In another thread there was mention of Global Warming. Seems that the right doesn't want to pay attention to any reputable scientists on this issue. It is a fact that humans have been raising the average temperature of the planet and the consequences are beyond alarming. Polar ice packs are melting at an an unprecedented rate, areas of the world are experiencing drought, monsoons, wierd weather of all kinds. This WILL lead to migration of populations and famine.

The people who profit from pollution don't want to have to cut back on the greenhouse gas emissions. The USA decided not to follow the Kyoto protocols, almost alone in the world. Here in Seattle, our Mayor rallied 300 other Mayors across the country to say that their cities would follow or exceed the Kyoto limits, since the Federal government is implacably opposed to ANY environmental concerns.

I'm not even gonna go look for links to science that supports my view, you go ahead and look for yourselves. Try to find a scientific body that isn't a pawn of the oil industry to deny these findings. Independent scientists all over the world have said recently that global warming is no longer a theory, it is a fact.

We need to do better than this if we want to live on this planet much longer.

wow mog is right for once ......... there has been a dramatic increse in the amount of carbon dioxied and other harmfull gases in the air in the past year

Who cares, all we are going to kill is ourselves and then the world will rebuild without us. I suspect global warming will destroy us... in say 400-500 years.

We have only been an industrialized world for about 100 years. COncern yoursleves with issues that have a more immediate theat.

yea like usa blowing evryone up because they think were working for osoma binlaten ........................... no offance usa people

NO I was thinking like literacy as it seems many of us cant even spell.

I don't believe your "facts". If you don't know the world's temp. has fluctuated throughout history. The founders of the global warming theory were the people who in the 70s try to cause hysteria over a global cooling. The Middle Ages experienced a period of global warming which brought a brief period of economic growth.

www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0123-01.htm

www.wsws.org/articles/2005/jun2005/coon-j18.shtml

www.newscientist.com/channel/earth/climate-change

www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2005/05/snowed.html

www.globalwarming.net/

Last Edited : Saturday, 25 June 2005 - 19:44

ok ............................ i'm not going to get into this

You already did. You made it sound as if I have been wrong about everything I've ever said except this one issue. You have been here for about a week and you apparently have read every forum post I've made! Not too bad. What was I so wrong about before, I'd like to know, NH?

www.mpogd.com

.............................................................. it was a joke

Last Edited : Saturday, 25 June 2005 - 19:52

Bah, Finguld... Just because the Earth's temperature has fluctuated in the past doesn't mean that any fluctuations NOW are due to the same causes...

Greenhouse gases and their effects are established scientific facts...

It also doesn't mean that a long-term heating trend is no big deal or something we shouldn't worry about (even if it's not caused by us). If we have the ability to control our climate (to some degree) why NOT exercise it when it benefits us?

Card

Last Edited : Saturday, 25 June 2005 - 19:58

Oh, motherjones. lol Please don't try to presuade people with shoddy science and doomsday prophets

A quick input from the other side (The Heritage Foundation):
"Many uncertainties surround even the theory of global warming. The conventional wisdom is that climate change can be explained as a simple cause-and-effect relationship: As greenhouse gases increase, so do average temperatures. Industrial activities pump these gases into the atmosphere, trigger warming, and invite environmental calamities.

But recent scientific research throws these assumptions into doubt. According to Dr. Kenneth Green, environmental director of the Reason Public Policy Institute:

"Our ability really to know what the climate is doing is limited by a short observational record and by the uncertainties involved in trying to figure out what the climate was like in the past or might be like in the future, for comparison with recent climate changes. While the Earth's climate has been evolving and changing for over four billion years, recordings of the temperature only cover about 150 years … In fact, temperature records are spotty before the 1950s and only cover a tiny portion of the globe mostly over land."

Yet, despite the immense void in data, warming is touted as scientific fact. This is partially the fault of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In a 1995 report, the IPCC claimed a "discernable human impact on the climate system." Less widely reported was the report’s conclusion – that "it should be clear ... that current data and systems are inadequate for the complete description of climate change."

Moreover, as technology improves, other variables that affect climate are better understood. These include cloud changes, "carbon sinks" (forests that soak up carbon dioxide), solar radiation and volcanic aerosols. The more we learn about the climate change process, the more existing climate change models are exposed as inadequate. The temperature change they predict is continually reduced as more information and better models become available.

