Interesting Climate Change Talk
1, 2
posted on December 15th, 2008, 12:03 am
posted on December 15th, 2008, 1:22 am
Last edited by ewm90 on December 15th, 2008, 1:45 am, edited 1 time in total.
posted on December 15th, 2008, 9:51 am
Last edited by SisQ on December 15th, 2008, 9:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
posted on December 15th, 2008, 10:55 am
Well I had a huge report like post for this but for some reason my IE was disconnected somehow...strange, I had a lot of nice links too, well too be short, if you like this stuff you should visit this site, it has a lot of nice close calls, some fake, some real, you decide. O, and why was this speech in a "school" and it had really nothing in terms of statistical data or any data to be honest, he showed a graph detailing the world does this every 25-30k years then he starts in on all the "doomsday" scenarios, this is funny that people actually listen too this, he wants funding, just watch the last 1/3 of that "speech" and you will see what I mean, 1 billion to fund projects associated with his company? Anyways, here is the link http://www.armageddononline.org/, well happy hunting. O, and one other thing, read this poem...great little bit of literature you will love...http://poetry.poetryx.com/poems/784/, have fun. And yes I believe we as a species should do more as in technology, learning new and better types of energy, propulsion, new types of materials that are stronger and more flexible, just about everything can and should be improved upon; it is really sad humanity won't do this, seems that only 1-5% actually want to do evolve humanity beyond what it is and the rest, well...just wants to sit on the sofa and watch Heroes...sad thing though is that in todays world it is designed to keep people on the sofa...watching the TV...very viscious cycle... 
I guess my little speech wasn't so small, and by the way, I won't say anything about politics because well too put politics in something like this is just dumb, sorry but to be honest, its like saying the pope has the power to make the US hand over all its nukes...seriously...why is the economy crashing now? I will give you one hint...it isn't the president because well the president doesn't mess with finances, he even has someone monitoring his...what the heck, I feel bad, I will give it too you...its credit...credit makes the world go around now and now businesses and people are finding out it isn't the best thing...one broken gear makes the whole machine fall apart...problem is how do you find that one gear?
But seriously thats the last little bit, just a little erked about people spitting ignorance around like its common knowledge. If you want to find out more just do a little research, its not hard and takes a little time but makes the ending that much sweeter...to be honest don't really listen to what you see or hear on the internet or media in general, especially internet...any side for anything can find a thousand websites stating anything from toasters run the world to aliens have already landed and have been making pod people for the last two thousand years. 
I guess my little speech wasn't so small, and by the way, I won't say anything about politics because well too put politics in something like this is just dumb, sorry but to be honest, its like saying the pope has the power to make the US hand over all its nukes...seriously...why is the economy crashing now? I will give you one hint...it isn't the president because well the president doesn't mess with finances, he even has someone monitoring his...what the heck, I feel bad, I will give it too you...its credit...credit makes the world go around now and now businesses and people are finding out it isn't the best thing...one broken gear makes the whole machine fall apart...problem is how do you find that one gear?
But seriously thats the last little bit, just a little erked about people spitting ignorance around like its common knowledge. If you want to find out more just do a little research, its not hard and takes a little time but makes the ending that much sweeter...to be honest don't really listen to what you see or hear on the internet or media in general, especially internet...any side for anything can find a thousand websites stating anything from toasters run the world to aliens have already landed and have been making pod people for the last two thousand years. posted on December 15th, 2008, 4:53 pm
posted on December 15th, 2008, 6:07 pm
Last edited by KL0K on December 15th, 2008, 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.
posted on December 15th, 2008, 6:32 pm
We'll all see it, cuz it's happening right now...
It isn't that gradual; hence why big calvings of the antarctic and greenland ice occur all at once. Sea levels don't just rise gradually when this happens: it occurs on a very short time period.
Plus, it's a positive feedback loop, meaning that it'll just get worse over the next 400 years.
It isn't that gradual; hence why big calvings of the antarctic and greenland ice occur all at once. Sea levels don't just rise gradually when this happens: it occurs on a very short time period.
Plus, it's a positive feedback loop, meaning that it'll just get worse over the next 400 years.
