Global warming....

[Bodhi]

actually if my memory serves me its about time for another iceage soon*


*soon being relatively loosly worded since were talking roughly 400 million years since the last one, and they seem to happen at around those intervalls

so with that in mind, the earth shouldn't heat up, it should start to get cooler.

and it isnt.

Gee, i see a pattern

Think is, if you'd bother to look at any data rather than just shooting your mouth off and looking like a spacktard, you'd see that in fact yes, the planet is cooling.

Which completely fucks your theory up the ass.

Feel free to come back with more drivel, you are amusing. But not in a good way.

 

[Scouse]

What I object to most is those who are sceptical of the theory of anthropogenic climate change being labelled as 'deniers'.

I agree m8. But that's a press term - not a science term. I think that the science press has been a bit pissed off by this (I remember reading a moaning article in New Scientist about it)

Oh and Chipper, you'd do well to examine what percentage of the atmosphere is made up of carbon dioxide, and what percentage of that is from man-made sources

It's relatively easy to measure the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere very accurately and over long periods of time - which, in turn, makes it much easier to calculate our overall contribution...

 

[Scouse]

Climate change will not "destroy the biosphere". It will change it....

We're in the middle of a massive extinction level event and you're quibbling over what "destruction" means? No-one's saying it's going to burn the face of the earth off...

Well, for all the flora and fauna that are extinct, the others that are in danger of becoming so and the rest of the biosphere that's horribly stressed (yep, that's the way to describe it), I'm gonna call it destruction....

 

[Scouse]

now that we're cutting down on pollution, the planet heats up.

Gee, i see a pattern

I see a pattern too Toht. One of ignorance.

We're not cutting down on pollution. The rate we're polluting the atmosphere is speeding up, not slowing.

Even Britain, since 1997, has gotten worse. And we only have to measure our cuts against "1990 levels".

Well, 1990 levels of pollution were pretty fucking high.

 

[Scouse]

None of this means that Climate Change isn't happening but it shows that a lot of climate scientists believe that it is but that their proof won't look convincing enough without a helping hand.

A tiny minority of "climate" scientists (if there is such a thing - it's another press label for us thick fucktards) are criminals - just like the rest of mankind.

Does that justify labelling the whole lot as frauds? I mean, if someone read a few of your posts and used the same logic we'd all be labelled sex-mad bum-raiding facial plasterers...

...erm

 

[old.Tohtori]

I see a pattern too Toht. One of ignorance.

We're not cutting down on pollution. The rate we're polluting the atmosphere is speeding up, not slowing.

Even Britain, since 1997, has gotten worse. And we only have to measure our cuts against "1990 levels".

Well, 1990 levels of pollution were pretty fucking high.

So compared to the industrial WW era, we're polluting more now?

There's more crap in the air that blocks the heat from the sun?

 

[Tom]

Yes, there most certainly is.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Yes, there most certainly is.

Would love to see some form of article or such about it.

Could you link one or point in the direction?

Honestly, interested, not a "nu-uh" post.

 

[Wij]

A tiny minority of "climate" scientists (if there is such a thing - it's another press label for us thick fucktards) are criminals - just like the rest of mankind.

Does that justify labelling the whole lot as frauds? I mean, if someone read a few of your posts and used the same logic we'd all be labelled sex-mad bum-raiding facial plasterers...

...erm

Nobody uses my posts as the basis for further predictions which all count towards the magic 'consensus' figure.

 

[Tom]

Would love to see some form of article or such about it.

Could you link one or point in the direction?

Honestly, interested, not a "nu-uh" post.

Go to your local library. Global consumption of oil, coal, gas, nuclear, and other forms of electricity has increased steadily over the last 50 years.

 

[rynnor]

We're in the middle of a massive extinction level event and you're quibbling over what "destruction" means? No-one's saying it's going to burn the face of the earth off...

