Idiot Savant?

dck4shrt

New Member
ylexot said:

Why is it moronic to be afraid of something? Granted it sounds like he is describing a possible outcome that has a lower probability of occuring than most. I'd be afraid (about the end of human existence) if that is what I thought was going to happen.
 

ylexot

Super Genius
Because for someone who is supposed to be extremely intelligent in the field of physics, his "fear" defies physics. 250 degrees centigrade? That's just f'n loony unless he's thinking that global warming will cause the sun to expand :dork:
 

dck4shrt

New Member
ylexot said:
Because for someone who is supposed to be extremely intelligent in the field of physics, his "fear" defies physics. 250 degrees centigrade? That's just f'n loony unless he's thinking that global warming will cause the sun to expand :dork:

If there is a fundamental change in the composition of the atmosphere then temps could get really hot...pure speculation and not advocating any of this though.

I'm under the impression that he has information that is leading him to this hypothesis.
 

Ken King

A little rusty but not crusty
PREMO Member
dck4shrt said:
Why is it moronic to be afraid of something? Granted it sounds like he is describing a possible outcome that has a lower probability of occuring than most. I'd be afraid (about the end of human existence) if that is what I thought was going to happen.
Wouldn't an equal fear be that the earth might end up like Mars, a frozen mass with a mean temperature of -65C.? Besides isn't the mean temperature of Venus around 474C or so NASA says. Yes, vrai I know. :nerd:

Global warning, while a possibility, is, in my mind, a theory that is nowhere near being understood or verified as a reality. To predict with any degree of accuracy as to what might be one day with all the variables that contribute to environmental change is about as exact as being able to regularly select winning lotto numbers.

In 1988 the "experts" projected an increase of .8°C per decade. In 1990 they revised that to .3°C per decade, and then in 1995 it was again revised to .2°C per decade. Actual ground temperature readings since 1979 have shown an increase of .1° - .15°C per decade and satellite measurements from NASA's TIROs series of weather satellites indicate that there has been a slight atmospheric cooling trend of 0.04°C per decade since 1979 verified by weather balloon data.

So are we experiencing warming, cooling, or a natural cyclic trend of the planet? I don't know but I do know that it doesn't seem anywhere near as significant as what some would like us to believe.

As such I don't plan on losing much sleep worrying over theories like this.
 

jazz lady

~*~ Rara Avis ~*~
PREMO Member
dck4shrt said:
I'm under the impression that he has information that is leading him to this hypothesis.

I think he has more of an agenda he is trying to push than anything:

"It is important for the human race to spread out into space for the survival of the species," Hawking said. "Life on Earth is at the ever-increasing risk of being wiped out by a disaster, such as sudden global warming, nuclear war, a genetically engineered virus or other dangers we have not yet thought of."

Space key to human survival

I have yet to see any proof forthcoming about these "disasters" which theoretically are possible but hardly probable. What better way to garner support for the space program and colonizing other planets than to do a Chicken Little "the sky is falling" act?

I do respect Dr. Hawking greatly and enjoyed reading his books and articles but I think he is totally out of his element now.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
The end of earth...

...is coming. Pick one;

Burning fossil fuels will raise the surface temperature because burning things is hot. Which will kill us all.

Fossil fuel burning will actually cool the earth because of the increase in cloud cover due to warming. Which will kill us all.

Using fossil fuel is actually lightening the earth which is causing the planet to be pulled ever closer to the sun. Which will kill us all.

Burning fossil fuel is making the earth lighter, reducing the pull of the earth on the moon which is causing the moons orbit to become oblonged which will cause devastating weakening and strengthening of global tides which will in turn oblong the earths rotation, with all of that water, which covers 2/3's of the surface, sloshing around, about the sun causing much larger seasonal temperature swings. Which will kill us all.

Use of fossil fuels is causing gaps within the earths crust which will increase earthquakes and volcano eruptions as the voids naturally fill themselves which will cause massive increases in volcano emissions, both above and below sea level, both poisoning the air AND simultaneously evaporating the oceans causing increased cloud cover which will be too salty which will ruin cropland globally when it comes back down as rain and...kill us all.

The volcano poisoning of the air ALSO will reduce the pH of rain clouds, thus making them acidic thus melting all of the aluminum we use, creating rivers of aluminum sulfate. Killing us all.

While we are using fossil fuel, the earth will coincidentally and irrespective of use of fossil fuels cool/warm to the point where it will kill us all.

The use of fossil fuels is ridding the planet of a poison that would have eventually killed the planet but we've worried about it so much we all eat too much cheesecake in a futile attempt to fell better.

Killing us all.
 

bcp

In My Opinion
desertrat said:
He's one smart cookie, but I don't get where the sulphuric acid is going to come from. Maybe he's losing it.
his fear is not that far fetched.
In northern states like Vermont the effects of acid rain has already caused lakes to die, and is causing a great threat to the sugar maples that we get syrup from.
The simple fact is that Acid rain is real, and it is already creating a concern for our north eastern states, as well as large areas of Canada.

