Looks like we are past the Global Warming thing

[jflip2002]

That first one was a good read, ive gotta read the rest when I get back in an hour or so. Im open to the fact that this might be exaggerated and made a bigger deal than it possibly could be. Id like to play it safe though, and reducing emissions (CO2 mainly) certainly wouldnt HURT.

[//MPower]

Oh god not this shit again.

Yea, lets save the Earth... by paying taxes.

:roll:

[jflip2002]

i suggest you read them, if for no other reason than to calm you down. there are smarter minds than yours or mine that conclude CO2 is a marker of warming temps, not the cause of warmer temps.

Again, Im not even relating it to temperatures, for all I care. The temps can keep climbing, or start to drop. It can be natural, or caused by man. Im not debating that. I think at this point all people can do is debate, and support, nothing can really be proven.

What is a fact: Calcifiers such as corals and invertebrates can not tolerate too low of a pH. The low pH will start to "eat away" at the calcium carbonate, or at least inhibit the calcifiers from utilizing them. Thats a fact, no way around. 100%, absolute fact.

What is theory or beliefs is that we are causing this problem, or that we can actually prevent it. Who knows, really? Im just saying it wouldnt hurt to be safe, rather than sorry. Id really hate for my little scumbag kids, when I have them, to not know what a reef is, or never be able to snorkel along one.

That is all, but those are some interesting reads, all of them. Im not ruling them out by any means, and Im not going to follow them as if they were the gospel. Its just a little scary when you read that coral reefs are at an all time low (who cares if its factual, and the REAL all time low, or just a low PERIOD) in growth. And its even more frightening that they say around 20% of these reefs have been destroyed. There are life cycles for everything, maybe this is just one of those. Id just really hate for it not to be, and us end up being the cause for the most diverse environment on our planet. Id feel like a real piece
of shit if I knew it was my fault.

Oh god not this shit again.

Yea, lets save the Earth... by paying taxes.

:roll:

Ignorant. No one said that. Go tag along in the member rides or something, young man.

[gwb72tii]

the problem jflip is that co2 is not a pollutant, it is a fertilizer, and to globally decrease co2 emissions in today's world is unbelievably costly. the good ol usa could probably find a way to do it quicker than most other countries, but how do explain it to 3rd world economies that cannot afford it, other than to make poverty permanent?

here's another common sense kinda look at why co2 isn't the issue.
temps have been far warmer in the immediate past (1000yrs) than they are today, with much lower atmospheric co2, and very little if any anthropogenic co2.

[//MPower]

Ignorant. No one said that. Go tag along in the member rides or something, young man.

lol

Go eat a bag of dicks. I'll tag along wherever I would like.

:finger:

[nedtheviking]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...efer=australia

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americ...vey/index.html

cliff notes- the bloomberg piece explains that the only place people had thought there was a cooling trend, the southern antarctic, has actually been warming up over the past 50 years.
the cnn piece explains that the vast majority of climate/earth scientists believe that the earth is warming up, and the only debate that remains is how much it is due to people.

Christopher Booker is an idiot trying to spread his agenda through an opinion piece which has zero scientific merit. His article made me furious. He is a historian, not a scientist. Just because the alps got more snow that people thought they would does not mean the earth is not warming up. I saw no linked articles giving support to his claims, other than the reports about snow, which refer to local weather, not the global climate.

Whether you like it or not, and whether its due to people or not, the earth is getting hotter.

I know it was pretty pointless to revive this idiotic thread, but it pissed me off, and i read these articles today. peace. Ned.

[Maluco]

...

[gwb72tii]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...efer=australia

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americ...vey/index.html

cliff notes- the bloomberg piece explains that the only place people had thought there was a cooling trend, the southern antarctic, has actually been warming up over the past 50 years.
the cnn piece explains that the vast majority of climate/earth scientists believe that the earth is warming up, and the only debate that remains is how much it is due to people.

Christopher Booker is an idiot trying to spread his agenda through an opinion piece which has zero scientific merit. His article made me furious. He is a historian, not a scientist. Just because the alps got more snow that people thought they would does not mean the earth is not warming up. I saw no linked articles giving support to his claims, other than the reports about snow, which refer to local weather, not the global climate.

Whether you like it or not, and whether its due to people or not, the earth is getting hotter.

I know it was pretty pointless to revive this idiotic thread, but it pissed me off, and i read these articles today. peace. Ned.

sorry, but the vast majority of anything is no proof of anything
the fact is both sides of thus argument have smarter people than you or me at 180* odds with each other, so there is no consensus, no proof of anthropogenic GW

[CorvallisBMW]

sorry, but the vast majority of anything is no proof of anything
the fact is both sides of thus argument have smarter people than you or me at 180* odds with each other, so there is no consensus, no proof of anthropogenic GW

Didn't he just link a story where both sides were not at disagreement with each other, where a huge, huge majority agreed that it is real, and that there is a consensus? What exactly are you expecting? I bet you couldn't get 99% of people to agree that the sky is blue, yet here is a vast majority of scientists (who, as you point out, are much smarter than you) agreeing on something, yet you completely discount it? Am I the only one that sees a discrepancy here?

