Welcome to Laser Pointer Forums - discuss green laser pointers, blue laser pointers, and all types of lasers

Buy Site Supporter Role (remove some ads) | LPF Donations

Links below open in new window

FrozenGate by Avery

Global Warming - Real Science?

Raybo ---
We may be in a dip of sunspots but I read somewhere long ago that the sun's heat output had increased ~ 5% over the last 20 years. Damn I hate to post crap which I can't connect to. I believe that sunspots are cool areas.

This is only hearsay. Sorry --

HMike
 





"There is also the matter of solar irradiance," adds Pesnell. "Researchers are now seeing the dimmest sun in their records. The change is small, just a fraction of a percent, but significant. Questions about effects on climate are natural if the sun continues to dim."
 
This is the problem. Contradictory evidance in science. Who's reporting what - Who do we believe? Everyone posting here has remained cool. Thank You.

Keep watching and questioning the reported findings. I hope you now all see what is going on. Always two sides to pick your pocket.

HMike
 
I hope you guys can understand that the science is far, far more complex than "turn your car ignition on, temperature goes up". I study environmental chemistry at University and this stuff is just so ridiculously complex that it's far too early for anyone to say whether global warming exists or not. All we do know, from a scientists perspective, is that more carbon dioxide and gases that cause a 'greenhouse effect' are being released into the atmosphere than would be without human intervention. What that means, who knows.

pullbangdead alluded to what I want to say. There are many, many more good reasons to 'go green' than global warming. The key one, in my opinion, being that fossil fuels are a limited resource and will run out eventually. We have so much dependence on fossil fuels in all aspects of our lives that if we don't find an alternative before it runs out, it could cause a massive economic crisis.

Although honestly, 'going green' only buys us more time, it doesn't solve the problem. What we need is more research into alternative energy rather than everyone deciding to use less fuel and hope that fixes the problem, because it won't, it'll just delay it. Heck, to put it one way the MORE fuel you use the sooner someone will find a solution, lol. So to put a spin on it, not going green is actually helping to get a solution faster.
 
Last edited:
mike, check the video I posted if you haven't, every time I read you I feel this video was made for you lol

Btw, what happened to your rep? hehe

Muradai, as expert on this, can you tell me where does this video fail if it does? It seems pretty trustful IMO
 
Cyparagon said:
Ultimately we have two choices here. Number one: we reduce carbon emissions. This costs trillions of dollars, and results in LOTS of economic hardship. Number two: we wait and see what happens. I highly doubt most of the speculative repercussions are sound.

It seems to me, a reactive approach is best when we don't know for sure that a proactive approach (especially when it is exceedingly expensive) will do much of anything.



Oh but there is. See this wikipedia article
Click to expand...

did you even read the whole sentence? "hole" in in quotes as in it's not as if the sun's energy passes 100% unfiltered as a HOLE would suggest. it's more of a thinned out area. which his exactly what i said if you bothered to quote the whole sentence instead of cutting it off. -_-
 
Hallucynogenyc said:
Muradai, as expert on this, can you tell me where does this video fail if it does? It seems pretty trustful IMO
Click to expand...

The main things it fails at is believing in absolutes. "CO2 does not cause global warming". "Humans aren't causing global warming".

One of the core doctrines of science is that there are no facts, only theories that either have evidence supporting them or not supporting them. Things we might believe for thousands of years can easily be proved wrong. And it's naive to think that we're somehow special because we have greater technology than the past and live in the present, and that we must know what's right. As new evidence comes in theories are always being disapproved or supported.

It's quite true that CO2 levels and temperatures have both fluctuated wildly over earths history, but to flat out say "Humans aren't having any effect" is un-scientific, because science does not deal in absolutes. Politics does deal in absolutes though, and that's what's happened, the political thinking has smashed its way into the science world and is forcing scientists to say "this is what's happening" rather than "we think this is what's happening based on evidence".


As I said I think this has all turned into a bit of a farce and regardless of global warming or not, there are other valid reasons why we need alternative energies that don't emit greenhouse gases.
 