Developed on the basis of spotty data and deeply flawed analytical models, the Kyoto treaty – if implemented – would produce only one certain result: severe harm to the U.S. economy. As Wall Street Journal columnist James Glassman has noted, "The U.S. could meet the Kyoto targets only by sharply increasing the price of fossil fuels. … [T]he growth of gross domestic product in the U.S. would be cut by more than half as businesses moved offshore to escape the high tax."
-----
There is no evidence to directly connect the activity of mankind with any changes in global temperature. Even if all of our industrial activity was to stop, there would still be greenhouse gasses released into the atmosphere (volcanic activity, animals exhaling, forests burning, etc.). Impacts of us ceasing all industrial activity are certain: loss of economic growth, loss of jobs, destabilization, sickness, starvation, and a sharp drop in our ability to do research and pay for any actual solutions we might find (greenhouse gas scrubbers, moving into space colonies, finding out our impact is actually avoiding an approaching ice age, etc.). As with most things...progress and development is the answer, not the curse. (For example; that is why our waterways are cleaner now than in the 1970s...we can afford the environmental clean-ups and pollution reducing equipment)
Cheers,
H.

Last Edited : Saturday, 25 June 2005 - 23:39

Note: This post was a reply to Finguld, above. Hwatta was writing his bit and posted it before I culd get this posted. So it isn't a reply to Hwatta's post above.


This is classic. First, make the source sound bogus with no counterargument whatsoever, then disparage scientists who have been studying this problem intensively for decades and who have flat out said it is true. Not "shoddy" scientists, real climatologists, geologists and lord knows what else. Plus, look around you for a little evidence. Had any odd weather wherever you live in the last ten years? Like for instance 9 of the hottest years on record?

Hee hee, I'm so right on this one I'm actually going to enjoy this thread. Go ahead, shoot another blast of denial over me! Wheeee!

Last Edited : Sunday, 26 June 2005 - 00:04

Moggy,
I went in and did a quick Google search for Global Warming. I rapidly noticed that over 90 percent of the posts were from LIBERAL organizations. Is it your contention that all reputable scientists are liberals? That only liberals research the weather? That even if they are finding real, scientifically verifiable evidence of global warming...man's activities must be the cause? Have you noted any unusual volcanic activity in the past 10 years? Noted any large forest fires...due to environmentalists stopping the clearing of dead trees from forests in the western US? Noted that there were in fact historical periods where glaciers were smaller than they are now?

Does any of this actually matter to you? Is the liberal position so dogmatic that thought is forbidden?

There is more than one side to this issue...for someone who usually chides me for seeing everything in black and white...it is odd you are so comfortable seeing this one only in black!
Cheers,
H.

I suppose you could divide scientists into two groups and call them "Liberal" and "Conservative". but the data is what is being looked at, not MY political beliefs, right?

Well I'll just support Finguld on this. There are three cycles relevant to "ice ages". One of those cycles is a 22000 year wobble that causes the tilt of the Earth to change back and forth. Another of those cycles we are in now (i.e. an eleven year solar cycle). We've been having some record sunspot activity because of it and these sunspots do cause changes to our upper atmosphere. There are about three more years left before we enter the other half of the cycle. We have a "mini-iceage" every 20 years or so which has been recorded and the solar cycle is coincidentally a 22 year complete cycle.

Cycle means an interval of time during which certain things reoccur like /\/\/\/. I like to draw diagrams.
Seriously though, I'm sure you all know the word cycle but we are ignoring it on this issue I think. The other cycle is very difficult to understand and occurs over hundreds of thousands or even millions of years but it may be responsible for some of our more spectacular ice ages.
Anyway the Earth is like a perpetual motion machine where even heavy snowfalls come in cycles and are literally responsible for the growth of the ice cap.
I can document all of this so skoff if you like but I'd really prefer not to have to dig through this again. Instead is there is a meteorologist in the house?

TR

Last Edited : Sunday, 26 June 2005 - 11:39

global warming is just one of the things that is going to distroy human kind one day .......... a possible epedemic ................ the sun blowing up................................ the earth being distroyd ......................... a huge world war.......................

Last Edited : Sunday, 26 June 2005 - 10:27

I Agree NH. I hate all those that impose Hugs on us. We need to oppose the Hug world wars. where do we send troops??

SO I'm wondering something about this topic. If in reality there is a decrease in world average temperature would that also be blamed on industrial gasses?

I would think that by destroying the ozone layer, all the surface heat would evaporate and cause extreme cold.

lol what do you mean hug? we send troops nowhere

i ment huge world wars not hug world wars lol

Last Edited : Sunday, 26 June 2005 - 10:25