Do you believe in global warming ?

1. 60

   Tcad1191posted 13 years ago

   Why or why not
   
   P.S. you would be surprised to find out how many people don't believe in global warming.

   replyreport
   1. 65

      jcbmackposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      No. Anthropogenic global Warming is not supported by the actual laws of thermodynamics, like the second law: S = Q/T, nor is it supported by the physics of latent heat processes, or the principles of the third law of thermodynamics in regards to thermal equilibrium. Furthermore, most weather, despite the media highlights is good, and in fact has not reached a new high statistical average beyond previous decades, or even centuries based upon the best records we can find.
      
      The hockey stick is in severe error and ignores the fullness of the buffering capacity of water, clouds and even terrestrial land, even where there is not ice.
      
      Water has a high specific heat and heat capacity and it covers around 75% of the globe making the Earth a great absorber of heat without raising the temperature at all. When water temps do rise clouds are also formed. Recently in the peer review papers from respectable journals it was found water vapor actually cools the globe and does not produce a net warming effect. Also at NASA satellite data shows that in fact more radiation is leaving the planet than was previously believed. While it is true S, entropy is increasing, energy is conserved and not created or destroyed, showing the lack of credibility in global climate change as it is presented by many.
      
      Now the real issues are: air pollution, water pollutions and the size of lanfills to be sure, then pollution is a real issue.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         recommend1posted 13 years agoin reply to this

         The issue is not as simple as you portray.  Small rises in sea water temperature can make big changes, reductions in the main ocean currents can also make big changes in both local and global weather.
         
         There are good arguments on both sides but neither can convince me totally as yet.  However, the dispute over this has obscured other major changes that man is making to our environment such as the mass extinction of species due to our just being here and our activities, the absurd situation of half the world huddled around the wealth of a few people while the other half barely scrapes life out of each year.
         
         The publicised material that warns about global warning comes from the same places that warnings of mass extinctions and global poverty,  the opposing materials come from global corp. inc. and the oil companies. 
         
         I choose to go with the global warming side not necessarily because they are right - mostly because global corp. inc. on the opposing team are proven to be a lying bunch of warmongering profiteers.

         replyreport
         1. 65

            jcbmackposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            The simple version or a more complex version that is still very simple is all any human or supercomputer can do. In order to evaluate Delta  Q(change in heat flow) it would take 500-1000 pages of calculations that take into account all: heat sources, heat sinks, delta T's (change in temperatures) and a far more rigourous statistical analysis of an additional 1000 or more pages.
            
            The same research sources: NASA, MIT and Penn State that says we have global warming are the same centers with research emerging saying we do not. Thus it is not just the oil and gas companies funding research. Also last time I cheacked NASA was not doing much to help the poor.
            
            I read each IPCC report to date and much of the climate scientist's papers and books as well.

            replyreport
   2. 82

      SimeyCposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Didn't you know - Global Warming no longer exists as the predicted rise in average temperatures simply hasn't happened (according to some reports), and the winter's are getting more harsh and colder - however, it's now called Climate Change!
      
      The real big problem is that data has been manipulated by both sides and not presented in an objective way - corporations either want Global Warming to happen (so they can sell green products) or don't want Global Warming to happen (as they are the ones supposedely causing it) - so money is being thrown into research that is obeviously going to be slanted towards the sponsor.
      
      Even educational insitutions are likely to skew the facts as there are a lot of huge grants available for green issues!
      
      Take out the money and debate the issue using science and we may get some real answers one day!
      
      As an aside - we're all being told to get rid of old light bulbs and use the new environmentally safe ones - great so we are reducing energy and being good to the environment right? Well - did you know that these 'efficient' light bulbs should not be thrown into normal land-fill as they contain mercury? they have to be properly recycled? I know 9 out of the 10 people I asked about it didn't......
      
      ...money money money!!!

      replyreport
2. 71

   Cagsilposted 13 years ago

   I would be more surprised if people actually searched the forums for threads on the topics that they want to discuss.
   
   As for your topic? I've no interest in the debate going on with it. There's enough distortion and misinformation spreading around about it, as it is. And, no it wouldn't surprise me how many people don't believe it, because the average person has trouble finding any credible information, due to political misinformation.
   