CO2 is a green house gas along with Methane, H2O, NO, NO2 and a bunch of other stuff. Water vapor is the biggest culprit here and no one is trying to limit that.
The earth history stretches beyond recorded climate history and information from core samples sheds little light here in light of the corrupt data reporting recently found.
Volcanos which are becomming more active throw tons of trash into the air every day. What is their effect? How does the computer climate program account for the mother earth pollution?

HMike
 
We are not the first species to have effected our environment. I doubt we shall be the last.

trivia -- According to the EPA, livestock are the largest source of methane caused by human activity.

Peace,
dave
 
Hemlock_Mike said:
CO2 is a green house gas along with Methane, H2O, NO, NO2 and a bunch of other stuff. Water vapor is the biggest culprit here and no one is trying to limit that.
Click to expand...

Regarding water vapour that's essentially talking about clouds. I don't think getting rid of all clouds is a feasible solution, lol. But it's worth considering also that clouds also reflect a lot of the suns rays back into space, so that's preventing a lot of energy that could be warming up the planet from even reaching the surface. I have no idea how that balances out though, whether clouds have a net cooling effect or a net warming effect, although I could imagine that a warming planet will create more water vapour and clouds, regardless of what clouds actually do.
 
Murudai ---

Notice that questions posted here exceed answers available. Clouds are unpredictable but do provide shade during the day but at night can hold heat down.
On a clear night, temps drop fast. Sometime, try pointing an IR temp meter into the clear night sky. It will bottom out!
This happens at random all over the planet.

HMike
 
Hemlock_Mike said:
Dave --
You left out termites which digest cellulose in massive quantites.

HMike
Click to expand...

LOL! I didn't forget them. They're just not the largest source.

Besides, how are you gonna attach the little filters to their butts?

Peace,
dave
 
Hemlock_Mike said:
Murudai ---

Notice that questions posted here exceed answers available. Clouds are unpredictable but do provide shade during the day but at night can hold heat down.
On a clear night, temps drop fast. Sometime, try pointing an IR temp meter into the clear night sky. It will bottom out!

HMike
Click to expand...

Notice that the first thing I said in this thread is that things are far too unpredictable to provide any answers to what causes global warming.

All this is just pure speculation, which is completely and utterly meaningless except to provide a question for science to answer.

(Oh, when zombies rise from the dead they release the carbon sink that they provided which is in turned released into the atmosphere when people set them on fire, thus zombies are a possible cause of global warming.)

(Lasers are a source of energy that may split ozone molecules in the upper atmosphere that lowers greenhouse gas emmisions. Thus lasers save the planet from global warming).

(Mutant alien squids from the orange clouds of Saturn fly to Earth on giant bumblebees where the beating of their huge wings cause trees to sway more which in turn hypnotizing more toads into believing that calculators can be used as footrests which causes a loss in toad activity that enrages canadian geese. The protests of the canadian geese are held in farms in southern spain which many livestock attending, which directly causes the ghost of a 15th century poet to expand and absorb over 5 trucks containing bottles of coca-cola which then explode and the CO2 bubbles inside are released into the atmosphere which is without a doubt the KEY cause of greenhouse warming. Thus we need to nuke Saturn).
 
Yeah, there are feedback loops everywhere, that get complicated REAL fast.

Increased temperature increases carbon uptake in the oceans as more CO2 dissolves in the water (negative feedback loop). But increased temperature can melt permafrost in northern hemisphere tundra which can release a lot of extra CO2 (positive feedback loop). But higher CO2 concentrations means trees grow faster and remove more CO2, but with diminishing returns with time (negative feedback loop, with changing returns over time). But melting ice changes the reflectivity of the earth's surface, but changing temperature changes cloudcover, and so on. Complicated crap.

Umpteen feedback loops that all interplay and are impossible to predict.

And then as Mike mentioned, the sun! For the first time in recorded history, the sun went an entire month last year without a single visible sunspot. First time ever, since humans have been able to look at the sun for spots. So yeah, in many ways we have no idea what is really happening with the sun and its past and future effects on earth, and it is by far the largest variable in any climate equation one could ever conceive.

But I still think hybrids and fuel-efficient vehicles are a great idea, as well as energy-efficient lighting, and recycling, and renewable energy sources in general.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top