[Mefustae]

Take a look:

http://www.break.com/index/tough-to-argue.html

It's level-headed, compelling, and logical. Scary, huh?

[Nuke]

intresting argument, i cant wait to hear rush limbaugh bash it.

[Ashrak]

scary

[Wobble73]

That guy makes a lot of sense! No doubt people will still stick their head in the sands though, I'm off to switch everything electrical I can off (Except my pc of course, I couldn't live without that! Oh and my TV, and Fridge Freezer.......................Etc.) 

[WeatherOp]

Now if only the atmosphere was warm or ok, he would be right.

[Nuke]

im all for doomsday scenarios. why should i give a **** if the world dies

[LOA--JK47]

ALL  Modellers are Evil! And their true desire is to make all gamers bow before their might..... I've said too much:nervous

  


Anyway in response to the topic n hand, i'd just like to say the following; I'm sure its etter ot have a tropical apocalypse compared to another ice age.


That is all  

[Nuke]

i live in alaska for a reason, in 10 years, this will be a tropical paradise. and all you people down south will be on fire. muhahahaha!

[achtung]

I agree with NetFodder.....:
if the bible is true then we can't stop that **** anyway. The only reason I have to choose column A at this point in time is so this guy quits getting gaddamn case loads of diet pepsi trucked into his house.

That's the mindset sending us down.

[WeatherOp]

i live in alaska for a reason, in 10 years, this will be a tropical paradise. and all you people down south will be on fire. muhahahaha!

Actually, if the doomsayers are right, the artic is warming faster, thus you roast before I do.

[TrashMan]

I'm currenlty doing a report on Global Warming for colleuge (Physics class) and I have been gathering and looking up a LOT of data.

And the data is scary...very scary indeed. Long stroy short, if we don't do something and fast, we ****ed..
Even if we cut ALL pollution ATM becosue of the degraing (and long-term) aftereffects of what we did so far, the climate would still continue to worsen for a LOOONG time.

Not beliving in global warming is the same as not beliving in oxygen - it not only means you are stupid, but blind as well.

[jr2]

Hmm.

[WeatherOp]

I'm currenlty doing a report on Global Warming for colleuge (Physics class) and I have been gathering and looking up a LOT of data.

And the data is scary...very scary indeed. Long stroy short, if we don't do something and fast, we ****ed..
Even if we cut ALL pollution ATM becosue of the degraing (and long-term) aftereffects of what we did so far, the climate would still continue to worsen for a LOOONG time.

Not beliving in global warming is the same as not beliving in oxygen - it not only means you are stupid, but blind as well.

I think you meant if you don't believe in human induced GW.

If so, I'm stupid and blind.

[castor]

Having hard times tryin to find anything new in it. But the boxes are convining, I guess..

[Nuke]

giving the vastness of the universe and the complexity of the interactions of forces withing it. i wouldnt be supprised if we werent responsible for the shift. sure that big spike in cot levels starting atthe industrial revolution and growing to its present day pointyness looks pretty damn convinsing. but what if it was caused by a shift in our galactic orbit, or perhaps a couple asteroids ran into eachother behind the moon, and sprayed us with super death space radiation from star trek, or perhaps odin and thor are just having a farting contest. our environmental track record is only accurate to about a hundred years and any data from before then just gets less dependable with time. theres just as good a possibility of us just witnessing a cyclical event with a very low frequency. something that happens like clockwork every 5000 years or so. the shortness of the human attention span would certainly conceal such an event. the better safe then sorry argument still applies though.

[Flipside]

Well, the UK Government is starting to wise up.

The fact of the matter is that the chances are quite high that the current climate trend will continue regardless of what we do, as was mentioned in the Video 'Human Caused' is the most common issue, this is the danger of running countries like businesses, there's more effort going into pointing fingers than into dealing with the problem in a rational manner.

[Mustang19]

but what if it was caused by a shift in our galactic orbit, or perhaps a couple asteroids ran into eachother behind the moon, and sprayed us with super death space radiation from star trek, or perhaps odin and thor are just having a farting contest. 

 

scary

[TrashMan]

I wish people would do some research on this..

I spent weeks reading materials from more sources than I can count.. Hell, my grade depends on this so I did check this out in detail.
So I'm SURE I know what I'm talking about...

Oh and when we go inot the predction of how long will things continue to get worse....we're talking hunderds of years here...maby more
Just CH4 takes over 100 years to finally "decompose" and during that time it constatnly interacts with other molecules in atmosphere..

And there's about 70,000 MILLION tons of in in Sybira, under the now fast melting permafrost...if that goes into our atmosphere it will be like pooring oil into the fir..e

[Mika]

I would advice to be careful before stepping in to conclusions. It is very difficult to say if human has caused the global warming effect. If I have understood it correctly, the average temperature of the other planets in this solar system have risen also, which would actually point towards a change in the space weather. Simply put, the measurement time is too short to jump into conclusions. And, the climate is not a "constant", but it is varying all the time.

And the most effective way to cut off the carbon dioxide emissions would be to cut down rainforests and slaughter a load of cows, and destroy several microbes from the ocean crust. These combined, according to my knowledge, contribute significantly more than human in the carbon dioxide emissions. However here I'm open to accurate knowledge if someone really has it. Needless to say, I think these measures would never gain popular support.

In the environmental questions, lots of politics is involved. I would advice people to actually calculate the energy spend in the process without the environmental option and the energy spend in the total chain of the environmental option. Sometimes it is an eye-opening experience.

The pollution, is another thing. I personally like clean surroundings and would like to have them as such later also. I have nothing against blocking the dangerous micro-particles away from the air, but there is need for research before one can be sure to block the correct particles away. Having lived two months in one particularly badly polluted city I wouldn't wish that for my worst enemy.

[WeatherOp]

I wish people would do some research on this..

I spent weeks reading materials from more sources than I can count.. Hell, my grade depends on this so I did check this out in detail.
So I'm SURE I know what I'm talking about...

Oh and when we go inot the predction of how long will things continue to get worse....we're talking hunderds of years here...maby more
Just CH4 takes over 100 years to finally "decompose" and during that time it constatnly interacts with other molecules in atmosphere..

And there's about 70,000 MILLION tons of in in Sybira, under the now fast melting permafrost...if that goes into our atmosphere it will be like pooring oil into the fir..e

Then I suggest you take off the lenses from your eyes and look at the other side.

I'm not trying to be mean nor change your view on this subject, simply put I can't do that. I am not an expert in this category, yet, and I don't claim to be. This a good article to start thinking on.

http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/

And secondly, if you know anything about weather, you know that it takes far more than a few degrees in the lower atmosphere to change the climate.

The pollution, is another thing. I personally like clean surroundings and would like to have them as such later also. I have nothing against blocking the dangerous micro-particles away from the air, but there is need for research before one can be sure to block the correct particles away. Having lived two months in one particularly badly polluted city I wouldn't wish that for my worst enemy.

Can't agree more, we need to cut down on pollution and protect the environment.