Dr. Lazarus
posted on December 15th, 2008, 8:22 pm
Last edited by Dr. Lazarus on December 15th, 2008, 8:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
posted on December 16th, 2008, 12:36 am
posted on December 16th, 2008, 1:43 am
Last edited by Dominus_Noctis on December 16th, 2008, 1:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Very VERY briefly (just because I should be studying for an exam 
)... A lot of the reasons that "the planet's negative feedbacks do not count nowadays, and why we are supposedly capable of shifting the position of the dynamic equilibrium" reside with the simple problem that the "things" we are doing are being done at a very fast rate. "Normally" the planet's negative feedbacks take time to counteract because of how they work. For instance, CO2 being pumped into the air gets sucked into the ocean, taken up by organisms, which die and precipitate to the ocean floor, where they are safely stowed for a good long while (before entering an oceanic trench and starting up the trend again... or an ocean current). However, the amount of CO2 currently being pumped into the atmosphere exceeds the ocean's ability to dissolve the CO2 for one thing (its never been higher), and it is also at a very very fast rate that this CO2 is being pumped into the atmosphere. This means that organisms cannot adapt to the low pH, and they die without reproducing and fixing that CO2 (1/5 of all corals reefs have died now, due in large part to the pH shift-and that is the only really "studied" organism unfortunately). This in turn makes the oceans harder to recover. Another issue is the methane burp; which will occur sooner rather than later. Over a geologic timescale (lets say a few hundred years), it'll just decompose. However, unless we/you/whatever want the next few generations to deal with that, it'll be uncomfortable hot and a lot of organisms (and people) will die.
This, however, is part of the problem: "So if the model predictions are to be taken with a large grain of salt, then all we are left with is some recent observations, maybe a melting ice cap for example. Since we have no truly useful models, it is absurd to extrapolate this melting into the future. On geological timescales, a few years or even decades of vigorous melting is a tiny fluctuation. You never extrapolate noise into the future. The melting may be fast, it may be anthropogenic, but we will never know unless we watch the data for a few centuries to see where the zigging and zagging leads us."
Over the course of several hundred/thousand years we can assume that, yes, the temperature should stay within an average. However, an extremely rapid spike within a few decades is still an extremely rapid spike. Simply put, the timescale of destruction is not a matter of centuries, and thus we cannot really wait (if global warming doesn't exist, we're fine and dandy, but if it does... that's the issue at hand) to see if our predictions come true. Plus, if it does turn out correct, it screws everybody over for a looooong time (in human terms). As far as I have read and seen, this bit of warming is the fastest on record (it is consistently going up; which is not what other comparable eras of small-time warming have done), and thus very unusual. I thought I'd pulled up that data on the other thread... but I'll try to find it again later. This of course is the apologetic side, as it assumes the IF clause (which someone could take to mean that there's little/big chance.)
Here's the part of the problem that is largely forgotten, and in my mind very important. Irregardless of IF global warming become permanent (as in a few hundred years) or even if it does/is occuring, the fact is that the destruction of the ozone layer, particulate pollution, CO2 production, methane release, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds and heavy metals etc are decimating our habitat NOW (and we caused that, no ifs ands or buts). Evolution is blind here, but we aren't self-sufficient, and we are fairly complex... so we in the end will suffer a lot. Keep in mind, I'm not even talking about global warming, I'm just describing the effects of the pollution and environmental havoc we are currently creating. There is NO question about that, and recycling/renewable energy etc is thus important to implement ASAP.
In regards to anthropogenic causes: this may seem a little stupid or perhaps even a bad example at first, but think about stromatolites and their effect on early earth. They managed to change this planet to an oxygen rich world relatively quickly, and they didn't have machines to dig up and use billions of years worth of plant sequestered carbon very very quickly. One of the most important things to remember I think when looking at anthropogenic effects is to think of the effect of plants, phytoplankton, and zooplankton on the environment (think back to stromatolites). Now remember that fossil fuels are dead plants, phytoplankton, and zooplankton essentially: so by burning them at an extraordinarily high rate we are "reversing" (for lack of a better term) all those millions/billions of years of growth and terraforming in a few decades; essentially terraforming our planet in reverse very quickly. According to our favorite wiki "1 litre of regular gasoline is the time-rendered result of about 23.5 metric tons of ancient organic material deposited on the ocean floor. The total fossil fuel used in the year 1997 is the result of 422 years of all plant matter that grew on the entire surface and in all the oceans of the ancient earth." (Not sure if I was exagerrating with the millions/billions yet or not... I'd have to do the calc: still, I think the point come across fairly clearly). That is why anthropogenic causes of global warming are taken dead seriously, and why I think that it is foolish to think that we can't cause an enormous effect on our planet. Another thing to consider is that if a moderately-sized volcano, for instance, can release enough particulate to cause global cooling, why can't we when we are forcing up hundreds of times the amount of particulate.
