Can someone explain Global Warming to me?

MKSheppard · Post by **MKSheppard** » 2003-01-21 11:59am

Seeing as it's snowing AGAIN here in Washington DC...it now seems to snow
here on a bi-weekly basis now....

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-21 12:01pm

If it gets colder, it's global warming. If it gets warmer, it's global warming

Knife · Post by **Knife** » 2003-01-21 12:20pm

Darth Wong wrote:If it gets colder, it's global warming. If it gets warmer, it's global warming

If it gets you voted into political office, then its Global Warming.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-21 12:39pm

Global warming occurs when the average heat of the planet itself begins to rise. A consquence is the ocean conveyour (sp) system stops distributing heat throughout the ocean because the water is no longer the right temperature for the system to occur. A by product of this global warming causes the poles to become extremely cold because there is no warm water flowing up there to bleed off the cold temperatures. Glaciers begin to grow and advance. By contrast the tropics are extremely warm because all the hot water is staying there rather then leaving.

This is why Ice Ages never manage to push very far south. Its hot in the tropics, but freezing in the arctic.

In short, intial global warming will cause an ice age. Intial global cooling will cause full planet global warming in the long run. There is no need to worry about full planet global warming because Earth is still in a cooling period, has been for 2 million years. It looks like we might get colder for a while, but nothing major. We had a mini cooling about a thousand years ago, though it did cause massive crop failures in certain parts of the world.

Larz · Post by **Larz** » 2003-01-21 12:47pm

Global Warming = Greenpeace
Greenpeace = bullshit group
thus; Global Warming = bullshit group tactic

The only global warming I wouldn't mind is the increase of universal entropy due to all those enviromentalists saying that I should be more enviromentally friendly (as they hand me out tons of pamphlets made of paper and consume as much if not more resources than I do) finally volunteering to make an active effort to save the earth by jumping into a gigantic bonfire, thus decreasing human population and strain for resources... hey, its the only solution for enviromental problems...

Sokar · Post by **Sokar** » 2003-01-21 01:12pm

Alyeska wrote:Global warming occurs when the average heat of the planet itself begins to rise. A consquence is the ocean conveyour (sp) system stops distributing heat throughout the ocean because the water is no longer the right temperature for the system to occur. A by product of this global warming causes the poles to become extremely cold because there is no warm water flowing up there to bleed off the cold temperatures. Glaciers begin to grow and advance. By contrast the tropics are extremely warm because all the hot water is staying there rather then leaving.

This is why Ice Ages never manage to push very far south. Its hot in the tropics, but freezing in the arctic.

In short, intial global warming will cause an ice age. Intial global cooling will cause full planet global warming in the long run. There is no need to worry about full planet global warming because Earth is still in a cooling period, has been for 2 million years. It looks like we might get colder for a while, but nothing major. We had a mini cooling about a thousand years ago, though it did cause massive crop failures in certain parts of the world.

There is some evidence to point to occasional spikes in the temperature shiftsas well eiether very cold or very warm. Interruptions in the Gulf Stream thermal conveyor are what is believed to be the cause of the severe winters experienced between 1776-1779 and again durng the 1880's. A couple of scientists were inspired when they saw Irvings painting of people ice skating on the Hudson River.......they realized the Hudson hasn't frozen that solid in over a century and did some digging. Only a small shift in weather patterns and much of the US has the same winters as Moscow does.........

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-01-21 01:19pm

Larz wrote:Global Warming = Greenpeace
Greenpeace = bullshit group
thus; Global Warming = bullshit group tactic

The only global warming I wouldn't mind is the increase of universal entropy due to all those enviromentalists saying that I should be more enviromentally friendly (as they hand me out tons of pamphlets made of paper and consume as much if not more resources than I do) finally volunteering to make an active effort to save the earth by jumping into a gigantic bonfire, thus decreasing human population and strain for resources... hey, its the only solution for enviromental problems...

Global warming most certainly exists. The question is, does man have any impact on it? IE, are we experiencing manmade global warming or naturemade global warming?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-01-21 01:21pm

The environment is not a static phenomenon. One of the biggest mistakes made by conservationists is the assumption that the natural cycle of decay, change, extinction, and evolution is somehow wrong and must be stopped in its tracks.

