Global warming devastates...
- Thread starter Larry Gude
- Start date
Just a guess but I would say reproduction has a lot to do with it. At the beginning of the 20th Century the world population was about 1.6 billion and at the beginning of the 21st Century the population had surpassed 6 billion. Seems to me all that bang-bang-banging and the heat it generates could be what has resulted in a rise of the temperature.Larry Gude said:
mAlice
professional daydreamer
Ken King said:Just a guess but I would say reproduction has a lot to do with it. At the beginning of the 20th Century the world population was about 1.6 billion and at the beginning of the 21st Century the population had surpassed 6 billion. Seems to me all that bang-bang-banging and the heat it generates could be what has resulted in a rise of the temperature.
I think you should delete your post. Can you imagine the ramifications if that information fell into the wrong hands?
harleygirl
Working for the weekend
Ken King said:Just a guess but I would say reproduction has a lot to do with it. At the beginning of the 20th Century the world population was about 1.6 billion and at the beginning of the 21st Century the population had surpassed 6 billion. Seems to me all that bang-bang-banging and the heat it generates could be what has resulted in a rise of the temperature.
OMG!! Is that why it is so cold in my house?!
harleygirl
Working for the weekend
RoseRed said:Turn the heat up. That's about all I can do.
Thanks!! Good Idea!! 
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Ken...
If I was President one of my education initiatives would be to make sure every high school aged kid had been on at least one commercial airliner, on a day time flight, across the country. Maybe throw in a night flight as well.
Also included would be a weekend in NYC.
This would all be summarized by classroom discusion with a globe and map of the world and weather records.
If all goes well, the kids will see that, somehow, NYC does not exist in this whirlwind of devestating climate changes due to the mass of humanity and their never sleeping use of energy. That alone dismisses the 'global warming is mans fault' phobia.
Then, they would see that most of this county is...empty of human beings and, obviously, any human activity, like burning fossil fuels (other than the plane, of course). This makes the 'global warming is mans fault and we gotta do SOMETHING NOW' instability nothing but an analysis of head up ass contortions. Removing ones head from ones ass would be the thing we NEED to do. Now.
Then we'd research the sometimes wild but mostly consistent weather of both NYC and randonly chosen empty America places.
We'd read how in the Civil war, long before any industrial age, weather fluctuated from the norm. Hot Octobers. Cold Mays. Lower than normal springtime river levels due to lower than normal winter snows. Wars inspire people to record alot of stuff. The kids would learn that 11 or 12 year patterns of weather have been going on for some time WITH NO HELP OR HINDERANCE from man.
Hopefully, somehow, the shear vastness of the US coupled with the recognition of how small we are in a global sense and the fact that WE use 25% of the worlds manmade energy (burning fossil fuels) would help them conclude that when man starts his car or turns down his AC or jumps on a plane or farts, it is NOT noted by Mother Nature.
Then, we'd bring in Professor King and his thesis to wake the kiddies up.
Ken King said:Just a guess but I would say reproduction has a lot to do with it. At the beginning of the 20th Century the world population was about 1.6 billion and at the beginning of the 21st Century the population had surpassed 6 billion. Seems to me all that bang-bang-banging and the heat it generates could be what has resulted in a rise of the temperature.
If I was President one of my education initiatives would be to make sure every high school aged kid had been on at least one commercial airliner, on a day time flight, across the country. Maybe throw in a night flight as well.
Also included would be a weekend in NYC.
This would all be summarized by classroom discusion with a globe and map of the world and weather records.
If all goes well, the kids will see that, somehow, NYC does not exist in this whirlwind of devestating climate changes due to the mass of humanity and their never sleeping use of energy. That alone dismisses the 'global warming is mans fault' phobia.
Then, they would see that most of this county is...empty of human beings and, obviously, any human activity, like burning fossil fuels (other than the plane, of course). This makes the 'global warming is mans fault and we gotta do SOMETHING NOW' instability nothing but an analysis of head up ass contortions. Removing ones head from ones ass would be the thing we NEED to do. Now.
Then we'd research the sometimes wild but mostly consistent weather of both NYC and randonly chosen empty America places.
We'd read how in the Civil war, long before any industrial age, weather fluctuated from the norm. Hot Octobers. Cold Mays. Lower than normal springtime river levels due to lower than normal winter snows. Wars inspire people to record alot of stuff. The kids would learn that 11 or 12 year patterns of weather have been going on for some time WITH NO HELP OR HINDERANCE from man.
Hopefully, somehow, the shear vastness of the US coupled with the recognition of how small we are in a global sense and the fact that WE use 25% of the worlds manmade energy (burning fossil fuels) would help them conclude that when man starts his car or turns down his AC or jumps on a plane or farts, it is NOT noted by Mother Nature.
Then, we'd bring in Professor King and his thesis to wake the kiddies up.
truby20
Fighting like a girl
The clearest example of how Man can and does cause worldwide environmental issues is the Ozone hole. The ONLY cause for the formation of the ozone hole was the release of CFCs from our activity (manufacturing, cooling, aerosols). It has been proven that those CFC created the ozone hole over the antarctic and a smaller one over the arctic. With the massive reduction in CFC emissions in the last 30 years the ozone hole is expected to recover by 2065.Larry Gude said:
Slowing recovery of ozone hole
Be sure to take them to southern CA if this is during the summer so they can enjoy the smoggy views of the ridge-line. And a assure them that the filth they see in the air isn't affecting their health or the environment because man is so insignificant.Larry Gude said:
Whether global warming is being accelerated by human activity or not should not be the defining factor in us cleaning up our exhaust. The combustion engine has been around for over 100 years, still dirty and making us reliant on an area of the world that really doesn't care for us. As a county we have the greatest intellectual pool available, there is no reason why we can't figure out a replacement for our greatest polluter. It would help clear the air, we wouldn't be as dependent of foreign oil, and at least we would know we made an effort to combat global warming based on our best understanding of it.
I don't know how you could make an argument against that.
Lenny
Lovin' being Texican
You people amaze me
Nothing of the such has been proven. In fact the cores from Antarctica still haven't told us if the "hole" (as people like to call it) is a natural phenomenon that comes and goes over the millenia. Since it was first "discovered" only 20 years ago, we have no evidence it hasn't been there off and on for the short history of the world. I've studies all your evidence and conclude this is another Y2K dreamed up by the "sky is falling" idiots who influence public discourse
truby20 said:
Nothing of the such has been proven. In fact the cores from Antarctica still haven't told us if the "hole" (as people like to call it) is a natural phenomenon that comes and goes over the millenia. Since it was first "discovered" only 20 years ago, we have no evidence it hasn't been there off and on for the short history of the world. I've studies all your evidence and conclude this is another Y2K dreamed up by the "sky is falling" idiots who influence public discourse
Larry Gude
Strung Out
The ozone hole!
I love that one!
"Why, the clearest evidence of man made global warming is the 'OZONE HOLE' which is located, uh, just above, the uh, err, the coldest spot on the planet because, as you see, warming, uhm, is not cold and cold is, uhm, where a problem related to warmth would uh, naturally, as everyone KNOWS, well...it is."
I do NOT discount that we make smog. I do not discount we make all sorts of emisisons and gobs of CO2. I do not discount that NYC and LA are pretty dirty compared to, say, Fly Over Country. I also do NOT discount that plants LOVE CO2.
LA is a MAN MADE eyesore that does not belong where it is. There is no water. The air currents suck. There is not the local vegetation to absorb all the CO2. So, it sits and rots. It is a MISTAKE.
NYC, on the other hand, only suffers smog on the stillest summer days. There IS the air flow to carry off the CO2. There is the local vegetaiton to absorb it and produce OXYGEN.
If we had a man made ozone problem, wouldn't it be right over LA?
Do you know that this fall of endless hurricanes, which some blame on man, all 'made' incalculable amounts of fresh, new 'ozone'?
How is one to reconcile that, A, we cause these problems yet, B, they bring their own 'solutions'?
If man made, greenhouse gas global warming is a fact then it is NOT a fact in that it is bad because the 'excess' emissions generated by the gases would actually increase cloud cover, increase foliage and crop output, increase rainfall and DECREASE global temperature. Mand made global COOLING!!!! RUN!!!
To where? Antarica? It's not safe. You'll freeze to death if the ozone hole doesn't get yah first.
No, wait. Mand made global warming/cooling is probably good for the planet.
You wanna get in the way of turning deserts to gardens?
Now, you can calculate to your hearts content what driving around the beltway in a Yugo does to the weather in Antartica but it is a COMPLETE waste of time once you simply start to speculate on the global ripple effect one single hurricane has. Or one erruption of Mt. St. Hellens. Or one El Nino pattern. And so on.
As far as health, Mother nature spends all her time trying to kill us; toxic emissions from all sorts of features, inhospitable weather and climates, natural disease, earthquakes, mudslides, hurricanes, insect plaugues, tsunamis, you name it.
"Here Jr, turn off that AC and go live with nature in Death Valley. You're hurting the planet."
It is the height of arrogance to think we are so big and smart and all powerful as to be able to affect, in any way, the planet earth which has a FAR more volitile and violent history than we can even begin to comprehend...
...LONG before I or my ancestors fired up the back yard BBQ.
I love that one!
"Why, the clearest evidence of man made global warming is the 'OZONE HOLE' which is located, uh, just above, the uh, err, the coldest spot on the planet because, as you see, warming, uhm, is not cold and cold is, uhm, where a problem related to warmth would uh, naturally, as everyone KNOWS, well...it is."
I do NOT discount that we make smog. I do not discount we make all sorts of emisisons and gobs of CO2. I do not discount that NYC and LA are pretty dirty compared to, say, Fly Over Country. I also do NOT discount that plants LOVE CO2.
LA is a MAN MADE eyesore that does not belong where it is. There is no water. The air currents suck. There is not the local vegetation to absorb all the CO2. So, it sits and rots. It is a MISTAKE.
NYC, on the other hand, only suffers smog on the stillest summer days. There IS the air flow to carry off the CO2. There is the local vegetaiton to absorb it and produce OXYGEN.
If we had a man made ozone problem, wouldn't it be right over LA?
Do you know that this fall of endless hurricanes, which some blame on man, all 'made' incalculable amounts of fresh, new 'ozone'?
How is one to reconcile that, A, we cause these problems yet, B, they bring their own 'solutions'?
If man made, greenhouse gas global warming is a fact then it is NOT a fact in that it is bad because the 'excess' emissions generated by the gases would actually increase cloud cover, increase foliage and crop output, increase rainfall and DECREASE global temperature. Mand made global COOLING!!!! RUN!!!
To where? Antarica? It's not safe. You'll freeze to death if the ozone hole doesn't get yah first.
No, wait. Mand made global warming/cooling is probably good for the planet.
You wanna get in the way of turning deserts to gardens?
Now, you can calculate to your hearts content what driving around the beltway in a Yugo does to the weather in Antartica but it is a COMPLETE waste of time once you simply start to speculate on the global ripple effect one single hurricane has. Or one erruption of Mt. St. Hellens. Or one El Nino pattern. And so on.
As far as health, Mother nature spends all her time trying to kill us; toxic emissions from all sorts of features, inhospitable weather and climates, natural disease, earthquakes, mudslides, hurricanes, insect plaugues, tsunamis, you name it.
"Here Jr, turn off that AC and go live with nature in Death Valley. You're hurting the planet."
It is the height of arrogance to think we are so big and smart and all powerful as to be able to affect, in any way, the planet earth which has a FAR more volitile and violent history than we can even begin to comprehend...
...LONG before I or my ancestors fired up the back yard BBQ.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
Larry, if we were discussing global warming - I'd be with you in your skepticism.
But ozone depletion is fairly well documented, and the science behind it is very reliable.
One is trying to ascertain global climatological changes over periods spanning eons, with but a few hundred years of reliable data, and a few thousand years of slightly less reliable data.
The other is twenty years of scrutinized measurable phenomenon, for which the causes are mostly known, and for which most if not all of the major natural causes can be accounted for.
(For instance - you'd never have an ozone hole in the stratosphere - where the ozone layer IS - over LA. It takes up to five years for CFC's to navigate to the stratosphere - and the air currents take them in concentration to the poles).
But ozone depletion is fairly well documented, and the science behind it is very reliable.
One is trying to ascertain global climatological changes over periods spanning eons, with but a few hundred years of reliable data, and a few thousand years of slightly less reliable data.
The other is twenty years of scrutinized measurable phenomenon, for which the causes are mostly known, and for which most if not all of the major natural causes can be accounted for.
(For instance - you'd never have an ozone hole in the stratosphere - where the ozone layer IS - over LA. It takes up to five years for CFC's to navigate to the stratosphere - and the air currents take them in concentration to the poles).
FastCarsSpeed
Come Play at BigWoodys
truby20 said:
You do realize that the weather station at National airport handled by the National Weather Service does have error to it? Their instruments are not that acurate and its in an urban area that has alot of things to affect it. I work for NOAA and deal with alot of climatologists and such and the data that they use to determine some of this stuff was taken with very limited means over the say the last 50 years. It is going to take about 10 years before we can really tell what is going on. There is a program right now that has some very sophisticated instruments being set up all over the US. Google "CRN" "Climate Reference Network" and do some reading. There are soo many differing opinions on the subject because it is all left to interpretation and speculation. As someone here has said there is just not enough data to do any accurate measurements.
truby20
Fighting like a girl
I wasn't using the ozone hole as an argument to the existence of global warming, it was an example of how human activity does affect the worldwide environment. The ozone hole has nothing to do with global warming, they are two different issues.Larry Gude said:
Again I wasn't giving the smog example as evidence of global warming, I just wanted to show that we affect large scale environments. CO2 does not cause smog...other pollutents from industry cause it...Larry Gude said:
What are you talking about here? The ozone that benefits us exists in the Stratosphere. Tropospheric ozone is very bad for our health (when we breath it in), that's why during the summer there are occasionally alerts issued advising persons with respiratory problems to stay indoors because ozone levels are very high.Larry Gude said:
Were you joking about hurricanes making ozone? (I hope so)
truby20
Fighting like a girl
The question was how many days over the last summer did we reach 100 degrees, all I did was answer it based on the OFFICIAL observations for DC. Yes I know that National airport has not always been the official reporting station but we somehow have records back to the late 1800's, is that an accurate guide? I guess it depends on how accurate we can be.FastCarsSpeed said:
Look like the Climate Reference Network will help NCDC get a grip on observations.
Climate Reference Network
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Uh...you're kidding right?
How many links do you want?
How many links do you want?