Global Warming

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

Cool... never seen that book before. Thanks!

 

Oh man! Ad-blocking software has been detected! :'(

This website is run by the community, for the community... and it needs advertisements in order to keep running. Blocking our ads means your killing our stats!
Please disable your ad-block, or become a premium member to hide all advertisements and this notice.

or you could always just pay someone to offset your footprint.

what do you guy's make of Charities/companies like This, could you still class this as doing your bit?

 

I also remain unconvinced that mankind is having any effect at all on natural cyclic changes in global temperature.

I belive the scientists have a vested interest in supporting the theory because of the funding they recieve.

 

Do they offset the carbon that a volcano spits out?? This carbon footprint crap makes me laugh - and to think that someone actually got paid to come up with it too???

 

Forgive me for not being a climatologist...

Core samples dug out of polar ice suggest that over the past few hundred thousand years, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has been more or less static. They know this because they can analyse air bubbles in the ice, and they know that deep ice is old ice. Other stuff suggests that the last 20 million years have been pretty much stable for CO2.

In the same period, there have been countless volcanic eruptions. They know this because the soot layers can be seen in the same core samples as well as in rock layers elsewhere. They also know it because volcanism is a natural process that happens all the time.

These two facts suggest that volcanic activity does not raise CO2 levels - never has, in millions of years.

The rise in CO2 levels coincides with the start of our industrial period. We burn coal and oil and create CO2. We burn rainforest, and we create even more. This suggests that we are responsible.

If we agree that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, then we have some explaining to do...

There was a report today that said that some new research suggests that changes in Sun activity are also not responsible for the clearly measured and agreed rises in temperature.

The apocalypse is overdue, I know, but Revelations suggests that when the judgement comes, it will be more dramatic than a slow roast. I think we can rule God out as the cause of this.

Yes, scientists get research grants. But governments and oil companies make a load more money out of denying global warming than they can make from going with the evidence. If you are looking for a conspiracy, look there.

And offsetting is an odd thing. Sometimes it is good, and can make a difference, but there are a lot of companies out there just out to make money. Personally, I think offsets are a bit like papal indulgences - probably not going to do much...

 

It's a cracking read, and although it is a work of fiction, it does make you think.

There is also an interesting article which looks at the 'facts' that he raises here:

http://www.pewclimate.org/state_of_fear.cfm

 

I must admit I have never heard of that book JonnyMX, but to be honest that does sum up my opinions exactly. I know I am quite cynical, but at the moment the greatest thinkers in the world are claiming it is being destroyed by own own acts (or indeed lack of action) relating to CO2 emissions. At one point, these great 'thinkers' insisted that the world was flat, they insisted on the authenticity of Piltdown Man, they insisted the Earth was the centre of the universe and that an acceptable remedy for headaches was holes drilled in the head.

It's easy to scoff at these notions now, but at the time, these people that devised these theories (and at the moment this is what it is) were regarding as the greatest brains along with the greatest scientific method on Earth, much like we do now

I am not - nor ever will be - in a position to say whether these scientists are right or wrong. I do however refuse to roll over and accept whatever is thrown at me by some think tank I've never heard of and a widely hated government whose only solution thus far to the 'problem' is to whack up as many taxes as humanely possible whilst every other opponent party puts these issues above - in my opinion - far more important and home-grown issues in order to sway public vote

Saying that though, I did go to Live Earth last Saturday and it was bloody good fun, Duran Duran rocked

 

The real facts shouldn't include inflated statistics of highly inaccurate modelers, but a consensus by educated people that are in the field.

The Petition Project

Here's the statistics, compiled into the detailed report and signed by over 20,000 of the world's scientists, of which over 2700 are practicing climatologists, meteorologists, physicists, oceanographers, geologists and geophysicists. Read it if you dare, it's chock full of charts and graphs.