The only question we should ask regarding environmentalism is: will the changes be detrimental to humanity, and if so, can we do anything about them?

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2003-01-21 01:26pm

Look at any weather chart for the global mean temperature for the past several hundred years, and you will see that the temperature very definitely is going up. I have attended lectures by climate physicists, and there is no doubt among them that global warming IS happening. As Alyeska says, the only question left is whether it is man-made or not.

But it is one of the dumbest of strawmen misconceptions to think that global warming will cause temperatures to rise all over the world. The climate is far more subtle than that, and the only guarantee you can get from global warming is that the weather will get more and more fucked up, even with seemingly small changes of global mean temperature. And of course, there's the effect on the ecosystems as well...

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-01-21 01:27pm

Assuming global warming happens and we are the culprit. It still does not always mean temperatures will be higher where you are. Weather is extremely complicated and you could easily end up being colder. Its the average world temp that goes up.

All I really care about is will the ski season in the Sierra Nevada get jacked up.
Yes, its selfish, but Im being honest.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2003-01-21 01:29pm

Darth Wong wrote:The environment is not a static phenomenon. One of the biggest mistakes made by conservationists is the assumption that the natural cycle of decay, change, extinction, and evolution is somehow wrong and must be stopped in its tracks.

The only question we should ask regarding environmentalism is: will the changes be detrimental to humanity, and if so, can we do anything about them?

Ahem...driving animals to extinction at a rate many times higher than previous major extinction events is NOT part of the natural cycle. Razing thousands of acres of forests to the ground in slash-and-burn farming is NOT part of the natural cycle. Pumping millions of tons of CO2 into the air is NOT part of the natural cycle. Dumping toxic waste into our rivers is NOT part of the natural cycle....you catch my drift.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2003-01-21 01:32pm

Larz wrote:Global Warming = Greenpeace
Greenpeace = bullshit group
thus; Global Warming = bullshit group tactic

The only global warming I wouldn't mind is the increase of universal entropy due to all those enviromentalists saying that I should be more enviromentally friendly (as they hand me out tons of pamphlets made of paper and consume as much if not more resources than I do) finally volunteering to make an active effort to save the earth by jumping into a gigantic bonfire, thus decreasing human population and strain for resources... hey, its the only solution for enviromental problems...

Why do "conservatives" always speak in such violent terms when talking about liberals/conservationists? Witness Shep's frequent mentions of having to kill all liberals, even if not in seriousness?

What does this tell us about the mind-set of rightwingers?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-01-21 01:33pm

We are still in an ice age if I believe, practically pulling out of one or going into one from what I recall.

Il Nino and other such weather phenomona have been more "vocal" lately, overactive if you will. They usually happened every 4-6 years, now it's every 2 or so.

That and floodings and warmer winters are more common in the UK while other places get colder. The environment is a very mixed up place.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-21 01:56pm

the real issue about global warming isnt the temperature, its the sea levels. they wont admit it, but their concern is not for the environment.

If the see level rises by 1 metre, I'd be floating in the ocean right now. It wouldnt be so bad for bay-type cities and such (like much of holland, or Tokyo) but for low lying coastal regions and lowlying inland regions with coastal access (like the great plains region of america) youre fucked If the ocean rose by 50 meters (the equivalent of antarctica melted) the entire inland USA would be flooded. All of florida, new york city, californias san fransisco bay area.. GONE. India? bye bye. Southern China? Swamped.

Thats the real issue: a vast majority of humans live by the ocean. You'd need to relocate a good 2-3 billion people. Sure, real estate and constructionc companies would love it but those people wouldnt. Then youd need to build new shipping ports, airports, train stations, etc. The entirety of human civilisation would be FUCKED.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-01-21 03:00pm

There are more pressing issues to worry about than global warming. Smog over cities is real, is bad, and can be changed. Deforestation without replantion is real, is bad, and can be changed. Dumping of toxic waste into rivers is real, is bad, and can be changed. Global warming might be real, it could be good or bad, and it probably can't be changed. Where should we focus our priorities, on that which is known and correctable, or that which is still unknown, and probably not correctable?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-01-21 03:50pm

kojikun wrote:the real issue about global warming isnt the temperature, its the sea levels. they wont admit it, but their concern is not for the environment.