The worst extinction event we are currently looking at is the Amphibians which isnt related to climate - dont get sucked into thinking global warming is the most important threat to the environment because it isnt.

However it is a threat that politicians recognise they can use to pass more taxes thus its been presented as the Uber threat.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Go to your local library. Global consumption of oil, coal, gas, nuclear, and other forms of electricity has increased steadily over the last 50 years.

That's not increased pollution though, you have to take into consideration the efforts to diminish pollutions as well.

The industrial era of the world war was one big hunk-a-junk of coal burning and spewing into the atmosphere.

 

[Vasconcelos]

So compared to the industrial WW era, we're polluting more now?

There's more crap in the air that blocks the heat from the sun?

By WW times, there werent this 2 mega economies like China and India.
Imo Its pretty much logical that we contaminate more than 50 years ago even if the Western economies have made advances in polution reductions

 

[rynnor]

By WW times, there werent this 2 mega economies like China and India.
Imo Its pretty much logical that we contaminate more than 50 years ago even if the Western economies have made advances in polution reductions

Well its actually a pretty complicated picture - first you need to classify pollutants - despite hysteria CO2 is not actually a pollutant so set that one aside.

If we look at radioactive pollution (from all the tests) then it peaked in the late 50s/60s so that one has gone down.

CFC's have now been banned so that ones gone down a lot.

We use nearly twice as much coal globally than we did in 1959 (though a lot less in europe than we did) so a lot more smog produced.

We no longer use a long list of the nastier insecticides like DDT (not even used in the developing world now) so that ones gone down.

Theres a lot more oestrogen in waste water due to the pill now but conversely many places have improved sewage treatment.

We no longer use lead in most car fuels but there are a hell of a lot more cars.

Its difficult to generalise - pick a specific pollutant?

 

[Scouse]

So compared to the industrial WW era, we're polluting more now?

Yes. Yes we are. By a fucking million miles. And it's accelerating - especially with countries like China bringing on 2 coal-fired power stations a week...

There's more crap in the air that blocks the heat from the sun?

Yes, there most certainly is.

No. There most certainly isn't.

By crap in the air I presume you mean particulate emissions. We've been reducing these for decades as public health demands it. However, carbon dioxide is a colourless, odourless gas...


Come on lads. Do you really think that an oversimplified viewpoint is going to be accurate? The whole debacle is shades of grey and the scientists are doing their best to figure it out - which is a load more than anyone else tbfh, so they shouldn't be getting slated for their effort.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Scouse, while toxins in the air do effect things, i meant simple un-complicated smoke from factory pipes

 

[Bodhi]

By crap in the air I presume you mean particulate emissions. We've been reducing these for decades as public health demands it. However, carbon dioxide is a colourless, odourless gas...

I'm sorry, but this CO2 business heats my urine to a tempterature that would REALLY kills some polar bears. CO2 occurs naturally in our atmosphere and, at the end of the day, a pretty useless Greenhouse Gas. Cows contribute more to climate warming change global than we do, but if you ask a cow to pay for bigger farts they'll just chew some grass and fart anyway. Yet if you cherry pick results to reach the conclusion you want you can brainwash masses of, what are supposedly a far more intelligent animal.

Pfft, this picture sums up my feelings.

 

[Scouse]

Pfft, this picture sums up my feelings

Which is pretty much what your argument is based on.

Glad you're not a scientist

 

[rynnor]

Which is pretty much what your argument is based on.

Glad you're not a scientist

Hes right tho - CO2 never was and never will be a pollutant - its essential to life on this planet.

Why not attack the number 1 greenhouse gas - water vapour - we can drain all the rivers and concrete over the sea's - job done

Anyway why talk of global warming when we are experiencing global cooling - crazy

 

[Bodhi]

Which is pretty much what your argument is based on.

