Global Warming - Real Science?

[Tech_Junkie]

But that doesn't change the fact that the industrialized world consumes (per capita) WAY more commodities, and food, and energy, and water, than the non-industrialized world.

I think the fact that over 50% of Americans are over weight makes that statement irrefutable.

 

[Hemlock_Mike]

pbd --- You make a good point. Yes, Americans do consume a lot of energy per capita but in our cold climate, that's used largely for heating in this cold weather.
Other areas of the world still rely on wood for heating which is just as bad in terms of BTU carbon conversion.The comparison of BTU/Capita is quite complicated when the benefits we (USA) provide are considered.

HMike

OH Crap -- I can't argue with the number of fat people here -- many on welfare :-(
I get almost sick when I see 50%+ people overweight blocking isles in the stores. These people will destroy health care eventually. Just look at this FAT ASS playing with toys !!!

 

[photonaholic]

Sort of on topic, part of the explosion problem is humans have discovered medicine, not long ago, we expired shortly after we reached our prime, birth defects of any kind rarely survived to perpetuate the gene.

The strong survived, the weak died.

The population density would be just a small fraction of what it is today if we had never discovered ways to keep people on the planet longer.

So IF we are accelerating the inevitable, We have only accelerated it more by keeping people around longer. More people = more food, heat and transportation.

(That is not intended to sound heartless, crude or disrespectful to anyone)

 

[denton808]

man bear pig... i'm cereal.

 

[Cyparagon]

^Niko don't take kindly te yer type 'round here.

Hydrogen produced from methane, producing.......TADA! carbon dioxide!

Eh, sometimes. It's either carbon, carbon monoxide, or carbon dioxide. In either case, since it's produced in one place it can be disposed of properly. See hydrogen production. I'd rather just burn the methane, myself.

I think the fact that over 50% of Americans are over weight makes that statement irrefutable.

I think your figure's a bit low.

Other areas of the world still rely on wood for heating which is just as bad in terms of BTU carbon conversion.

But wood, unlike many other fuels, is renewable.

 

[Tech_Junkie]

I think your figure's a bit low.

Yeah I tried to be conservative. ~75% of the people I know are over weight.

 

[Deleted member 8382]

Yeah I tried to be conservative. ~75% of the people I know are over weight.

hail USA lol. Not even a 10% of the ones I know!

back to the topic. Asuming there's no destiny or any kind of route the world history is following, what will happen tomorrow is random, and altering a random thing results in another random one. With this I'm not saying that we can destroy the world deliberately, but the argument "we are changing our environment and we should leave it as it is" is a falacy!

 

[daguin]

But wood, unlike many other fuels, is renewable.

Not at the levels we are consuming it.

Peace,
dave

 

[photonaholic]

But wood, unlike many other fuels, is renewable.

Not at the levels we are consuming it.

Peace,
dave

I agree with Dave on this one.


It takes a hardwood tree (fuel) 35 years to become worth cutting down.

Burning trees that have already died is only effective if you get at the wood quickly, within 24 months of the tree dying (usually quicker) the wood begins to break down (rot) and is no longer as effective of a fuel, so people who burn wood harvest it "green" and season it controlled.

The main reason pine/hemlock and other softwoods are used for buildings is that a pine tree can reach similar girth in 1/2 the time. Therefore cheaper to buy and use.

So we are buzzing these trees down at a rate that is faster than they can replace themselves.

A few years back a group of loggers shaved a hillside bare near here, the resulting erosion ruined that massive parcel of land for a very long time.

 

[Tech_Junkie]

With this I'm not saying that we can destroy the world deliberately, but the argument "we are changing our environment and we should leave it as it is" is a falacy!

Ah..to be young, dumb, and full of cum again.

You are young enough that you are going to be in the middle of it, and by your attitude, its obvious you will have your thumb up your ass when it happens.