If the see level rises by 1 metre, I'd be floating in the ocean right now. It wouldnt be so bad for bay-type cities and such (like much of holland, or Tokyo) but for low lying coastal regions and lowlying inland regions with coastal access (like the great plains region of america) youre fucked If the ocean rose by 50 meters (the equivalent of antarctica melted) the entire inland USA would be flooded. All of florida, new york city, californias san fransisco bay area.. GONE. India? bye bye. Southern China? Swamped.

I still fail to see the problem. Infact things are looking up already!

Cpt_Frank · Post by **Cpt_Frank** » 2003-01-21 03:51pm

Wicked Pilot wrote:There are more pressing issues to worry about than global warming. Smog over cities is real, is bad, and can be changed. Deforestation without replantion is real, is bad, and can be changed. Dumping of toxic waste into rivers is real, is bad, and can be changed. Global warming might be real, it could be good or bad, and it probably can't be changed. Where should we focus our priorities, on that which is known and correctable, or that which is still unknown, and probably not correctable?

I agree on that, first we need to solve the problems which we actually know exist.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-01-21 04:00pm

What does this tell us about the mind-set of rightwingers?

Simple, A Liberal wants to talk you to death, A Conservative just wants you to shut the fuck up and DIE

No the diffrence truely is between Left and Right Wing is normaly about method

IE taking the Saddam problem

If the Dems where in office
- Economicly pressure Saddam till he gives up them make sure you have a hand in replacing him

The Rep Method
-Invade, and put his head on a pike and stick it out on the White House Lawn

The general comparsion is that a Conservative wants things done now and damn the consquences, and a Liberal wants things done with the ABSOULUTE perfect, nevermind all the money you spent

Example
How Long would have Mozilla been in devolpement if they waited until... EVERY SINGLE BUG was ironed out and every single possible feature was in

Heck it would not have been released yet if they did that....

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-01-21 04:04pm

Mr Bean wrote:
What does this tell us about the mind-set of rightwingers?
Simple, A Liberal wants to talk you to death, A Conservative just wants you to shut the fuck up and DIE

No the diffrence truely is between Left and Right Wing is normaly about method

IE taking the Saddam problem

If the Dems where in office
- Economicly pressure Saddam till he gives up them make sure you have a hand in replacing him

The Rep Method
-Invade, and put his head on a pike and stick it out on the White House Lawn

The general comparsion is that a Conservative wants things done now and damn the consquences, and a Liberal wants things done with the ABSOULUTE perfect, nevermind all the money you spent

Example
How Long would have Mozilla been in devolpement if they waited until... EVERY SINGLE BUG was ironed out and every single possible feature was in

Heck it would not have been released yet if they did that....

Pardon my questioning, Mr. Bean. But what does Mozilla have to do with the end of half the world?

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2003-01-21 04:07pm

Pardon my questioning, Mr. Bean. But what does Mozilla have to do with the end of half the world?

Just comparing it to the Liberal Approch

IE, If Mozilla... what 3 years ago? 2 Years ago? Had not been released and instead the fokes behind it had waited until every single Bug was ironed(And I Do mean EVERY) it would not have been released yet would it? Heck it probably still be in Beta Stages with release another eight months off....

Thusly the basic summination diffrence between Conversative and Liberal Apporchs

Liberal-Study it until it fixs itself or at some unknow point way down the line fix it with whatever we came up with after spending 40 Billion Dollers Studing the 2 Billion Doller Problem
Conversative-GO! You have 24 hours! We must fix it NOW NOW NOW! MOVE MOVE MOVE! So what if it ends up costing 40 Billion Dollers? It got fixed did it not?

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2003-01-21 04:09pm

Mr Bean wrote:
Pardon my questioning, Mr. Bean. But what does Mozilla have to do with the end of half the world?
Just comparing it to the Liberal Approch

IE, If Mozilla... what 3 years ago? 2 Years ago? Had not been released and instead the fokes behind it had waited until every single Bug was ironed(And I Do mean EVERY) it would not have been released yet would it? Heck it probably still be in Beta Stages with release another eight months off....

Thusly the basic summination diffrence between Conversative and Liberal Apporchs

Liberal-Study it until it fixs itself or at some unknow point way down the line fix it with whatever we came up with after spending 40 Billion Dollers Studing the 2 Billion Doller Problem
Conversative-GO! You have 24 hours! We must fix it NOW NOW NOW! MOVE MOVE MOVE! So what if it ends up costing 40 Billion Dollers? It got fixed did it not?