)... A lot of the reasons that "the planet's negative feedbacks do not count nowadays, and why we are supposedly capable of shifting the position of the dynamic equilibrium" reside with the simple problem that the "things" we are doing are being done at a very fast rate. "Normally" the planet's negative feedbacks take time to counteract because of how they work. For instance, CO2 being pumped into the air gets sucked into the ocean, taken up by organisms, which die and precipitate to the ocean floor, where they are safely stowed for a good long while (before entering an oceanic trench and starting up the trend again... or an ocean current). However, the amount of CO2 currently being pumped into the atmosphere exceeds the ocean's ability to dissolve the CO2 for one thing (its never been higher), and it is also at a very very fast rate that this CO2 is being pumped into the atmosphere. This means that organisms cannot adapt to the low pH, and they die without reproducing and fixing that CO2 (1/5 of all corals reefs have died now, due in large part to the pH shift-and that is the only really "studied" organism unfortunately). This in turn makes the oceans harder to recover. Another issue is the methane burp; which will occur sooner rather than later. Over a geologic timescale (lets say a few hundred years), it'll just decompose. However, unless we/you/whatever want the next few generations to deal with that, it'll be uncomfortable hot and a lot of organisms (and people) will die. This, however, is part of the problem: "So if the model predictions are to be taken with a large grain of salt, then all we are left with is some recent observations, maybe a melting ice cap for example. Since we have no truly useful models, it is absurd to extrapolate this melting into the future. On geological timescales, a few years or even decades of vigorous melting is a tiny fluctuation. You never extrapolate noise into the future. The melting may be fast, it may be anthropogenic, but we will never know unless we watch the data for a few centuries to see where the zigging and zagging leads us."
Over the course of several hundred/thousand years we can assume that, yes, the temperature should stay within an average. However, an extremely rapid spike within a few decades is still an extremely rapid spike. Simply put, the timescale of destruction is not a matter of centuries, and thus we cannot really wait (if global warming doesn't exist, we're fine and dandy, but if it does... that's the issue at hand) to see if our predictions come true. Plus, if it does turn out correct, it screws everybody over for a looooong time (in human terms). As far as I have read and seen, this bit of warming is the fastest on record (it is consistently going up; which is not what other comparable eras of small-time warming have done), and thus very unusual. I thought I'd pulled up that data on the other thread... but I'll try to find it again later. This of course is the apologetic side, as it assumes the IF clause (which someone could take to mean that there's little/big chance.)
Here's the part of the problem that is largely forgotten, and in my mind very important. Irregardless of IF global warming become permanent (as in a few hundred years) or even if it does/is occuring, the fact is that the destruction of the ozone layer, particulate pollution, CO2 production, methane release, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds and heavy metals etc are decimating our habitat NOW (and we caused that, no ifs ands or buts). Evolution is blind here, but we aren't self-sufficient, and we are fairly complex... so we in the end will suffer a lot. Keep in mind, I'm not even talking about global warming, I'm just describing the effects of the pollution and environmental havoc we are currently creating. There is NO question about that, and recycling/renewable energy etc is thus important to implement ASAP.
In regards to anthropogenic causes: this may seem a little stupid or perhaps even a bad example at first, but think about stromatolites and their effect on early earth. They managed to change this planet to an oxygen rich world relatively quickly, and they didn't have machines to dig up and use billions of years worth of plant sequestered carbon very very quickly. One of the most important things to remember I think when looking at anthropogenic effects is to think of the effect of plants, phytoplankton, and zooplankton on the environment (think back to stromatolites). Now remember that fossil fuels are dead plants, phytoplankton, and zooplankton essentially: so by burning them at an extraordinarily high rate we are "reversing" (for lack of a better term) all those millions/billions of years of growth and terraforming in a few decades; essentially terraforming our planet in reverse very quickly. According to our favorite wiki "1 litre of regular gasoline is the time-rendered result of about 23.5 metric tons of ancient organic material deposited on the ocean floor. The total fossil fuel used in the year 1997 is the result of 422 years of all plant matter that grew on the entire surface and in all the oceans of the ancient earth." (Not sure if I was exagerrating with the millions/billions yet or not... I'd have to do the calc: still, I think the point come across fairly clearly). That is why anthropogenic causes of global warming are taken dead seriously, and why I think that it is foolish to think that we can't cause an enormous effect on our planet. Another thing to consider is that if a moderately-sized volcano, for instance, can release enough particulate to cause global cooling, why can't we when we are forcing up hundreds of times the amount of particulate.
