Someone Stop These Eco Idiots!!! |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 12 Aug 2009 at 3:47pm |
||
If the first 800 years of warming is not CO2 related, you can NOT possibly say that CO2 accounts for the other 5/6 ths - that is one hell of an amplification! They aren't, they are saying it's likely. However we do see a direct correlation between the CO2 emitted by us and the temperature rise during the industrial revolution, without any of the natural causes of temperature rise being present. That is making facts fit theory again. That’s misinterpreting the statement; again, they are not claiming to know for certain only pointing out the logical possibilities based on the research. What caused the first 800 years of warming??? Where did the heat energy come from in the first 800 years that CO2 was not around to amplify? Where did the heat energy come from that the CO2 is allegedly amplifying after the 800 year period? You’ve already been told...
Solar activity etc, etc. Actually there are many factors other than CO2 that can increase temperature, and the inevitable result is release of locked up CO2 after a lag. CO2 pumped into the atmosphere increases temperature, it's called the green house effect, basic junior school science, and higher temperatures as a result of any phenomenon you care to mention can accelerate the release of CO2.
This isn't difficult you know. But you tend to make it as difficult as you can due to your bias against anything relating to anthropomorphic warming.
|
|||
767nutter
Chief Pilot Joined: 09 Jul 2008 Location: Norfolk, UK Points: 1330 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I'm very sick of seeing these kinds of posts, not that I read the rubbish here of course
How can you see the posts if you don't read them??? And if so why are you here?
These people know far, far better than you. Looking through quickly, it's quite laughable the arguments you try to throw at each other. They're completely unscientific, they have no decent foundation
Nothing wrong with a good old debate! Thats half the reason forums are made.
Anyway back on course i was just wondering about the solar panels. judging by the image they have shown on the website wouldn't it affect the lifestyle if they stay in orbit with the planet? Because wouldn't they block out sun light to some vast areas?
|
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
No - someone else who thinks, too.
"could" does not cut it scientifically, and again, "could" is being read as "does". "could" doesn't prove it EITHER way. WE DO NOT KNOW - that is the reality. "could" also means "it could not". You could replace all instances of "could" with "could not" and it would still be valid. If the first 800 years of warming is not CO2 related, you can NOT possibly say that CO2 accounts for the other 5/6 ths - that is one hell of an amplification! CO2 alone rises temperature by 5 times (or 500%)???? That is making facts fit theory again. What caused the first 800 years of warming??? Where did the heat energy come from in the first 800 years that CO2 was not around to amplify? Where did the heat energy come from that the CO2 is allegedly amplifying after the 800 year period? 500% amplification is entirely impossible, but this is exactly what scientists are implying. They are suggesting that if CO2 wasn't in the atmosphere, the other 4200 years of warming would not have occurred. Best regards, Vulcan. |
|||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Oh dear, someone who has obviously not read anything we have previously posted, or any climate science.
|
|||
dmr100
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Location: Sheffield, UK Points: 1571 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Hey, just thought I'd put my opinion down here.
There is NOTHING we can do! Sending solar panels into space is messing with nature, and if anything will make the situation worse. The earth naturally goes through periods of ice age and through warmer periods. This is due to many reasons, the axis on which the earth tilts, or example, or changes in sun spot activity in the sun. However either way following the pattern of ice ages so far, we are due for one any time now. This might be why we're seeing what people call 'global warming'. This is one of these fluxations, which could lead to the slowing down of the gulf stream, leading to extream cold and there you have it, ice age. Personally I think global warming is the media kicking up a fuss. Thanks to Mr Parkers Geography lessons for the info! Dom |
|||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Geosciences Research Division, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0220, USA.
is not scientific enough?? Vulcan. Yes but you misinterpret it don't you Vulcan.
The initial warm period before CO2 rise was not caused by CO2, other factors cause a rise in temperature also, like changes in the Earths orbit, affecting the amount of summer Sunshine, Atlantic ocean slowdowns ETC. However, after the temperature reached a critical level, it induced the release of CO2 from permafrost etc.
I find it amusing that it's so easy to counter your claims, ironically, by quoting from the very same oceanographic institution you quoted from.
This is what Guest Contributor: Jeff Severinghaus, Professor of Geosciences at University of California, San Diego, Scripps Institution of Oceanography really has to say...
|
|||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
You claim the politicians are biased and invented global warming to con us...
And then you link to the association of British Drivers.
Try linking to the published research in nature, or science, rather than British petrol heads.
|
|||
737Chris
Chief Pilot Joined: 04 Apr 2009 Location: The Abyss Points: 2247 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Got to agree with Odai about the Climate change,
what i would say though, is that we're not as bad as we are being made out me thinks :) |
|||
Generic forum signature
|
|||
Odai
Chief Pilot Joined: 05 Apr 2008 Location: NW England Points: 3731 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
You didn't get what I said.
I never said the material was unscientific. I said the arguments were.
Every graph is scientific. It doesn't mean the argument it's used in is.
|
|||
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Geosciences Research
Division, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0220,
USA.
is not scientific enough?? Vulcan. |
|||
Odai
Chief Pilot Joined: 05 Apr 2008 Location: NW England Points: 3731 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
They're not scientific ideas man, they're rubbish. Why would I read them? And what exactly would I want to be taken seriously on? I haven't contributed anything!
