Why is there a debate over global warming?

Discussion in 'Science' started by Neodoxy, Aug 6, 2011.

  1. Felix (R)

    Felix (R) New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I believe there was a part regarding ice.
     
  2. Joe Six-pack

    Joe Six-pack Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    10,898
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As far as I know, when there is more sun-spot activity there is more heat. That's what melts the ice. Plus gases like "water vapor" are greenhouse in nature, so the hotter it is, the more water evaporates and the more heat gets trapped. Co2 contributes to this, but it's not the driving force behind the heat. The sun activity is. The only way to reduce Co2 would be to eradicated all animals and people, which is a bad idea. It's not even the primary factor.
     
  3. Felix (R)

    Felix (R) New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Cryoconite causes ice to melt faster and does not require an increase in temperature to do so. The source of cryoconite is far away deserts, volcanic eruption, and emissions from things like
    Factories and othe man made emissions.
     
  4. Joe Six-pack

    Joe Six-pack Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    10,898
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Soot absorbs suns radiation, which heats the ice.

    But even with this factor, there is nothing we can do about volcanos, people, animals and the sun.
     
  5. Felix (R)

    Felix (R) New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Right. But there is something that could be done about other man made emissions if their contribution was proven significant.
     
  6. Joe Six-pack

    Joe Six-pack Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    10,898
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Those are the least significant factors in the equation.

    Why kill our economy before we develop effective alternative forms of energy?
     
  7. Felix (R)

    Felix (R) New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2011
    Messages:
    1,603
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Never said we should.
     
  8. Joe Six-pack

    Joe Six-pack Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2008
    Messages:
    10,898
    Likes Received:
    34
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Okay, good. We sort of can't get rid of Co2 without killing all life on the planet.
     
  9. speedingtime

    speedingtime Banned at Members Request

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2011
    Messages:
    1,220
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What about this?

    http://www.newscientist.com/article...al-warming-is-down-to-the-sun-not-humans.html

    Just curious as to what your thoughts are.
     
  10. The Great Dane

    The Great Dane New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    274
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL! You stuck your hand in a hornets nest! It is a battle of statistics and yes, it is messy. The problem is that you can interpet the data in many ways, just like you can with the bible! Remember, there are lies, (*)(*)(*)(*) lies and then statistics!
     
  11. Windigo

    Windigo Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    15,026
    Likes Received:
    1,139
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My thoughts are that it

    #1 Totally ignores the recently proven relationship with cosmic rays and cloud formation.

    #2 Appeals to the authority of the IPCC while not recognizing that the author of the IPCC chapter that halved solar influence Dr. Judith Lean did so citing only her own work to the objection of eminently more qualified solar physicists who reviwed her chapter. Dr. Judy is hardly the worlds leading expert but she was willing to play ball with the IPCC so she got to write the rules.
     
  12. TheBigBuddha1987

    TheBigBuddha1987 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2011
    Messages:
    5
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    hi


    i think that global warming is happening because of two things or facts

    1. because of the pollution of cars, carbon dioxiyd (dioxid?)
    2. the sun is more active as normally...

    by the way, did you know that the airforce and other (parties?) people are smashing atomic bombs into the sun to keep it glowing?!? ;)

    i bet you didnt! :sun::-D
     
  13. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hi
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
  14. FlamingLib

    FlamingLib Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2018
    Messages:
    3,903
    Likes Received:
    2,192
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The idea that billions of people could pour gigatons of **** into the air and oceans every year with no ill effect is absurd just on the face of it. There is a near universal consensus among scientists that we are a major factor. The idea that this is the result of some grant money-based cabal is ludicrous. The idea that the consensus is wrong is less ludicrous, but still highly unlikely.

