Mog one time long ago it was 129 degrees outside. Now that was hot. Was it proof of global warming? no. Now if you look at the historical record there have been periods of cooling while man made greenhouse gasses have increased. There have been periods of heating while man made greenhouse gasses have increased. Now the main question is Is man made greenhouse gasses gona cause major harm to the earth? I say no and so do thousands of scientists.

We can not destroy the ozone layer, no matter how hard we try. The ozone layer is constantly being replenished by the sun hitting the upper atmosphere. The reason for holes appearing over Antartica is obvious
Global warming isnt a bad thing. Increase the tempature by a few degrees and more land becomes habitable, crops yield better return (food for potential famine areas), more water is evaporated which translates into more rain (so no droughts) and the winters will be less severe, which everyone can appreciate
Unfortunately I do not have any links to support this If I had more ambition I would find some for you. Perhaps I'll go look now..

TL

Well like I said we can look at the historical record and see that periods of globa warmer temp. led to increased food production and economic activity.

I'm going to side with Mog on this one. We continue to pump carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but we are also rapidly chopping down forests, especially the rainforests. With a decrease in trees, less CO2 is absorbed, and more stays in the air. Look at pictures of the Artic taken a century ago, and compare them to pictures taken today. You'll notice a lot less ice and snow, too much to be attributed to a short, 20-year cycle. And notice the planet Venus. Venus is the hottest planet in the solar system, with an average temperature of around 500 degrees Celsius. This is because of the large amounts of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The planet is proof of the greenhouse effect can happen.

TL- Really? I'm sure that people living near the equator will be able to appreciate warmer winters. And even a slight change in temperature has been proven to cause havoc in ecosystems around the world, killing off some species entirely. Global Warming is not a good thing.

I think the very least that has to be admitted is we are currently in the midst of the worlds largest experiment. Just how much CO2, NOx, CH4, ozone, & other atmospheric pollution can Earth take before we ruin it for future generations?

Most scientists say not much, that we are already causing severe harm. The data bear this out: rising sea levels, average temp increase, increase in severe and violent weather such as hurricanes, etc.

So the question becomes do we do anything, or just sit on our hands waiting for more conclusive "proof"? I suppose millions of people starving during droughts, forced out of flooded coastal cities, etc. is proof. Does that have to be what it will take? Evidently Americans (particularly Republicans) need at least that much, probably more, since the only thing we seem to care about is the cost of filling our SUV's, or other horrificly naive short-term concerns.

But then, short-term thinking (eg.: I've got mine, screw the rest of you) is what Republicans do best.

I'm with Max! Let's immediately cut the dreaded output of CO2. OK...on 3...we all stop breathing...1...2...3.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Well, as Max has now passed out, the rest of us can get on with our normal lives where CO2 is just part of the normal ecological cycle on our planet that benefits plants and allows them to produce oxygen for the rest of us. Did you know that actual experiments by real scientists show that increased CO2 levels actually increase the growth rate and productivity of plants. The panic mongers can prepare for the mass starvation and the rest of us can prepare for the global feasts of bounty as the shortages of food disappear across the globe.
Cheers,
H.

PS. Sam,
Scientific experiments are not the only kind...we are also currently in a large political, public relations, and economic experiment. There are European leaders (who have formally committed to, yet fail to meet their own Kyoto targets) who have admitted the entire push for Kyoto was to level the ECONOMIC playing field. Nice experiment if you are the EU, China or India...Bad experiment if you are a US citizen. We'll keep our sovereignty thank you. Kyoto is bad policy based on worse science. Let's try to find the actual measurable magnitude of the problem, what the real cause is, and what solutions will actually work...does that sound like a sane reaction to anybody? If it is really as catastrophic as some of you believe, shouldn't it seem odd that we've gone from a global cooling scare to global warming in <40 years? Shouldn't the actual process be measurable and predictable? Can anybody tell us what percentage of greenhouse gas in the atomosphere is actually put there by man, based on real data from reproduceable scientific measurements of course? Scientific experiments are not always bad...but they do require unbiased data and interpretation.

Last Edited : Sunday, 26 June 2005 - 20:33

wildcat.arizona.edu/papers/98/155/03_1.html

The Senate now has recognized the problem, will Bush be next?

Hi there people...

Talking about Global Warming, seems to be as... devious as when one says that "smoking kills" or "living under high voltage electrical towers provoque cancer" (i had to use a term for the electrical towers, 'cause i didn't remember how they were called in english).

True, that there are imediate problems with a more visible aspect (though as mog says... the frequency of some situations HAS risen up, and even started happening where before they were inexistant or with a far lesser frequency), but 400 to 500 years in earth's life is nothing. And if it only took 100 years to come this far as it was said, do you think that we're poputing on the same level as in those 100 years? The Earth's population has risen exponentially in the last 100 years, and so it's polution capacity.

NOW if you tell me that fighting some imediate problems, that also contribute (and heavily) to this problem of all, then i'm completely in favour.

The Kioto protocol, was an attempt to say that "there's a problem"... most acknoledged it, some didn't... due economical pressures perhaps? but the thing is, and giving a final example...

We're all in the same bus, and while most are smoking, most decide that perhaps we should smoke as little as we can so that we can keep breathing, and a few (the biggest amongst them) say... oh, do that, i'll just step up my smoking a bit.

People, there are more imediate problems, excess population, hunger, iliteracy, unemployment, etc..
But what will it all matter, if in 200 years the rate of Natural Disasters is so high that we're more worried between building another house or going for a tent (since it's easier). Or due to the higher speed on the rising water level, that my own country will lose quite an hunk of it's present territory (maybe there is a nice BIG country around that will accept about 2 millions or more of refugees and give them some land... oh please, let me apply already for a nice spot in a reservation ).

Yeap, i'm exagerating perhaps... but the problem is dire... except for those that live in the last floor of the burning building, those have an helipad in the roof waiting

Well all this natural disaster is anecdotal. I can cite hurricanes, flooding and other events that killed 10s of thousands 100 years ago. Although I do predict we are due for an ice age in about 10,000 years.

Like has been said before in the 70s it was global cooling, in the 80s it begain with global warming and we were all doomed in a few years. We had to restrict the use of hairsprays and such(damn big evil hairspray was gona kill us all with Aquanet). 15 years later it is still global warming and we are all doomed.

Well right now it is a lovely 71 degrees F in my hometown in New Jersey and is not supposed to get above 83 for the rest of the week while lows are expected to be down in the low 60s all week with clouds and rain predicted today and most of the rest of the week.
I used about 1/3 less fuel to heat my house this past winter also so IMO there is nothing less polluting than that and as I said before IMO this is a hoax perpetrated to sell heating oil and we won't know the truth for a few years yet when the solar cycle wanes.

Mother nature is full of surprizes also because the more latent heat off of South America thusfar this year has generated tropical storms in the Carribbean that have tended to cool the east coast with clouds and rain and so far neutralized the nasty depressions that come across the Atlantic from Africa.
I think that for 11 years a gravitational massage is given to the sun by the Earth resulting in 11 years of increased solar flare activity which cycle repeats over and over. Of course it is predicted that billions of years from now the sun will go to a red giant stage that will reach out to the orbit of Earth and I can imagine that a million years from now that humans will be living in domed climate controlled cities or even underground but I think we would do better to spend trillions to terraform the Sahara and all the other deserts of the Earth instead of wasting trillions to do something that may even be the wrong thing to do.

That's right for example mother nature endures so much and then produces rain to cool herself off so maybe we shouldn't mess with her ingredients.
In fact maybe we should spend some of those trillions just building huge evaporators out in the oceans where rain and snow will be produced to give mother nature an assist to cool herself off but no they won't do that because this is all about holding back the American economy to allow the economies of the rest of the world to get ahead.

PS:
I haven't had a smoke in four years
So I'm doing my part to hold down my personal pollution also.

TR

Bush offered at least a new emphasis in U.S. policy by acknowledging more explicitly than before that humans were at least partly to blame for climate change, and said it was in Washington's interests to respond.

"I recognize the surface of the Earth is warmer, and that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans is contributing to the problem," he told a news conference ahead of the summit.


________________________
Hee hee, even Bush is beginning to see the truth. All you doubters just keep on with your heads in the sand, others will solve this problem before you admit there is one!

The point is though that the rest of the world want's the US to fix it without taking any responsiblility themselves.

Max, I'm sorry for taking so long to respond.. but what about survival of the fittest? Wouldnt the animals evolve to the changing climate?

TL

it takes a lot more time for the animals to evolve than they have if the ozone continually decreases as rapidly as it is. And didnt bush already allow an increase in industry pollution recently? i think hes going to aknowledge the problem but do nothing or just lower it slightly to try to keep people happy.

All that Glitters
In the year 2033 scientists had to take their heads out of the sand to avoid getting their brains roasted and they concluded that the Earth indeed was getting hotter not because mankind was doing anything to cause such a significant temperature difference but instead because the sun itself was radiating higher temperatures.
Luckily they had anticipated the possibility of hot times from the sun and had a viable solution on the shelf.
By the year 2035 one hundred glitter spraying satellites were in orbit around the equator spraying a ring of glitter in orbit to reflect the suns rays, already cooling the Earth enough so that the scientists could return their heads comfortably under the sand.

www.livescience.com/technology/050627_warming_solution.html

An interesting opinion follows:

www.melaniephillips.com/articles/archives/000255.html

Did they actually try to melt the Arctic ice cap back in the 70s?

www.aip.org/history/climate/RainMake.htm

TR

BigAmigo, the real point is that the rest of the world actually IS willing to change, it is the US that is the odd one out on this issue. Of course people who make a ridiculously good living off of oil and old tech don't want to acknowledge this problem, it might slightly impact the wonderful lifestyles they enjoy!

The US is responsible for a disproportionate percentage of pollution and greenhouse gasses because we use far more energy per capita than any other nation does.

The rest of the world doesn't want us to "fix" their problem, they want us to stop exporting OURS. They are actually doing something about their share of the problem!

This might mean those of you in the oil and defense industries will make a few million less each year, but I for one am willing to let the rich be slightly less rich if it means avoiding global catastrophe.

This used to be a garden planet, full of trees, fish and wildlife. Now it is a concrete mess, with polluted rivers, few trees and oceans empty of fish. Six billion humans is too many humans for this ecosphere and it will not last like it is going. You younger players might do well to read up on these issues and deal with them in your own lives, they will have a huge impact on you.

Sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings, but the world has worse problems than what religious folks see as the problems. By that, I mean that most people in the world are religious and are fighting over basically nothing. We as a race, the human race, have real urgent issues to deal with and most people just want a vacation. Oh well, fry!

And what effect does the burning of the Amazon rain forest have on this? The U S has no hand in that one.

As I understood Kiato (Spelling check), it gave like 75% of the world a free ride.

What dispororitional argument are you making? Disporpoitional in what> GNP? or Population?

How do you enforce such agreements in say CHina? The largest industrial nation in the world now.

The world wants us to wreck our economy to pay for this clean up so they can conquer us. - DUH, wake up.

Wait a minute...

"I recognize the surface of the Earth is warmer, and that an increase in greenhouse gases caused by humans is contributing to the problem," he told a news conference ahead of the summit." - Mog

I thought Bush was an idiot? Or does that only apply when you don't agree with him...

This is far more a political issue than anything else. That being said pollution is an issue we should be aware of and address - it just doesn't need to be done in the religious doomsday prophet style. (Or is it that people who profess to no religion have a tendancy to be just as wacko and messed up as people who do?)

---------------------------------

"It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine." - REM

Two persons lives in a pool of water permanently, they eat sleep and make their buissiness there. However the existing watercleaning system can handle only 60% of their leavings and other contributing factors, like birdpoo. After awhile the water starts to get too polluted for their comfort . They start discussing to buy a new watercleaning system. The new system costs 1000. One of the persons has got 5000 in his bankaccount and the other only 250, we see a problem... They start to haggle about how to pay for it.

The rich man doesnt think its fair he should pay more, he´d rather take the chance that the poor guy dies before him so that a new system wount be needed or that in time they will find a cheaper system somewhere.. The poor man suggests that the rich man should pay almost all of it since he can well afford it, after all they will both suffer without it and he cant afford to put up his ½ of the cost.
The poolwater will be polluted anyways, give it time, the rich one argues. Birds and other animals also contribute to it and they are multiplying at a high rate, I think its of no use to get that system anyways.
Meanwhile the waterpollution begins to give the two men rashes but there are soothing ointments to get, no worries Ill buy you a bottle too, the rich offers generously.
Some time after that they develop more serious, fatal diceases.
The rich finally realises his money wount buy him life and pays for the new system. Alas it turns out he acted too late and they both die.
The birds gets their pool back after many years of being forced to share it with the guys that occupied it.
The new cleaning system is well capable of cleaning up after the two odd creatures that used to live there.

The mistake the rich guy made was to by a bottle of rash ointment for the poor guy.
The rich guy should have taken advantage of the poor guy's misery to get him to sign over 10% of his profits until he paid for half of the new water cleaning system.

TR