I'm not a scientist, and neither are you. If I was a scientist, then I would of course listen to the ideas of other scientists. Again, this is a load of rubbish. Nothing said here has been scientific!
I've said this before, but I'll say it again. Why do you keep referring to this? Ignore the government, ignore the bloody IPCC if your mistrust in the government is this extreme (not that I blame you). Listen to the scientists if you don't believe what anyone else is telling you.
|
|||
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
If you wanted to be taken seriously, then you would read them, and consider them. There is no scientist worse than an ignorant one, who is closed-minded and refuses to consider the possibility they are wrong. There are too many sources that question the IPCC. Because they are not the IPCC however, they are thrown out as trash. Remember - the same Governments that lied to us over Iraq and Afghanistan are the same Governments feeding you with this man-made climate rubbish! Vulcan. |
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Odai
Chief Pilot Joined: 05 Apr 2008 Location: NW England Points: 3731 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
I'm very sick of seeing these kinds of posts, not that I read the rubbish here of course.
Those of you who continue to assert the change in climate is a conspiracy; you are not scientists. You do not understand the work scientists have done to come to their proper conclusions. These people don't rely on guesswork, and conspiracy to come up with ideas.
Become scientists, then you'll be able to understand exactly what they are saying, and how we are in danger.
These people know far, far better than you. Looking through quickly, it's quite laughable the arguments you try to throw at each other. They're completely unscientific, they have no decent foundation. Completely meaningless. Put simply Vulcan, it's you that's the "idiot", not these "eco" guys. Don't take that as a personal insult, lots of (too many) people are just like you.
I'm no climate scientist, therefore nothing I say about this, no graphs I link, is solid. I can't understand what a climatist would tell me, neither can you. I do however understand how a scientist works, so I'll just trust them. Why don't you?
Let the poor guys do their work, they know what they're doing.
|
|||
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
|
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
http://www.abd.org.uk/co2_cause_or_effect.htm
Don't laught at the site I linked to - read the links it contains. |
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/283/5408/1712
|
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Did you know CO2 rise lags temperature rise by about 800 years?
The core samples prove it. Oh - they won't tell you that though. Best regards, Vulcan. |
|||
liamp51
Ground Crew Joined: 26 Jul 2009 Points: 70 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Some other scientists also said that with the global warming that all the permafrost up on the Russian tundra would melt with global warming. In that permafrost is millions of tons of methane gas. Methane gas is way more insulating that CO2. That means that all that gas would be released and cause that much more damage.
|
|||
Any body up for some sushi!?
|
|||
MartinW
Moderator in Command Joined: 31 Mar 2008 Location: United Kingdom Points: 26722 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
How do we know the rate of change is bad? Because human beings and other species will suffer the consequences sooner. And we know we are to blame because the rise in temperature is in step with our CO2 emissions since the industrial revolution. As I said previously - how do we know the rate of change we call "normal" is actually abnormally slow, and this "fast" rate of change is actually the true normal? Because we have a historical record. Not just from ice cores, but from other sources. Whether the rate the temperature is changing is the norm or not, we are to blame. If it was changing slowly, we would still be to blame if the temperature rise kept pace with our emissions. We can look back into the earths history and see the same correlation between CO2 increase and temperature increase, as a result of 'natural' emissions' therefore, it doesn't take a genius to appreciate that if human beings now emit the same quantity of CO2 into the atmosphere, then the consequence will be global warming. We also have a reasonably good idea as to what the consequences will be, again, because we know the consequences of the natural release of CO2 in the earth’s early history. It's a simple concept, as Magic Man pointed out, mankind is releasing all the carbon, that was locked up deep under ground in the form of coal and oil, it therefore makes perfect sense that we will experience the same, or similar temperatures to when that carbon was in the atmosphere previously in history, and we have a pretty good idea what that will mean. The projected one trillion tons has been in the atmosphere before, and we know what the consequences were, courtesy of natures handiwork. This time it's us rather than nature providing the CO2.
As you said earlier...
''We are so damn arrogant to think we're bigger than nature and know better. If we mess with it, it will kill us.''
We have been 'messing with it' since the industrial revolution. |
|||
VulcanB2
Chief Pilot Joined: 02 Apr 2008 Points: 13365 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
How do we know the rate of change is bad? As I said previously - how do we know the rate of change we call "normal" is actually abnormally slow, and this "fast" rate of change is actually the true normal? Answer: we don't. It is a made up figure. A bit of trivia for you: humans are averse to this thing called "change". Humans prefer the status quo and don't like it when perceived norms alter, especially when they don't understand them, less control them. Some "expert" was on the news yesterday saying that food will be in short supply as a result of "climate change". In the following sentence, he said that world population was predicted to be at 8 Billion by 2050, and that the countries we currently import food from will want to keep it for themwselves to feed their own growing populations. Just what in the hell has climate change got to do with the fact these countries wish to keep their own products for themselves? NOTHING. Yet they are all the time trying to get us to link "climate change" with anything bad (in this case, food supply). Their psychology and mind games don't work with me. Best regards, Vulcan. |
|||
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |