Global warming.

[Fear the Nation]

Problem is that you can't trust the data. There have been numerous whistleblowers that say that that data is cherry picked to force a politicized conclusion. So untill politicians get out out the scientists way I dont believe it any more than a report from CNN.

[Voice of Reason]

This is real simple for me. Global warming is happening. Undeniable. Anyone who denies that is illogical, closed minded and not worth debating on the topic.

 

Now ... the cause of global warming we can debate. My point on that is regardless of what level man is contributing to global warming, it is best we do what we can to control man's contributions to global warming.

[woodsrider]

This is real simple for me. Global warming is happening. Undeniable. Anyone who denies that is illogical, closed minded and not worth debating on the topic.

 

Now ... the cause of global warming we can debate. My point on that is regardless of what level man is contributing to global warming, it is best we do what we can to control man's contributions to global warming.

I don't think I've seen many if any at all on this board disagree with the premise of this. The debate, IMO, is to what lengths to we go and at what cost? There are those crying the sky is falling based on a very very very small sample size. The earth is roughly 4.5 billion years old. We have about 150 years of data. That is .00000003333% of our planet's life.

[UKMustangFan]

Global warming is absolutely happening.

 

The impact man has on it is up for debate. Even still, I'd be more concerned with what those in places like China are doing to destroy the environment more so than what Americans are.

[Fear the Nation]

This is real simple for me. Global warming is happening. Undeniable. Anyone who denies that is illogical, closed minded and not worth debating on the topic.

 

Now ... the cause of global warming we can debate. My point on that is regardless of what level man is contributing to global warming, it is best we do what we can to control man's contributions to global warming.

 

1% man, water vapor is responsible for like 66 to 85% of the trapt heat in the atmosphere.

 

Per nasa and epa.

The most significant greenhouse gases are water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), according to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

 

Out of the entire atmospheric makeup, only one to two percent is made up of greenhouse gases with the majority being nitrogen (about 78 percent) and oxygen (about 21 percent). Of that two percent, “planet-killing” carbon dioxide comprises only 3.62 percent while water vapor encompasses 95 percent. And of the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, humans cause only 3.4 percent of annual CO2 emissions.

[Voice of Reason]

I don't think I've seen many if any at all on this board disagree with the premise of this. The debate, IMO, is to what lengths to we go and at what cost? There are those crying the sky is falling based on a very very very small sample size. The earth is roughly 4.5 billion years old. We have about 150 years of data. That is .00000003333% of our planet's life.

 

One of the earlier posts in the thread had a link to data going back 1,000 years.

 

As to lengths and cost, what is the cost of not doing anything? What is the value of doing something? Who is building the windmill farms? Solar energy panels? Designing and creating radiant heating and other technology? If we want more jobs, this seems like a technology driven industry that should be good for the US job market.

[woodsrider]

One of the earlier posts in the thread had a link to data going back 1,000 years.

 

As to lengths and cost, what is the cost of not doing anything? What is the value of doing something? Who is building the windmill farms? Solar energy panels? Designing and creating radiant heating and other technology? If we want more jobs, this seems like a technology driven industry that should be good for the US job market.

It was a link to a wiki page and states the data was reconstructed. So in short avg global temps were not being tracked 1000 years ago. Best I can find is data going back to 1880. But for arguments sake let's say the 1000 year number is correct. That makes it .0000002222% of the planets existence. Is that really any better?

 

And who said do nothing? Wind energy just isn't a viable option. I think solar could be but it's expensive and the technology isn't where it needs to be.

[Bluegrasscard]

Talk about worrying about something that is probably out of our (human) hands...

 

Supposedly CO2 is the driver. And CO2 is at modern record levels and is not going to slow down or reverse with any actions in the near future. Rising CO2 is a given.

 

From 1970 to now CO2 has gone from less than 330 ppm to over 400 ppm.

 

Climate Change: Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide | NOAA Climate.gov

If CO2 is a driver and the magic number is 500 ppm or so - we are already doomed.

 

Of course the projection is that the oceans will rise and we will get this:

 

 

There are even charts that show the threat...

 

 

And...

 

 

 

And here is the track (since the magic 1880 year) at this url:

 

Climate Change Indicators: Sea Level | Climate Change Indicators in the United States | US EPA

 

The scary charts show what will happen if the sea rise is in meters. And since 1880 the rise is...1/4 meter. Using even what is probably 'the worst' data points on this subject.

 

So either the theorys on man-made CO2 driven are wrong or we are dead already.

 

Ignored are data points that show there are cycles and the cycles will continue. Most charts start at 1880. Some only do the last 50 or so years. But the bigger picture shows:

 

a) 2016 is not 'hottest' on record. The medieval warming period was warmer.

 

 

b) Warming has recently slowed, some say it has stopped. Possibly being driven by Sun power output - driven sunspot activity. We are apparently headed in a grand minimum. The Little Ice Age seems to correspond to the Mulder Grand Minimum.

 

c) Our magnetic protection from the sun's energy - the magnetosphere - is 20% or more less powerful in recent decades.

 

Are the cycles purely natural - hard to say. Does man impact the cycle - maybe, but probably does not as much as we are led to believe. At least CO2 impact theories have not played out at all. Can we quickly fix the rise in CO2 - no. Can we reverse its rise - heck no, its going to continue to rise. Should we reduce 'carbon footprints' - it if makes us feel good, can't hurt.

 

In closing. Here is good chart of temps since the dawn of (this) era of mankind. If you go back further the swings and cycles are even far more pronounced. Things are changing. They have always changed. Climate cycles a past, current and future are fact. I do not think any is 'denying' that. But can 'we' do about? Like it or not - probably not much at all. And 2016 was not 'warmest ever' in history...only if your history goes back to 1880....a sliver of geological time.

 

[All Tell]

This is real simple for me. Global warming is happening. Undeniable. Anyone who denies that is illogical, closed minded and not worth debating on the topic.

 

Now ... the cause of global warming we can debate. My point on that is regardless of what level man is contributing to global warming, it is best we do what we can to control man's contributions to global warming.

 

I don't disagree at all until it comes to the point of absurdity in the regulations that people and industries are expected to follow.

 

I also have 'UGE issues when the loudest and shrillest voices expressing concern for man made global warming have the largest carbon footprints.

[PepRock01]

I don't disagree at all until it comes to the point of absurdity in the regulations that people and industries are expected to follow.

 

I also have 'UGE issues when the loudest and shrillest voices expressing concern for man made global warming have the largest carbon footprints.

 

 

Just come out and say it, you mean Al Gore. :lol2:

[All Tell]

Just come out and say it, you mean Al Gore. :lol2:

 

Al Gore, George Clooney, Leonardo DeCaprio it's more then one.

 

I do respect Ed Begley, Jr. He apparantly practices what he preaches.

[mcpapa]

Go nuclear.

[JC Alumni 76]

All this talk makes me wanna watch "The Day After Tomorrow" ⏳

[Bluegrasscard]

Go nuclear.

 

We are still not done with Fuki...

[PepRock01]

Go nuclear.

 

Been saying this forever.