   Almost all facts I read in a survey done in America were not believed by over 60% of citizens. So, no I wouldn't be surprised.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Outside America global warming is seen as a verifiable fact by most.

      replyreport
      1. 71

         Cagsilposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Hey Earnest,
         
         I'm not doubting that. I was appalled when I read about the survey taken in America, about how many believe in facts. It's ridiculous, because if 60% don't believe in the facts established, then how the hell are these same people ever going to figure out when they are being lied to?
         
         It's pathetic and it's very sad.

         replyreport
      2. 65

         jcbmackposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Interesting belief system.

         replyreport
3. 0

   Emile Rposted 13 years ago

   I think the evidence is clear that humanity has adversely effected the environment. But, I don't see where we are in any position but being along for the ride at this point. I've read that the greenhouse gases caught under the now melting permafrost outstrip any the western world has generated. The oceans have massive amounts of greenhouse gases trapped and slowly being released.
   
   The Kyoto Accord, in my opinion, was a token agreement. No country will make the radical changes we would all have to make to change things. They won't take the risk of being the first to adversely affect their ability to compete economically. And who could blame them? Plus, could you tell developing nations to halt their economic progress?
   
   The bed is made. I hope for the best, but it's anyone's guess where it ends.

   replyreport
   1. 73

      earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Australia is trying to push through a carbon tax. The right wing loons are blocking it. I hope we can introduce it and achieve the results now accumulating in parts of Europe who have had a carbon tax in place for some time without the dire consequences predicted by the raging right.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

         Drops in the proverbial bucket. It's nice to think you can do something, but it's only a fantasy. China has surpassed America in carbon emissions and they are just getting started. For every person in the western world that suffers guilt at the situation and tries to change their carbon footprint, there are three people in developing nations struggling to have what we have.
         
         I'd love to believe the die wasn't cast,  but I can't find a way to get there. Of course, America will be blamed for whatever happens globally. But, we get blamed for everything. I'm surprised it hasn't been proposed yet that we killed Christ. We take the brunt of all the other fantasies.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            So true.  But our great Obama will apologize for all us Americans and make evvwweethang okay I'm sure.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I don't know about that, but you can't make anything ok when you are the global scapegoat.

               replyreport
         2. 73

            earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

            I believe we can make a difference and much is being done in China to deal with it's current and future emissions, which admittedly is an issue of immense proportion.
            
            The amount of emission from Australian bush fires caused by lightning strikes alone is probably multiples of Australia's man made emissions.
            The point being that the problem of global warming is here already and every contribution matters.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Emile Rposted 13 years agoin reply to this

               I'd ask to borrow a pair of those rose colored glasses, but that would involve shipping. Which would involve carbon emissions. Which would contribute to the problem.
               
               I would be curious to know exactly what China is doing to cut back on greenhouse gases. From everything I've heard the economy is like America was at the time of the robber barons. If they are willing to poison their own children just to make a profit I doubt anyone is overly concerned with greenhouse gases.

               replyreport
               1. 73

                  earnestshubposted 13 years agoin reply to this

                  I have seen one BBC documentary and a report out of Deutsche Welle through ABC radio that shows planning for new systems to be implemented. I will see if I can locate a link.
                  I believe from what I gleaned from the broadcast that the Chinese Government are well aware of the percussions at home if they allow pollution to go unchecked.
                  
                  I edited the Aust/China Herald during the late 1990s and saw the new legislation being introduced and indeed edited them in English.
                  
                  Things are changing rapidly in China, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to lie to the people in my view.

                  replyreport
4. 67

   innersmiffposted 13 years ago

   No I don't. This purely political 'green' movement is telling us that the oranges we see are actually apples - the steady temperatures, the non-melting ice caps, the non-rising sea levels, the not-dying polar bears, all actually mean that the world is ending and it's all your fault, so pay Al Gore some money and everything MIGHT be OK.
   
   And don't give me that nonsense that oil companies are funding denial; that may be true in some quarters, but the IPCC and green movement is a purely Rothschild and Rockerfeller funded operation, who happen to own all of the oil.
   http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/un/environment.htm
   
   60% of Americans know in their gut that they're being conned.

   replyreport
5. 61

   Dave Mathewsposted 13 years ago

   I do believe in global warming. I do not believe we can do anything to prevent it though. Trying to patch up a hole in the O-zone would be as effective as sticking your finger into a leak in a dyke. It can't be done.

   replyreport