Global Warming- how can you deny it?

[avatar4321]

It all depends where the temperatures decrease, that's what the positive feedback effect is. If temperatures increase only in certain vulnerable areas, like the permafrost regions, it would have some serious effects on the climate.

So basically, facts dont really matter.

[Little-Acorn]

I looked up temperature records in major cities all over the world, plotted all the temperature averages over time for as long as they've been kept (usually a century or so). Looked to me like there's been about a 1/2-degree (Celsius) increase in temperatures overall, in the last hunded years.

Not a thorough study, but it looks to me like there is something to it.

What I didn't find, was the slightest evidence that Man had anything to do with it, or can do anything to change it. And I still haven't seen any. And from what I've heard, neither has anyone else. Just empty rhetoric from AlGore-like people insisting it's true. No proof, no evidence, zippo. Satellite records show that Mars has gotten warmer by about the same amount, over the same period of time. Maybe the war between Marvin the Martian and Bugs Bunny, is heating up that planet?

Politicians saying that Government must "do something about" global warming, are pushing the ultimate snake oil. We can (and maybe will) pour billions of dollars into various schemes to "control" global warming. And when they don't have the slightest effect, the snake oil salesmen will say it's because we didn't do ENOUGH, and will demand that more billions be spent, more regulations and restrictions be imposed, more of us must feel guilty, etc. etc.

A medium amount of gullibility is necessary to believe in this manmade-global-warming tripe. Looks like a lot of people on this board (and both recent major Presidential candidates) fit the qualifications.

[-Cp]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...imate_100.html

There are many scientific and health organizations, enviromental, endangered species, etc...who keep compiling evidence that the earths temperature is indeed rising and the effects are begining to become more evident.

I don't understand those who insist a freak snowstorm negates the idea that the earths temperature is rising. It would seem reasonable to expect this to happen slowly.

How can you deny all this information?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/ljNDbKpusT0&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/ljNDbKpusT0&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[Des]

In response to the video:

Funny, but I never said anything about saving the planet. If you would read the link in the op, increasing temperatures on earth have some potentially nasty effects for us, as a species...manmade or not. Man has been shaping the enviroment we live in for a lot longer than the industrial age. Some people believe Native Americans shaped the ecology of North America through controlled (and occasionally accidental) burning. In order to sustain us as a species, certain things have to come together, and we have always contributed to that. The idea that we may be able to cool the earth a few degrees or pollute it with toxins is proven time and time again. We do have an impact, and I think it's arrogant to say we can't, rather than the reverse.

A medium amount of gullibility is necessary to believe in this manmade-global-warming tripe. Looks like a lot of people on this board (and both recent major Presidential candidates) fit the qualifications.

I still haven't found anyone on this board who will address the positive feedback issue...but your information on mars is pretty interesting.

So basically, facts dont really matter.

Do you understand what the rammifications of certain areas rising and cooling temperatures are for the rest of the world? It simply does not have to be every area warming up, it only has to be specific ones. And they ARE. Those ones are the places that would contribute most to potential irreversible change. Like the permafrost regions I keep talking about, or the amazon rain forests.

The ideas behind global climate change aren't as simple as "the whole world heats up, ice melts, the ocean rises, and everyone is hot"

[avatar4321]

Do you understand what the rammifications of certain areas rising and cooling temperatures are for the rest of the world? It simply does not have to be every area warming up, it only has to be specific ones. And they ARE. Those ones are the places that would contribute most to potential irreversible change. Like the permafrost regions I keep talking about, or the amazon rain forests.

The ideas behind global climate change aren't as simple as "the whole world heats up, ice melts, the ocean rises, and everyone is hot"

naturally. doesnt matter if the tempature goes up or down. Global warming is happening. How nice for politicians everywhere.

the climate has been changing for billions of years. Why should we arrogantly assume we are causing any of it? And why should we believe people who arrogantly assume it when no matter what direction the tempature goes, they cite that as evidence that its happening?

[avatar4321]

In response to the video:

Funny, but I never said anything about saving the planet. If you would read the link in the op, increasing temperatures on earth have some potentially nasty effects for us, as a species...manmade or not. Man has been shaping the enviroment we live in for a lot longer than the industrial age. Some people believe Native Americans shaped the ecology of North America through controlled (and occasionally accidental) burning. In order to sustain us as a species, certain things have to come together, and we have always contributed to that. The idea that we may be able to cool the earth a few degrees or pollute it with toxins is proven time and time again. We do have an impact, and I think it's arrogant to say we can't, rather than the reverse.

Why do you assume we aren't part of the environment? We cant have an unnatural impact on the environment. We are a part of it. Whatever we do is natural to the environment.