A web site to help explain where it comes from

as you can see, the actions of our population at this point is creating a situation very close to what this person fears. Maybe not as severe as his claims, but if not put in check, over time it could become a reality.

basically to answer your question as to where it is going to come from, well, we as a fossil fuel burning world are creating it as we go.
 

Hawk

It Wasn't Me
I dont see where he said it would happen in the 10,100,1000 years, but hey who knows maybe in another 100,000,000 years the earths temp could be 250C, the guy knows what hes talking about.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
From the above link...

Clean rain usually has a pH of 5.6. It is slightly acidic because of carbon dioxide which is naturally present in the atmosphere


...we're all going to die. Unless we accelerate sea water evaporation through burning fossil fuels which, while raising the EC level of rain will at least raise the pH. We have to try. Even if it kills us.
 

bcp

In My Opinion
Hawk said:
I dont see where he said it would happen in the 10,100,1000 years, but hey who knows maybe in another 100,000,000 years the earths temp could be 250C, the guy knows what hes talking about.
Maybe he worked in a foundry before loosing it?
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Hawk said:
I dont see where he said it would happen in the 10,100,1000 years, but hey who knows maybe in another 100,000,000 years the earths temp could be 250C, the guy knows what hes talking about.
Unfortunately none of us will be alive to say "HA!" one way or the other. :lol:
 

bcp

In My Opinion
Larry Gude said:
...we're all going to die. Unless we accelerate sea water evaporation through burning fossil fuels which, while raising the EC level of rain will at least raise the pH. We have to try. Even if it kills us.
part of what makes the sea water a higher ph is the salt. During evaporation, the salt would not be part of the product. Would the ph then be equal to that of fresh water? or would there still be enough trace sodium to raise the PH enough to make a difference.
 

Mikeinsmd

New Member
Larry Gude said:
...is coming. Pick one;

Burning fossil fuels will raise the surface temperature because burning things is hot. Which will kill us all.

Fossil fuel burning will actually cool the earth because of the increase in cloud cover due to warming. Which will kill us all.

Using fossil fuel is actually lightening the earth which is causing the planet to be pulled ever closer to the sun. Which will kill us all.

Burning fossil fuel is making the earth lighter, reducing the pull of the earth on the moon which is causing the moons orbit to become oblonged which will cause devastating weakening and strengthening of global tides which will in turn oblong the earths rotation, with all of that water, which covers 2/3's of the surface, sloshing around, about the sun causing much larger seasonal temperature swings. Which will kill us all.

Use of fossil fuels is causing gaps within the earths crust which will increase earthquakes and volcano eruptions as the voids naturally fill themselves which will cause massive increases in volcano emissions, both above and below sea level, both poisoning the air AND simultaneously evaporating the oceans causing increased cloud cover which will be too salty which will ruin cropland globally when it comes back down as rain and...kill us all.

The volcano poisoning of the air ALSO will reduce the pH of rain clouds, thus making them acidic thus melting all of the aluminum we use, creating rivers of aluminum sulfate. Killing us all.

While we are using fossil fuel, the earth will coincidentally and irrespective of use of fossil fuels cool/warm to the point where it will kill us all.

The use of fossil fuels is ridding the planet of a poison that would have eventually killed the planet but we've worried about it so much we all eat too much cheesecake in a futile attempt to fell better.

Killing us all.
:bawl: You skeered me. :bawl:
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
bcp said:
It is now clear to me that you did not work outside today.
No, I didn't.

I sure wish Al Gore would give another global warming speech so it'd cool off a bit.
 

bcp

In My Opinion
vraiblonde said:
No, I didn't.

I sure wish Al Gore would give another global warming speech so it'd cool off a bit.
I thought that every time Al Bore spoke, the average temp went up a few degrees from all his hot air.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Well...

bcp said:
part of what makes the sea water a higher ph is the salt. During evaporation, the salt would not be part of the product. Would the ph then be equal to that of fresh water? or would there still be enough trace sodium to raise the PH enough to make a difference.

...maybe so as I am no sea water expert. I do know nitrogen based EC, or salt, lowers the pH of the water we use, so I can't even guess as to the answer of your question because it's the inverse of my knowledge; in other words, not how it works as I understand it.
 

bcp

In My Opinion
Larry Gude said:
...maybe so as I am no sea water expert. I do know nitrogen based EC, or salt, lowers the pH of the water we use, so I can't even guess as to the answer of your question because it's the inverse of my knowledge; in other words, not how it works as I understand it.

I am no expert by any standard either, however I have noticed the relationship between salt and ph and balanced my salt water tank accordingly.
I also know by working with my tank that as the water evaporates, the salinity of the tank increases and the ph decreases.
I therefore assume that the evaporated sea water would be closer to a 7 ph and thus reflect no real exchange in the atmosphere of the acid rain.

thats the only knowlege I have on this subject.
 
Top