The world will not blow up, but we will probably have to revert to 1700's again. You are going to have to work to survive like your great grandparents did. It is going to happen, so be prepared. When the chit hits the fan, its going to be at least 5 years of chaos till we start getting organized again.

 

[Hemlock_Mike]

HEY T-J -- Lighten up on the insults here please.
We all have our beliefs (like religion) and so far, none are really wrong.
The weather man failed to predict the weather here AGAIN today. But in 20 years it will be 2 degrees warmer..... Right..

HMike

 

[rocketparrotlet]

As I posted before, glaciers are at the lowest point in over 5,000 years here. I have never seen a winter this warm before, besides when I lived in California. Granted we are in El Nino right now, but even for an El Nino event, we are having record winter highs.

You can believe what you want, but it shows a lack of moral integrity to do things like intentionally waste energy and supplies just to make a point- like not recycling because you don't believe in global warming. Okay. Now think outside your little box here. Even if global warming has nothing to do with human intervention, what about all the other consequences of wastefulness? The bauxite ore, after it is mined for aluminum, is dumped into the rivers, which kills the fish and starves the villagers. That SUV/truck you flaunt? It releases compounds known to be toxic to life, not including CO2 at a much greater rate than a small car. And for what? To look good at the cost of our future? Think before you waste, for it's only going to ruin our society we have worked for thousands of years to develop.

NOTE: This post is not directed at anyone in specific, but it applies to all of us.

-Mark

 

[digital_blue]

Okay. Now think outside your little box here. Even if global warming has nothing to do with human intervention, what about all the other consequences of wastefulness? The bauxite ore, after it is mined for aluminum, is dumped into the rivers, which kills the fish and starves the villagers. That SUV/truck you flaunt? It releases compounds known to be toxic to life, not including CO2 at a much greater rate than a small car. And for what? To look good at the cost of our future? Think before you waste, for it's only going to ruin our society we have worked for thousands of years to develop.

Not to sound rude or anything but one of the points you've made do not apply to everyday folks. Dumping of toxic waste in rivers is beyond the control of most people; unless you're asking us to rally outside an aluminum plant, there is little we can do.

As for your claim on "SUVs and trucks"; you need to realize that vehicles are becoming more efficient. A gas guzzling Hummer can be more efficient than an "efficient car" from 40 years ago. When would you consider any vehicle "efficient enough"? Is it not acceptable that the vehicle I drive today is more efficient than it's yesteryear analogue?

As for your "ruin our society we have worked for thousands of years...", tell that to the next ice age/supernova/astroid.

No offence intended/implied.

 

[photonaholic]

My Toyota RAV (SUV) gets better mileage than my Dodge neon did.......

I am proud of my SUV, and as a bonus (sorry Detroit) this vehicle will OUTLAST several lesser vehicles.

 

[Cyparagon]

As I posted before, glaciers are at the lowest point in over 5,000 years here.

That's not saying much considering the earth is over four billion years old. Like dave said, you need to think geologic timescales. The glaciers have been lower many, many times before we were here. Guess what - Life survived it. The great extinction events were seldom related to sea levels or weather patterns. We'll be fine.

 

[daguin]

That's not saying much considering the earth is over four billion years old. Like dave said, you need to think geologic timescales. The glaciers have been lower many, many times before we were here. Guess what - Life survived it. The great extinction events were seldom related to sea levels or weather patterns. We'll be fine.

The ice caps as we know them haven't even been around that long (geologically speaking). The Antarctic ice cap formed ~25 MYA. The Arctic ice cap didn't form until after the Isthmus of Panama rose ~5 MYA.

There were other cooler periods before that. There have been times that the entire earth was a "snowball" and times that the entire earth was ice free. There have been at least 5 massive extinction events since life emerged on the earth.

The main difference between those times and now is that now scientists need jobs and politicians need to get elected. Of course our basic survival instinct and our delusions of grandeur are what scientist and politicians feed from.

Peace,
dave