posted on December 16th, 2008, 3:35 am
posted on December 16th, 2008, 8:16 am
I'm only 21 going too college, pretty standard stuff but with all this talk they need more evidence rather then ice caps melting, they are having pretty wild claims from sets of actual data from just 1972, that was the first time we as a scientific community has actually been observing ice bergs and the amount they are melting, that is a very low amount of time too be talking about how humanity has been destroying the world...
I must admit humanity needs too change though, humanity is killing off many species of amphibians, avians, and mammals, and most importantly plants. Humanity needs too work with the environment not change it too how we see fit, what I have been saying to some of my friends is that humanity is the closest too a virus than anything else on earth, if you look down at Earth from space our "civilization" looks like a plague on this planet, very sad...
Back to subject, they need more actual data to support their "hypotheses", if you could call them that...their models are based off of very low amounts of actual data and a lot of "hypothesis", even his scenarios were based off of the whole what if...too make a valid scientific arguement you must have enough information to be able to say "it will" not "what if". I'm not a skeptic, I just think right now they seem like the doomsayers saying the world will end in 2036 when a documented asteroid will hit us; for some reason the name of the asteroid eludes me...
Anyways, I know humanity needs to change, we are destroying this planet, and with "better" technology we are destroying it faster, humanity needs too be able to coexist with nature and the world, not create it in our own liking because if we try, we will fail. Thats why my next house I have a couple friends who are in civil engineering and architecture to design my next house with plants inside the house that actually line all the walls with full light and water, and a vast majority of the roof will have a "glass" roof, should look awesome, good thing my uncle is paying for it...lol.
One last thing, why can't the world just get along? Stop fighting for this little patch of dirt we call earth and start diverting resources to expanding our species and our own knowledge and understanding of ourselves and the universe, why don't we have a party that is like that in office? Why are they all about power, international "negotiation", and taxes...? Seriously, make a party that does not intervene only if provoked as in attacked (defensive in nature), does not deal with international matters (only dealing with trade), and no taxes, instead of the government making money by taxing the people, the government should be investing on its people and companies and getting interest on what it gets, that should boost up the economy and its overall look in the international community...a US that doesn't like war but is prepared just for defense, does not put its foot down on every single little squabble between two nations, and third, a great economy with its people happy because no income tax, decreased corporation and business taxes. The government should be for the people, not people for the government...
Hope I didn't just throw myself under another bus...
O, and it already looks like Dominus already said the main point, teaches me to read while I type... 
I must admit humanity needs too change though, humanity is killing off many species of amphibians, avians, and mammals, and most importantly plants. Humanity needs too work with the environment not change it too how we see fit, what I have been saying to some of my friends is that humanity is the closest too a virus than anything else on earth, if you look down at Earth from space our "civilization" looks like a plague on this planet, very sad...
Back to subject, they need more actual data to support their "hypotheses", if you could call them that...their models are based off of very low amounts of actual data and a lot of "hypothesis", even his scenarios were based off of the whole what if...too make a valid scientific arguement you must have enough information to be able to say "it will" not "what if". I'm not a skeptic, I just think right now they seem like the doomsayers saying the world will end in 2036 when a documented asteroid will hit us; for some reason the name of the asteroid eludes me...
Anyways, I know humanity needs to change, we are destroying this planet, and with "better" technology we are destroying it faster, humanity needs too be able to coexist with nature and the world, not create it in our own liking because if we try, we will fail. Thats why my next house I have a couple friends who are in civil engineering and architecture to design my next house with plants inside the house that actually line all the walls with full light and water, and a vast majority of the roof will have a "glass" roof, should look awesome, good thing my uncle is paying for it...lol.