Glad you're not a scientist

I'm glad you aren't either

 

[Wazzerphuk]

I'm sorry, but this CO2 business heats my urine to a tempterature that would REALLY kills some polar bears. CO2 occurs naturally in our atmosphere and, at the end of the day, a pretty useless Greenhouse Gas. Cows contribute more to climate warming change global than we do, but if you ask a cow to pay for bigger farts they'll just chew some grass and fart anyway. Yet if you cherry pick results to reach the conclusion you want you can brainwash masses of, what are supposedly a far more intelligent animal.

Pfft, this picture sums up my feelings.

Actually Bods, the majority of methane comes from a cow's mouth, not it's arse. But you're right, cows produce enormous amount of methane. That's our fault, not theirs though

 

[Ctuchik]

Actually Bods, the majority of methane comes from a cow's mouth, not it's arse. But you're right, cows produce enormous amount of methane. That's our fault, not theirs though

what he said

WE are breading the damn things out of proportions here


so....

its STILL our fault
and whenever mother nature decides to do something about it (mad cow disease for example) we step up and fuck that up, contributing even more to the problem by saving as many animals as possible.

 

[Tom]

WE are breading the damn things out of proportions here

You can never have too many beef sandwiches!

 

[Wij]

Switch to marsupial burgers.

Mmm - King Koala with cheese !

 

[Scouse]

Hes right tho - CO2 never was and never will be a pollutant - its essential to life on this planet.

Do we need to be making the "CO2's needed for human respiration and therefore can't be bad" argument? Of course it's essential. Doesn't mean too much of it is a good thing for maintaining the current climate in a state we like tho...

I'm glad you aren't either

Scouse, BSc Hons, lazy bastard.

 

[00dave]

Scouse, BSc Hons, lazy bastard.

What's your bronze swimming certificate got to do with anything?

 

[rynnor]

Do we need to be making the "CO2's needed for human respiration and therefore can't be bad" argument?

No because its nonsense - CO2 is needed by plants - not us.

Your idea of somehow maintaining the climate in a certain state is equally nonsense at this stage in human development.

Can we control el nino, the solar cycle, volcanoes etc. etc.

Its very human nature to get used to one set of circumstances and then expect it to go on forever but even our brief recorded history shows this to be wrong and the geological record shows incredible extremes in times past.

 

[Scouse]

No because its nonsense - CO2 is needed by plants - not us.

Actually rynnor, if there's no CO2 in the atmosphere we lose the feeling that you get when you think you're starved of oxygen that makes you breathe.

Carbon Dioxide is responsible for making you want to breathe in if you hold your breath - not lack of oxygen.

If you breathe a gas like pure nitrogen you can pass into unconciousness without ever feeling breathless....

....so next time you accuse someone of talking nonsense maybe you should look in ol 't mirrorz first

 

[Raven]

Its more the actual pollution i have a problem with, I would rather live in a clean environment that filthy chemical cesspool. Bodhi is right about the cows, though it is man that breeds the cows in such a large number which a lot of the Jeremy Clarkson fans fail to tell you.

The government have totally got the wrong end of the stick though, taxing stuff that may or may not have an effect on the environment is far easier than regulating and tidying up.

Air is made up of around 75% nitrogen, 20% Oxygen, the other 5% is made up of other gases CO2 and methane included, if there was such a massive problem with carbon dioxide and methane then I would expect the ratio to change, not sure I have seen anyone complain that it has changed.

Regardless a fair amount of methane is produced by the earth in underwater seeps, massive amounts of sulphur and CO2 are produced when a volcano goes up.

At the end of the day I believe humans have very little effect on global warming, though we have a massive effect on local ecology.

There is a theory that the dark ages, a period of slow plant growth and very little history or human advance were caused by a volcanic eruption, essentially a mini ice age.

 

[00dave]

You're also forgetting the large amounts of methane that escape large areas of ice as it melts. Old swamps long frozen rot away and produce the gas which sits in pockets under the ice.

YouTube - Burning Methane from Frozen Lake