Keira Forums - View Single Post - Global Warming - Fact or Fiction?
View Single Post
Old 20-06-2006, 09:44 AM   #96
dave's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 8000 feet up in the Jemez Mountains of New Mexico
Posts: 271
Originally Posted by Foeni
There's no such thing as global warming. Chuck Norris was cold so Chuck Norris turned the sun up.

On topic: I believe global is a problem growing bigger. Partially because of man. Letting out too much CO2 to the atmosphere.
Please note that the greenhouse gasses that FlightFreak and the Scientists are worried about is no longer CO2. Everybody seems to agree that the minuscule amount of CO2 that civilization has added is not 'The Problem.' It is a major part of the smog problems, but not the atmosphere's problems. The Earth has had many epochs in the past where CO2 levels were much higher than they are now.

Also, there actually is a Solar heating cycle going on right now which many Scientists believe is a major part of the problem. (Along with the water in the atmosphere trapping more of the infra-red. However most Scientists admit that the infra-red was always 100% captured and thus, the additional infra-red being cast off by the Solar Cycle we are currently experiencing is the villain. But there's little we can do about that except finding some way to cool the sun. or perhaps eliminating all fireplaces and coal fired power plants! ) (Which, since the Japanese use Nuclear Power Plants, they believe is trivial for the rest of the world, hence the Kyoto Accords.)
Originally Posted by Flightfreak
If the current warming trends hold on it would result in a catastrophic global sea level rise of several meters.I’ve read the study delivered by Patterson at the Risk in 2004 and this was his conclusion:

In conclusion, the geologic record clearly shows us that there really is little correlation between CO2 levels and temperature. Although CO2 can have a minor influence on global temperature the effect is minimal and short lived as this cycle sits on top of the much larger water cycle, which is what truly controls global temperatures. The water cycle is in turn primarily influenced by natural celestial cycles and trends.

There are lot of parameters that influence the way someone should interpret the results of this study. Nor does Patterson deny that human activities would influence global warming. He just questions the importance of CO2 in global warming. He also does not deny that human activities made us more vulnerable for the sun’s radiation, what he says is the leading factor for our climate.Several studies point that out, take the effort to read some.
Greenhouse gasses adapt Infrared from the sun and defuses ultra violet, the ultraviolet radiation gets adapted by the earth surface and turns it back to the atmosphere as infrared where the greenhouse gasses adapt it again.

The ozone layer has as purpose to adapt the ultraviolet radiation of the sun, but human activity (CFC’s) demolish that ozone layer, so thus more UV gets through…
I question that UV hitting the ground is rebroadcast back into the air as infra-red. I suspect it is just absorbed. (Which might be a partial explanation why the ground is heating up faster than the atmosphere. Oh Right, the people who made the original report changed their input data to eliminate that little problem. They found an 'explanation' and merely changed the data to match their explanation, like any true Scientist would do... :fencing: )

Originally Posted by Foeni
We should be better at finding alternative energy sources like ethanol. And governments should be better at supporting this.
Ethanol produces as much CO2 as gasoline I think. Ethanol is recommended to eliminate the smog. An entirely different discussion.

I tried to get Peter to come on this board and add to the discussion, but I haven't heard back from him. He and I don't always agree about this stuff, but he is much more knowledgeable about it than I. (You'll recognize his style if he posts here, I'm fairly certain.)

Originally Posted by Foeni
I'm normally a supporter of my government, but on this they've haven't done enough. Danish scientists know a lot about using ethanol as fuel, but they are not doing anything about it because of taxes. It's being taxed as liquor. I know taxed probably isn't the right word, but I don't know what's correct....
Road Taxes are still Taxes.

"Le uova non devono ballare con le pietre."
"Eggs have no business dancing with stones" from the movie "Shoot 'Em Up"
dave is offline   Reply With Quote