One last thing, why can't the world just get along? Stop fighting for this little patch of dirt we call earth and start diverting resources to expanding our species and our own knowledge and understanding of ourselves and the universe, why don't we have a party that is like that in office? Why are they all about power, international "negotiation", and taxes...? Seriously, make a party that does not intervene only if provoked as in attacked (defensive in nature), does not deal with international matters (only dealing with trade), and no taxes, instead of the government making money by taxing the people, the government should be investing on its people and companies and getting interest on what it gets, that should boost up the economy and its overall look in the international community...a US that doesn't like war but is prepared just for defense, does not put its foot down on every single little squabble between two nations, and third, a great economy with its people happy because no income tax, decreased corporation and business taxes. The government should be for the people, not people for the government...
Hope I didn't just throw myself under another bus...
O, and it already looks like Dominus already said the main point, teaches me to read while I type... posted on December 16th, 2008, 8:11 pm
Dr. Lazarus
posted on December 16th, 2008, 9:42 pm
Last edited by Dr. Lazarus on December 16th, 2008, 10:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
posted on December 16th, 2008, 10:41 pm
I took pitchers of glassier a year ago at lest I took pitcher of ones that where still there. I have seen the effects with my naked eye. I all so see the effects when I see the devastation in africa and how the food thats needed each year go's up by large amounts.
Have you knottiest weird wether patterns whare freed snow stroms come up at times when they should not hapen or things like katrena whare biger then normal wether events. I have. People are dyeing wile people make of there minds if they are real or not.
I just cant understand why people say globule worming dose not exist is it because its to scary for you are you don't wont to do the work it takes to stop it?
I don't get it..
Have you knottiest weird wether patterns whare freed snow stroms come up at times when they should not hapen or things like katrena whare biger then normal wether events. I have. People are dyeing wile people make of there minds if they are real or not.
I just cant understand why people say globule worming dose not exist is it because its to scary for you are you don't wont to do the work it takes to stop it?
I don't get it..
Prowannabe wrote:I'm only 21 going too college, pretty standard stuff but with all this talk they need more evidence rather then ice caps melting, they are having pretty wild claims from sets of actual data from just 1972, that was the first time we as a scientific community has actually been observing ice bergs and the amount they are melting, that is a very low amount of time too be talking about how humanity has been destroying the world...
I must admit humanity needs too change though, humanity is killing off many species of amphibians, avians, and mammals, and most importantly plants. Humanity needs too work with the environment not change it too how we see fit, what I have been saying to some of my friends is that humanity is the closest too a virus than anything else on earth, if you look down at Earth from space our "civilization" looks like a plague on this planet, very sad...
Back to subject, they need more actual data to support their "hypotheses", if you could call them that...their models are based off of very low amounts of actual data and a lot of "hypothesis", even his scenarios were based off of the whole what if...too make a valid scientific arguement you must have enough information to be able to say "it will" not "what if". I'm not a skeptic, I just think right now they seem like the doomsayers saying the world will end in 2036 when a documented asteroid will hit us; for some reason the name of the asteroid eludes me...
Anyways, I know humanity needs to change, we are destroying this planet, and with "better" technology we are destroying it faster, humanity needs too be able to coexist with nature and the world, not create it in our own liking because if we try, we will fail. Thats why my next house I have a couple friends who are in civil engineering and architecture to design my next house with plants inside the house that actually line all the walls with full light and water, and a vast majority of the roof will have a "glass" roof, should look awesome, good thing my uncle is paying for it...lol.
One last thing, why can't the world just get along? Stop fighting for this little patch of dirt we call earth and start diverting resources to expanding our species and our own knowledge and understanding of ourselves and the universe, why don't we have a party that is like that in office? Why are they all about power, international "negotiation", and taxes...? Seriously, make a party that does not intervene only if provoked as in attacked (defensive in nature), does not deal with international matters (only dealing with trade), and no taxes, instead of the government making money by taxing the people, the government should be investing on its people and companies and getting interest on what it gets, that should boost up the economy and its overall look in the international community...a US that doesn't like war but is prepared just for defense, does not put its foot down on every single little squabble between two nations, and third, a great economy with its people happy because no income tax, decreased corporation and business taxes. The government should be for the people, not people for the government...
Hope I didn't just throw myself under another bus...
1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 11 guests