Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lets look at reality for a minute. The Earth constantly changes temperature, and the temperature changes tend to be very abrupt. In the last 400k years, the Earth has been hotter than it is today, three other times. And the Earth tends to be colder a lot more than its warm. Thus the reality is that, there is a strong possibility that the Earth will cool in the near future. As for the hockey stick theory, that was also in Al Gore's inconvenient truth. And has largely been discredited.
The temperature records are derived from looking at basically sediment in different parts of the world. Different parts of the world read significantly different temperatures over time. For instance, the medieval warm period didn't affect most of the world, but any samples taken from Greenland for instance, might show significant warming.
You have to look at the entire record, not just selected samples. And the reality is that, the Earth simply isn't that warm. Nor do the current climate models come anywhere close to accurately explaining the temperature of the Earth today, or the impact of CO2.
I mean, what else is there to say?
What caused the temperature changes shown in your sources ??
If you understood ecology and evolution... you know, science stuff... you would know that we aren't the only species on the planet to cause other species to go extinct. We are just one cog in the machine that is the biosphere, and we've only been here for a fraction of the time... a few tenths of a second if the whole lifespan of the earth was condensed to a day. And well before we were climbing trees to escape our own predators, millions of species either couldn't keep up or were driven to extinction by competition from other species. This nothing new. It's even quite possible that one day, we will be driven to extinction... not by our own stupidity, but by competition from another species. This is elementary biology. And nothing I should have to explain to someone who supposedly knows science.
As for us putting ourselves in danger... That is so much hyperbole, it's absurd. I'm more likely to die from idiots on the road than from some "cataclysmic" climate phenomenon. Yes, we should keep our house clean. How many times do I have to repeat myself. this is a no-brainer. On this we can agree. But but please drop the doom and gloom BS. We're more likely to kill ourselves from nuclear war than some climate disaster of our own making. (of course, the nuclear was would be a climate disaster, but GHG's are the least of our concern at that point.)
I am looking forward to you answering the following questions (this is interesting stuff.)
You said "we aren't the only species on the planet to cause other species to go extinct."
What other species besides humans, causes other species to go extinct ??
You said "It's even quite possible that one day, we will be driven to extinction... not by our own stupidity, but by competition from another species."
What species could ever kill off humans by competition ???
(I know competition to be, 2 species fighting for land, food, and/or water.)
You said "I'm more likely to die from idiots on the road than from some "cataclysmic" climate phenomenon."
The following link from NASA explains, how global warming could stop deep ocean currents (in the very near future.) A Chilling Possibility - NASA Science
I have heard that if deep ocean currents stop, 1,000's of feet of ice could be put on North America and Europe 365 days a year.
What is your evidence that you are more likely to be killed by an idiot on the road, rather by global warming stopping deep ocean currents ??
You said "We're more likely to kill ourselves from nuclear war than some climate disaster of our own making."
Will you share the scenario that could kill (all humans) with nuclear weapons ??
Personally I'm concerned about Pakistan's nuclear weapons (but Pakistan does not have enough nuclear weapons to kill everyone on Earth.)
After you post a scenario about nuclear war killing everyone on Earth.
I will post a scenario about climate change killing everyone on Earth.
But I believe you have a 0% chance to prove that nuclear weapons, are a bigger threat to human survival, than global warming is.
I look forward to you answering the above questions,
Chad.
Could I have a source for your above statements (please) ??
You said "everything in science and higher mathematics is about approximations. That said, 0.999999 is not 1.0, but it is as good as gold."
According to your logic,
50+50= 99.999999
And all of science's measurements are approximations.
Perhaps you need to realize that the global warming deniers in this thread, are all Fox news and Rush radio followers.
Scientists call Fox news and Rush radio "corporate propaganda groups."
You are debating propaganda followers (they have the personality traits of Hitler's propaganda followers, and loyal USSR communist citizens.)
The following Australian documentary shows/explains, the network of corporate CEO's, that (leads) the people you are debating with.
I don't understand calculus, and I fully despise math (I will not be taking any calculus classes.)
It appears you stand for the truth in matters of science, and I hope you never stop.
I don't understand calculus, and I fully despise math (I will not be taking any calculus classes.)
It appears you stand for the truth in matters of science, and I hope you never stop.
What caused the temperature changes shown in your sources ??
I assume, it is a whole slew of things. Maybe you should read about how we are technically living in an Ice age, that started about 2.6 million years ago. But also, we are living in an interglacial period, which is a warming pattern within our current ice age, that generally only lasts about 10,000-30,000 years, and started about 11,000 years ago.
"For example, as Earth was emerging out of the last glacial cycle, the warming trend was interrupted 12,800 years ago when temperatures dropped dramatically in only several decades. A mere 1,300 years later, temperatures locally spiked as much as 20°F (11°C) within just several years. Sudden changes like this occurred at least 24 times during the past 100,000 years. In a relative sense, we are in a time of unusually stable temperatures today—how long will it last?"
Another good read is the change in the orbit of the Earth.
Anyway, I'm not going to say that humans don't play a role in climate change. I'm just saying, people have this obsession with man-made climate change, and refuse to recognize that the Earth's climate can and will change dramatically, even in a short period of time. And while everyone seems to be so concerned with the Earth warming. Lets be honest, it has everything to do with sea-levels rising, everything else is sort of unimportant.
The question then is, if humans weren't burning fossil fuels at all, would sea-levels be rising? The answer is yes, but maybe just not as fast. Thus, not burning fossil fuels doesn't prevent sea-level rise, the best it can do is slow it down.
From my point of view, I just want to be realistic. I want a plan that fixes the problem, rather than just kicks the can down the road. And even if we stopped burning all fossil fuels tomorrow, it wouldn't fix the problem. And if we stopped burning fossil fuels tomorrow, there would be a dramatic change in human living conditions.
So lets make a plan that works, and doesn't hurt people. Lets not be alarmists, who just try to scare people, and are almost always wrong.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.