Environmental Facts of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide

Unfortunately, naysayers have jumped on the bandwagon to debunk the validity of this. I'm not posting this as 100% factual, because the subject is so rife with corruption and money that it is hard to be accurate. Still, the scientific community is not behind this as a MAJORITY as people like Al Gore would have us believe.

Some everyday facts are misleading. For example, in some high-density areas, like NYC, a brand-new, gas-guzzling SUV actually cleans the air as it drives? Yep the air exiting the tailpipe is cleaner than the air going into the intake. While I don't mean to dissuade alternative-energy (of which I'm a big fan), because the oil dependency needs to be reduced, these things are often left unsaid.

The Carbon Credit thing is about as full of crap as you can get. If you want to help out, just do your part. For me, I believe that whatever the hype, we all have to be better stewards of this planet. Sure, I believe the Earth is more dynamic than we can understand, but we should treat it as our children's future, regardless.

 

The Petition Project (Oregon Institute Of Science and Medicine) 'paper' quoted by fortch above is, of course, a complete and utter sham.

Although it looks like a scientific paper, it has in fact never been published in any scientific journal, and never been put up for peer review. These failings mean that it should be treated with a little more skepticism than one might employ in dealing with a properly presented and reviewed piece of scientific research.

The 17,000 odd 'scientists' who have signed the petition include Ginger Spice and the cast of MASH. There are very few 'real' scientists and no scientists of any great repute on the list.

Arthur B Robinson, the man behind oism, is a fundamentalist christian who stands very much on the lunatic fringes of the scientific community. His 'institute' is funded by grants from the oil and chemical industries. He gets paid good money to spout this sort of rubbish.

Here are some links...

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine

http://www.royalsoc.ac.uk/downloaddoc.asp?id=1630

http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2007/04/10/the-real-climate-censorship/

Make no mistake - the scientific community (by which I mean actual, real scientists - not pop stars) is very much of the opinion that Global Warming is a fact and that it is going to become a major problem for us because of the way we choose to live on this planet.

And can I just say:

This is a deliberately misleading statement. It may be true that the gases exiting the exhaust of an SUV could, in some exceptional cases, carry fewer particulates and have a simpler chemical composition (due to the burning up of complex compounds) than the air going in. Especially in some big cities.
However, some simple (really simple) chemistry will suggest to you that the internal combustion engine operates by burning hydrocarbons in the presence of Oxygen to produce energy and a variety of carbon oxides. The catalytic converter completes the task of converting the exhaust gases to (yes, you've got it) CO2. In the context of this thread, driving your SUV around all day is not helping the planet by 'cleaning' the air!

 

LOL, I knew that would come up, which is why I put in the disclaimer. But, if you feel you need to drag me around in the mud... have at it. All sides of the story should be perused, which is why I brought it up. Consensus is only good for politics, and not necessarily in science ALL the time. Most of our scientific revelations (do I need to list them for you?) were brought about by people NOT in the consensus.

btw, thanks for the combustion lesson. I taught that for GM as a profession, but its all good. I wasn't misleading anyone, and even stated that our oil dependency is our biggest issue in that area. My point was that driving a NEW car, regardless of its size, benefits the planet better than driving an older vehicle.

Perhaps my wording wasn't as thorough as it should have been -- maybe my post wouldn't then be misconstrued.

 

I'm not trying to drag you around in the mud...

You posted a link to a very misleading and inaccurate document and suggested that it was evidence of dissent in the scientific community. But there is no real dissent. The argument is over, we now need to look at action. If we get this wrong, a lot of people are going to die.

I completely agree with you that it is better to drive a new vehicle than an older one. I hadn't realised you had worked in the motor industry.

My personal belief is that the planet is going to be very badly screwed up before people wake up to the danger. I think that will happen because we live in a political age which is driven by short-termism and greed, and that selfishness has infected vast numbers of people in the western world. Everyone is too busy looking after number 1, to care what happens a few decades down the road. My only hope is that by the time we stop sleepwalking into this, it won't be too late.