    Even if one doubts the consensus that humans are a major contributing factor, one must admit the possibility that humans are a major contributing factor, and then it becomes a question of "What if you're wrong?" If the climate change people are wrong, some economic activity is depressed for some years. Life goes on. If the climate deniers are wrong, the planet will eventually warm to deadly levels. Why on Earth would anyone make such a gamble, considering the stakes?
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
    wyly likes this.
  15. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It’s not a gamble, it’s a sure thing. The climate IS. Changing more rapidly and , we are the major cause of the change in the rate. No if and’s or but’s . Deniers are as big dumbbunnies as they were about the ozone layer, cigarette smoking, black lung, trickle down, chem trails, 911 conspiracy and the guy on the grassy Knoll. Remember not everyone did well in all their science and math classes and ended up bagging answers off the guy or gal in front just to pass. For the most part many are the same people we’re arguing with. The rest of the deniers, they get their answers from the Old Testament.
     
    Last edited: Dec 2, 2018
    wyly likes this.
  16. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Actually it's Unicorn farts......I bet you didn't know that.
     
  17. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You are trying to appeal to science.

    However, climatologists the world over are in massive agreement that anthropogenic warming is very real and brings serious consequences.
     
  18. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    113
    nope it's not, deniers still cling to this myth even misrepresenting what sun-spot activity studies have found...yes there is an obvious link to solar activity and temps but the data revealed that as sun-spot activity decreased for a long period average global temps increased regardless...
     
  19. WillReadmore

    WillReadmore Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2013
    Messages:
    59,488
    Likes Received:
    16,351
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are long and careful measurements of solar radiation.

    The problem isn't heat inflow. It is what is slowing radiation of heat into space.
     
  20. wyly

    wyly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2008
    Messages:
    13,857
    Likes Received:
    1,159
    Trophy Points:
    113
    deniers are in a politcal bubble, they refuse to look outside their political bubble for information...

    recently I was involved in another thread discussion where several posters came up with fantastical ludicrous explanations for their beliefs...it made no sense to me, the answers to the questions they asking only required a simple web search to find the explanation they were looking for...I pointed them to accepted explanations that are supported by science and academics but they insisted on only sourcing their info from wacko sites because it supported their preconceived beliefs, they were in a bubble and didn't want to acknowledge anything sources that conflicted with their viewpoints...

    and such is the main problem with climate change deniers...and many have weak cognitive ability...
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2018
    Sallyally, Montegriffo and dagosa like this.
  21. iamanonman

    iamanonman Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2016
    Messages:
    4,826
    Likes Received:
    1,576
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Fast forward 7 years. CERN's cloud chamber experiments failed to show any link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Plus, per the GCR theory the Earth should be cooling. Yet, it's warming so that pretty much puts a nail in the GCR coffin.
     
  22. tecoyah

    tecoyah Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Messages:
    28,370
    Likes Received:
    9,297
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Dismiss them and move on.....remember that if they are right then we have nothing to worry about and if we are right, there isn't a damn thing we can do about it.

    The time has come to buckle up for the ride and have a couple beers.
     
    dagosa likes this.
  23. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Exactly.......these are people who have certain unfounded beliefs then only go to sources with the same beliefs. I’m of the opinion that, it maybe easy to find ligit scientifically backed ideas, but it’s also easier to find wakos who also believe in the tooth fairy.....
    Lots of flat earth society people out there.

    The rebuttals lie in the institutional sources that are accepted over time as truthful. NASA has a reputation because they’re the ones used as an informational source needed by a plethora of corporations. That’s what good govt. is for,
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2018
    tecoyah likes this.
  24. dagosa

    dagosa Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    22,147
    Likes Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I Don’t even worry about “ them” being right.
     
    tecoyah likes this.
  25. Jonsa

    Jonsa Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    39,871
    Likes Received:
    11,452
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Its simple, since scientific consensus considers the use of fossil fuels to be a major contributor to accelerating climate change.

    Now consider the GINORMOUS sunk costs of the fossil fuel industry. Literally trillions in investments. Consider that there are at least a dozen countries who are "trust fund" financed thru their oil/gas reserves. Consider the massive amount invested in those companies stocks.

    That's one helluva lot of vested interests, not to mention economic and political inertia. So it should come as no surprise that there are any number of people who want to protect their interests, position and power, today, and to hell with the facts. And there's even more who claim it ain't their problem, today being way more important than tomorrow.
     
    tecoyah, dagosa and WillReadmore like this.

Share This Page