[Des]

Why do you assume we aren't part of the environment? We cant have an unnatural impact on the environment. We are a part of it. Whatever we do is natural to the environment.

That's basically what I just said. People have been impacting the enviroment for a lot longer than the industrial age, both intentionally and "naturally". Being aware of that just gives us more responsibility to try and impact it in a more sustainable, positive way.

[Des]

naturally. doesnt matter if the tempature goes up or down. Global warming is happening. How nice for politicians everywhere.

the climate has been changing for billions of years. Why should we arrogantly assume we are causing any of it? And why should we believe people who arrogantly assume it when no matter what direction the tempature goes, they cite that as evidence that its happening?

The "baseline" temperature of the earth is rising. This means that certain ecosystems and areas we depend on to maintain the current livability of this planet will be affected by something called "positive feedback effects". The example I used was the permafrost regions in the arctic. Permafrost is permanently frozen, partially decomposed matter. It's also an area usually covered in snow, which helps reflect the suns rays (if you read the link dmp provided, it accurately stated that water has about 90 percent of the responsibility for global temperature, in any form). If this snow melts, the darker land will soak in more heat, causing the permafrost to begin melting and the organic matter to decompose...this will release methane (as gas with more "greenhouse" effect than co2) into the atmosphere and help increase the problem.

Most arguments don't take that all into account, only pieces of it.

[avatar4321]

The "baseline" temperature of the earth is rising. This means that certain ecosystems and areas we depend on to maintain the current livability of this planet will be affected by something called "positive feedback effects". The example I used was the permafrost regions in the arctic. Permafrost is permanently frozen, partially decomposed matter. It's also an area usually covered in snow, which helps reflect the suns rays (if you read the link dmp provided, it accurately stated that water has about 90 percent of the responsibility for global temperature, in any form). If this snow melts, the darker land will soak in more heat, causing the permafrost to begin melting and the organic matter to decompose...this will release methane (as gas with more "greenhouse" effect than co2) into the atmosphere and help increase the problem.

Most arguments don't take that all into account, only pieces of it.

Baseline? Do tell what is the baseline tempature? Do we use the tempature it was when they started taking tempature? do we use the tempature during the last ice age? How about the last heating period?

You've got a huge problem with the fact that the baseline is completely arbitrary.

[Des]

Baseline? Do tell what is the baseline tempature? Do we use the tempature it was when they started taking tempature? do we use the tempature during the last ice age? How about the last heating period?

You've got a huge problem with the fact that the baseline is completely arbitrary.

Not really. Over time, it's observable in things like crops being grown in previously hostile areas or disease spreading to previously colder climates.

[manu1959]

as someone that is working on a world wildlife fund endorsed "green" city known as one planet living.......google it......cool stuff....

can anyone tell me what the top five "greenest" countries are.....and the five worst?

[Said1]

Not really. Over time, it's observable in things like crops being grown in previously hostile areas or disease spreading to previously colder climates.

You're right, the baseline isn't arbitrary, but it isn't rising either. The baseline doesn't rise, temperatures surpass or fall below the baseline. Then you see the above or other changes.

[Said1]

Why do you assume we aren't part of the environment? We cant have an unnatural impact on the environment. We are a part of it. Whatever we do is natural to the environment.

I highly doubt that whatever we do is natural to the environment. But I guess I can't prove that cars, internet and cell phones aren't natural, can I? What about 'Spring Break Girls Gone Wild', they part of a natural degradation process brought about by naturally distilled alcoool and tequila, from the environment??

[DragonStryk72]

http://www.americanprogress.org/issu...imate_100.html

There are many scientific and health organizations, enviromental, endangered species, etc...who keep compiling evidence that the earths temperature is indeed rising and the effects are begining to become more evident.

I don't understand those who insist a freak snowstorm negates the idea that the earths temperature is rising. It would seem reasonable to expect this to happen slowly.

How can you deny all this information?

Here's the basic problem, and I guess it's just something I've been thinking about: These scientists are trying to prove that man is responsible for the warming effect. Now, it's not that they're trying to screw us or anything, they legitimately believe that global warming is a threat.

The problem comes about in the approach, because in order to truly study what is happening in an unbiased manner, you can't be walking in with your mind made up, it just doesn't work. The scientists on the other side of the line have the same problem, though.

Then some idiot gets up there sounding all official like, and exaggerates the studies findings on purposely, to scare people into action, and by the miracle of internet, get caught doing, thus discrediting not only themselves, but the very people that they are trying to help

[red states rule]

Global warming is coming to my area today. The temp may break the record of 65

Then snow for the weekend

I guess it is not global warming - it must be what enviro wackos call "climate change"

That way everything is covered for them