 

The political age you speak of has been the same since the dawn of man! The only difference now is that we have media to let us know that everyone else on the planet looks after number one too! Oh and btw, you have to look after number one cos no-one else will!

You're taking this Global Warming stuff way too seriously - you must be a nervous wreck!

 

Here's the irony.

I'm 47, so will be long dead by the time this seriously hits.

I have no children, so have nothing personally/biologically to worry about there.

I gain nothing from trying to get people to see this problem clearly. Except the knowledge that it is the right thing to do for the generations to come.

I still reckon the 80's - Thatcher, Reagan, Gordon Gekko and his 'Greed is Good' have a lot to answer for. Also the rise of the global markets and shareholders - all very much about jam now and damn the consequences... I'm pretty sure things have changed quite a bit over the years. No-one now would be even slightly interested in creating the NHS or any sort of Welfare state - that's because the new generations have been fed on a diet of self-interest and competition...

I'm not a nervous wreck. But I am passionate about it.

 

dude you rock, well what I mean to say is you have it spot.

Anyone who says putting plastic in a green box and tins another box will help save the earth is talking balls it is all about tax.

 

Why thank you GBL. Unfortunately, a lot of people think the articles in The Sun are taken directly from a scientific journal and take it as gospel, as well as doomsayers in the government, then the fear factor takes over.

 

Obviously, the world contains an infinite number of cans and plastic bottles. After all, it is so, so big...

Attitudes to taxation are a fine example of self-interest taking priority over the greater good. You guys seem to think that Tax is just an evil, invented by the government to steal from you. The reality is much more complicated than that.

Hopefully, your children's children will not end up paying so that you can carry on having a good time...

 

Well I used to print the Sun so I know all about that.

 

Tax is invented by the government to steal from us how else do you think they can afford to give themselves such big pay rises every year. Its like the BBC you pay a licsence fee for **** all.

The smoking ban will save councils money but they'll put up council tax because there be more litter outside of bars and pubs

BTW I hope I have no children anywhere n I hope to never have any.

 

Sorry mate, don't agree with you at all

Tax does serve a purpose, and mostly I am grateful for that. When I call the police, I want them to turn up, when I get injured, I want the NHS to take care of me. The list goes on

This is not an issue of self interest in the slightest. Example, Gordon Brown adds £10 'Green tax' for every flight we take. Will that prevent you from jetting off on your holidays? I think not, adding a tenner to the few hundred you've shelled out already doesn't seem too bad, same as for the other however-many-million people in this country. However, if everyone of those however-many-millions of people paid that £10, that is a huge windfall for the Government for doing absolutely sod all. Whilst I don't want to turn this into a political debate, practically all active government parties answer to every ill is to tax the shite out of it. They've done that to cigarettes, has it had a massive impact on the amount of people smoking? No. Same as drink, if anything that problem has got worse. Are poeple filling up their cars less? The drop in that is so small as to be negligable.

I go back to my original arguement, I am not going to just accept this because someone has just suddenly noticed that the world is going to explode. What the hell have they been up to the past few years then to only notice now? And consider the evidence backing too that a lot of the CO2 emmision IS caused by natural processes, be it cows farting all over the place (there is CO2 in guffs, by the way), swamps which let off a stupid amount of CO2 (rotting vegetation), who the hell do you believe

I'm staying neutral until convinced

 

Yep. It is more complicated than that. They don't just steal from me. They steal from all of us.

It hacks me off when the politicians beg for more money for education (it's for the children!!!), so they increase taxes, take money away from education in order to pay for whatever pet project (pay raise, whatever) that they want... then beg for more money for education (IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN!!!! ). And repeat.

It's just my opinion, but I think that the government has exactly one task: to protect the country, both nationally and individually. Taking money for anything else is theft. Unfortunately, I pay because I'd rather live here than elsewhere. It's a broken system... but it beats what some other countries have, that's for sure.