Ah, okies. Didn't see the underlying political tone, I'm still half asleep from eating a pack of Cheesestrings.

Larz · Post by **Larz** » 2003-01-21 04:34pm

kheegan wrote:
Larz wrote:Global Warming = Greenpeace
Greenpeace = bullshit group
thus; Global Warming = bullshit group tactic

The only global warming I wouldn't mind is the increase of universal entropy due to all those enviromentalists saying that I should be more enviromentally friendly (as they hand me out tons of pamphlets made of paper and consume as much if not more resources than I do) finally volunteering to make an active effort to save the earth by jumping into a gigantic bonfire, thus decreasing human population and strain for resources... hey, its the only solution for enviromental problems...
Why do "conservatives" always speak in such violent terms when talking about liberals/conservationists? Witness Shep's frequent mentions of having to kill all liberals, even if not in seriousness?

What does this tell us about the mind-set of rightwingers?

Because they like things done quick, efficently, and with little cost. Anyway, if humans are the problem, the only solution that is effective is to reduce human population and thus reduce the need to consume resources. For one to kid themself that their organization can make 6+ and growing billion people start to conserve out of their convenience to save the enviroment for uncertian generations to come is rediculous. Even if global warming is a natural cycle, the human factor certianly isn't helping.

But I did mean that "burn all enviromentalist" (though why people think that people concerned with the enviroment must be all liberals and people who waste must be all conservatives is beyond me) as a joking solution. I tend to go for the "Kick it in the pill sack" approach, though I'm not so inhuman as to seriously advocate it and prehaps practice it.

kheegster · Post by **kheegster** » 2003-01-21 04:35pm

Cpt_Frank wrote:
Wicked Pilot wrote:There are more pressing issues to worry about than global warming. Smog over cities is real, is bad, and can be changed. Deforestation without replantion is real, is bad, and can be changed. Dumping of toxic waste into rivers is real, is bad, and can be changed. Global warming might be real, it could be good or bad, and it probably can't be changed. Where should we focus our priorities, on that which is known and correctable, or that which is still unknown, and probably not correctable?
I agree on that, first we need to solve the problems which we actually know exist.

The fact may be true that the cause of global warming is still to be determined, whereas other problems are more obvious and treatable. However, no other environmental problem has the potential to fuck humanity over like global warming. We know that Venus' hellish atmosphere is due to a runaway greenhouse effect (an increase in temperature releases more CO2 from carbonate rocks, and increases greenhouse effect etc), in fact the concerns over global warming first came about during the 70s, when the mechanism for the Venusian climate first became clear.

If a runaway greenhouse effect gets going on Earth, the planet's going to become inhabitable, and there's absolutely NOTHING we can do to stop it, let alone reverse it. That's why environmentalists are particularly rabid about global warming. Other problems such as deforestation, pollution, etc, are generally reversible...even something like the Exxon Valdez mess could be more or less cleaned up with effort and time.

Even if there are still unknowns about global warming, I would rather err on the side of caution, rather than risk the biggest fuckup mankind has ever inflicted upon himself.

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2003-01-21 06:10pm

kheegan wrote:Even if there are still unknowns about global warming, I would rather err on the side of caution, rather than risk the biggest fuckup mankind has ever inflicted upon himself.

It's not that simple. If we try the massive scale down of CO2 that would be needed to put even a small dent in the greenhouse, we would end up shattering the world economy. Modern nations would feel the squeeze big time. In the future when we develop the tech needed to move away from our heavy reliance on fossil fuels, the problem should become mute.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-01-21 06:14pm

runaway greenhouse cannot happen on earth. plants thrive in CO2, and thus any excess CO2 will result in alot more plants eeting it all up and producing oxygen as waste. The projected result of global warming leaves the planet colder the during the Jurassic. Now, lets see what the jurassic gave us: shitloads of rainforests everwhere including ANTARCTICA, giant dinosaurs that were able to maintain their size and numbers due to extreme amounts of foliage and prey..

Hmm, seems to me like the only bad thing about global warming is we might in a million years have to fight off Godzilla.