Global Warming
- Thread starter speed
- Start date
Justin S.
Member
I think the biggest hurrdle to reaching some common ground on climite issues is that both prevailing attitides, like so much in modern debate, take extremes of opposite views and then run with it. All you get is polarization, not any reliable information.
Does climate change occur regardless of lifeforms present? Absolutely. Has humanity influenced the climate of the earth? Undenialbly. The events arent mutually exclusive, and the reality is a complex mixture of countless variables.
I remember reading an article linked to space.com from a more reputable journal that an interesting factor most people dont think of is: the Sun. The study was able to detect temperature rises on Mars, as well as variations in the gas content and weather patterns on the surface in the last 30 years. Certainly any variation in the Sun's output, even very small relative to its total, could have effects on what orbits it. Possibly one factor.
That aside, people who claim humans dont have much of an impact, dont understand how much 6.5 billion is, and what amount of mechanical infrastructure is needed to support it, all of which relies on energy harnessed from the environment. Take any variable you wish, a coefficient of 6,500,000,000 is a massive compounding force. Very few want to acknowledge this, especially due to society's "post-nazism" pathology.
Climate change and overpopulation go hand in hand, and we are powerless as long as we sidestep this fundmental problem. Even *if* humanity has very little role in the change (which I am highly skeptical of), it still cant adapt or effect it due to the burden of logistics (inflexibility). A "little Ice Age" like we experenced in the past centuries would be devastating to such a fragile system. Anything more would totally break it.
Does climate change occur regardless of lifeforms present? Absolutely. Has humanity influenced the climate of the earth? Undenialbly. The events arent mutually exclusive, and the reality is a complex mixture of countless variables.
I remember reading an article linked to space.com from a more reputable journal that an interesting factor most people dont think of is: the Sun. The study was able to detect temperature rises on Mars, as well as variations in the gas content and weather patterns on the surface in the last 30 years. Certainly any variation in the Sun's output, even very small relative to its total, could have effects on what orbits it. Possibly one factor.
That aside, people who claim humans dont have much of an impact, dont understand how much 6.5 billion is, and what amount of mechanical infrastructure is needed to support it, all of which relies on energy harnessed from the environment. Take any variable you wish, a coefficient of 6,500,000,000 is a massive compounding force. Very few want to acknowledge this, especially due to society's "post-nazism" pathology.
Climate change and overpopulation go hand in hand, and we are powerless as long as we sidestep this fundmental problem. Even *if* humanity has very little role in the change (which I am highly skeptical of), it still cant adapt or effect it due to the burden of logistics (inflexibility). A "little Ice Age" like we experenced in the past centuries would be devastating to such a fragile system. Anything more would totally break it.
Lord SteveO
Hero in a world of demons
I believe in climate change, as in the climate of the earth or parts of the earth is changing.
Global warming is actuallly happening, it has always happened, it how we get out of ice ages. The real debate "are human factors increasing the rate of global warming?" is what people should be talking about.
Even if human factors such as overuse of resourses, CO2 emissions and over population are having no affect on a natural warming process there is still a very real affect that is caused on the earth by our existance.
CO2 might not be a problem, it might not increase warming. But does that mean that it is ok the realese tonnes of CO2, methane, NOx, sulphur based gases, CFC's etc into our atmosphere? Does that also mean that removing huge areas of forest is ok? Does it mean we should allow human populations to expand exponentialiy, consumming all resources and leaving nothing but watse which must be burned or burried.
No matter what you think of global warming, nobody can deny that the human race has played a big part in messing up this planet, or at least bits of it. Is there not a time when we should all consider doingthings without causing so much damage and disturbance?
Global warming is actuallly happening, it has always happened, it how we get out of ice ages. The real debate "are human factors increasing the rate of global warming?" is what people should be talking about.
Even if human factors such as overuse of resourses, CO2 emissions and over population are having no affect on a natural warming process there is still a very real affect that is caused on the earth by our existance.
CO2 might not be a problem, it might not increase warming. But does that mean that it is ok the realese tonnes of CO2, methane, NOx, sulphur based gases, CFC's etc into our atmosphere? Does that also mean that removing huge areas of forest is ok? Does it mean we should allow human populations to expand exponentialiy, consumming all resources and leaving nothing but watse which must be burned or burried.
No matter what you think of global warming, nobody can deny that the human race has played a big part in messing up this planet, or at least bits of it. Is there not a time when we should all consider doingthings without causing so much damage and disturbance?
Susperia
Member
infoterror said:
I dont' think the term "climate change" is any more accurate than global warming. I mean, they both suggest a change in tempurate. Anyway, my point: the change in climate is only ONE effect of all this. Without a proper ozone layer around the earth, we CANNOT survive. People will get skin cancer by being in the sun, everything will die because the sun is so strong without that protective layer around our atmosphere.
I know that was said very simply, I don't know scientific terms, etc. But I think you will understand what I'm saying.
Lord SteveO
Hero in a world of demons
I get you. Even if global warming is bullshit, pumping hundreds of tonnes of poinsonous gases intothe air and dumping waste inot rivers, lakes, oceans etc is not a good idea. It still messes the palce up and harms us in the end.
Susperia
Member
Susperia
Member
Susperia said:
We're saying the same thing: climate is more than temperature, and there's a lot of other stuff besides warming-cooling that's going to afflict us.
And hopefully, kill the dumber among us off!
The Winnipeg Warrior
The Winnipeg Warrior ®
Susperia said:
.....I remember years ago listening to a prominent female.....Sigourney Weaver or Jodie Foster I think.....who stated that this world would be far better off if it just burned up and consumed us in the process. Because the planet would eventually re-evolve, cleanse itself, and re-generate to where it was before.....or take on a new life of it's own. Because the planet would recover on it's own.
I fully agree and get your point. And to quote Queen:
Is This The World We Created (Mercury/May)
"Is this the world we created
We made it on our own
Is this the world we devastaded
Right to the bone
If there's a God in the sky looking down
What can he think of what we've done
To the world that He created."