I'm sure if you look hard enough, you could find a scientist who believes gravity isn't real either. But that doesn't mean it isn't true....

[eric (^__^)]

the only thing that still kinda has me going is the melting permafrost beneath the arctic ocean releasing a lot of methane

but whatever

[mrsleeve]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...efer=australia

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/americ...vey/index.html

cliff notes- the bloomberg piece explains that the only place people had thought there was a cooling trend, the southern antarctic, has actually been warming up over the past 50 years.
the cnn piece explains that the vast majority of climate/earth scientists believe that the earth is warming up, and the only debate that remains is how much it is due to people.

Christopher Booker is an idiot trying to spread his agenda through an opinion piece which has zero scientific merit. His article made me furious. He is a historian, not a scientist. Just because the alps got more snow that people thought they would does not mean the earth is not warming up. I saw no linked articles giving support to his claims, other than the reports about snow, which refer to local weather, not the global climate.

Whether you like it or not, and whether its due to people or not, the earth is getting hotter.

I know it was pretty pointless to revive this idiotic thread, but it pissed me off, and i read these articles today. peace. Ned.

Ok smarty pants why is the arctic sea ice back to levels not seen since 1979 in less than one year???????????????????????????? Splain that one

[kylebes1]

I am confused? I thought ice melted when the temp was warmer than 32? assuming the ice formed below 32 (maybe its a little different including salt) that would mean it's now warmer than 32 but you guys are saying the world is getting cooler?

I am just wondering why everything we use dissipates heat and it ends up cooling the work instead of the logical out come of warming it... o well

[Ral]

^^nope, you're just not smart enough to understand like Al Gore and his paid scientists are.

[nedtheviking]

"Ok smarty pants why is the arctic sea ice back to levels not seen since 1979 in less than one year???????????????????????????? Splain that one"

I don't know where you are getting your info. at least link an article or something. This NASA article, which i would argue is pretty reputable, mentions that at the end of this past summer, the ice melted faster that any other time on record. Generally, that would indicate that its hotter than it has been in the past.

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fea...a_ice_min.html

Weirdly though, Sea Ice formation is based on more than just temperature, so maybe more ice formed because the global weather pattern is changing. I don't know, i just trust people who know what they are talking about such as NASA. Then I get pissed off by idiotic bloggers and other random people who have an ill-informed opinion based on some political bias.

I agree that Al Gore is kind of an idiot. I never did see his movie, because it looked too "fantastic", i.e. not based on fact. I don't understand why people hate his message so much though. What is wrong with not wanting to mess the earth up, or trying to reverse damage we have done? why do people get angry about that?

Ned.

[Rion]

same site, dunno if someone already posted this, but this is from the same site as OP used

Glaciers melting so fast some could disappear by middle of the century
Mountain ranges could lose their snowy peaks by the middle of the century, according to the lastest findings which show glaciers are melting faster than ever.
he World Glacier Monitoring Service in Switzerland collected measurements on the thickness of ice on mountain ranges from New Zealand to the Alps.

Heavy snowfall in Scandinavia meant the average loss in thickness in 2007 was 24 inches (0.6m) compared to a record 47 inches (1.2m) the year previously.

However, it is still the third biggest fall on record and after 18 years of uninterrupted loss around the world means the total mass of glaciers is thought to be at its lowest for several centuries.

Dr Michael Zemp, who analyses the data at the WGMS, said if temperatures continue to rise, glaciers in certain regions where there is a warmer climate and low altitudes could disappear completely by the middle of the century.

For example, ice on the Pyrenees and Rockies is at risk of disappearing. Where there are higher elevations the ice will only remain high up, for example the Alps. Only in the polar regions, where the tempearture is increasing from a very low point, will the ice remain longer.

"If temperatures continue to increase, glaciers will continue to retreat to higher elevations where they can be sustained," said Dr Zemp. "But if the topography does not allow them to retreat to higher altitudes they will disappear."

Dr Zemp said glaciers have reduced by an average of more than 2ft 3ins (0.7m) since 2000. It is thought that the melting glaciers are adding around 0.04 inches (1mm) to sea level rises every year as well as increasing the risk of avalanches and rock fall to mountain communities. It is also a problem for the millions of people that rely on glaciers for drinking water, tourism or even power through hydro electricity.

Dr Zemp said the new figures are the clearest picture yet that the climate is changing on top of temperature rise and the ice sheets in the Arctic retreating.

"Glaciers are independent proof the climate is changing, so even if you do not believe measurements on temperature rise or rainfall you can see the glaciers are retreating from their moraines around the globe."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/env...e-century.html