and eating organic foods. Give me a break, you honestly don't think that we're in that big of a shit hole that we need to all alter our lives?

    We're just another species on this planet that uses its resources. All other species take away from nature, as well..it just happens to be us that take away far more. But without it all, the world would complain. The poor would become more poor, and the rich would lose their fortunes.

    It's like..there are over a billion or more poor people in this world living in poverty, that do every little thing to stay alive, and are extremely eco-friendly in doing it (look at the African's that are still living in tribes, etc.) Then think about the few billions living in nice houses, with plumbing, electricity, and possessions, and when that lifestyle is endangered in the least, we go crazy and try to keep it alive.

    It's just my little rant against all the undereducated fo-hippie new age wannabe nature lovers who think they're the answer to saving the planet, when they can't even have the heart to consider otherwise.

    Attempts to save the planet are good, though. I won't argue it. I just think it's all for the wrong reasons, and that we may be doing it too heavily. The planet will not mysteriously heat up within the next hundred years and kill us..it's a ridiculous theory!


    Al Gore just made the biggest ego statement.
    Is it that by its indefiniteness it shadows forth the heartless voids and immensities of the universe, and thus stabs us from behind with the thought of annihilation, when beholding the white depths of the milky way?

  6. #46
    Oberon
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    We know how these chemicals work and can track their behavior in our atmosphere. The threat of a Greenhouse environment is what many fear if we do not modify our approach.
    Can you possibly imagine that I had not heard of this prior to just now?

    ...but let me correct it for you:

    Quote Originally Posted by Night View Post
    We think we know how these chemicals work and think we can track their behavior in our atmosphere. The threat of a Greenhouse environment is what many fear if we do not modify our approach.
    How many times have you heard or read the phrase "It was once believed that..." coupled with "...but we now know..."? Truly, we don't "know" any better now than we did when we "once believed"; it's just that one theory has given way to another.

    And to further compound the confusion, the credibility of anthropogenic global warming would be easier to evaluate if the issue had not been hijacked by political interests as a path to power.

  7. #47
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackmail! View Post
    And theoretically, thermal expansion could have a very noticeable effect, far more than the melting of ice caps.
    Right, none of which I disagree with - this is known.

    It's the part about relative impact. IIRC, even the IPCC has a range of about 400% base for thermal limiting, and the glacial effect falls within that (combined or not, but again, IIRC. I know it is close).

    And more to the point, that measured effect is based on only recent data. For instance, the Antarctic sheet is growing because the heat is rising - it brings more water mist from the southern hemisphere. The issue there is that stronger currents and such are resulting in the underground portions are breaking away and not returning... so overall mass is decreasing. Except, they estimate that this will result in a lowering of the sea levels. These give and takes are recent observations (recent enough that the "myth" sheet that people use hasn't moved into obscurity, like in the OP).

    Anyway, it's a minor nitpick

  8. #48
    Senior Member Jeremy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Posts
    426

    Default

    Even if global warming is a myth, we need to slow down on our consumption of these products anyway. I have a strong feeling that it's not the CO2 we should be worrying about when we burn coal and gasoline. It's probably everything else that we throw into the atmosphere and into our water supply.
    "Can you set me free from this dark inner world? Save me now, last beats in the soul.."

    Fonewearl and proud of it!

    I (85%) - N (80%) - F (35%) - P (90%)
    O: 94% C: 18% E: 21% A: 94% N: 38%
    9w1 (SP, SX, SO)
    (9, 5, 4)
    RCUAI (Primary Calm)

  9. #49
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oberon View Post
    How many times have you heard or read the phrase "It was once believed that..." coupled with "...but we now know..."? Truly, we don't "know" any better now than we did when we "once believed"; it's just that one theory has given way to another.
    So what do we do then? Do we never assume we have reliable information or discriminate some as more accurate than others?

    If we didn't act on our assumptions from the apparently best knowledge available, we'd never accomplish anything. One might as well attempt to cure diseases with doves and such... After all, we only think that doesn't work, and that our current medical practices do. But hey, tomorrow the scientific world could be turned upside down, and all of our white dove specialists will scoff at the naive days of antibiotics. The only reason I have to believe this won't happen is a mountain of scientific evidence, but since that doesn't validate global warming at all, I feel comfortable investing in white dove futures.

    Maybe that was a little too facetious and condescending to get the point across. But really, the whole "you never really know" argument is very flimsy.

    Quote Originally Posted by OneWithSoul View Post
    The planet will not mysteriously heat up within the next hundred years and kill us.
    You're right. It's going to heat up and kill us for well charted scientific reasons, and it might not completely kill us by then.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  10. #50
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    9w8
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post



    You're right. It's going to heat up and kill us for well charted scientific reasons, and it might not completely kill us by then.
    And you guys call me alarmist/apocalyptic? I'm not going around saying everyone's going to die in a fiery flood (yes, both, at the same time) of death...

Similar Threads

  1. The Great Global Warming Swindle
    By reason in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 07-08-2015, 12:04 PM
  2. Socialism posts (moved from Global Warming.)
    By Anonymous in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 08-21-2008, 08:28 PM
  3. Global warming explained
    By Virtual ghost in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 08-20-2008, 04:30 AM
  4. Global Warming, Man made or Naturally caused (And other earth questions)
    By Didums in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: 08-14-2008, 11:29 PM
  5. Global warming
    By Nocapszy in forum Home, Garden and Nature
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 04-09-2008, 11:18 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO