Can I blame you for Global Warming?

[Yuna7780]

Originally Posted by MMM

I wasn't being rude at all.

You spoke with authority: "Global Warming is BS".

That is interesting to me when professional and layperson's opinion tend to swing the other way.

It's like saying "Gravity is BS" in my head.

So what books have you read?

My dad gave me a few years back called "Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths" and when I get bored, I flip through my dad's books in his office.

EDIT: I don't really want to write much more in this thread because I don't want to fight with anybody.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Yuna7780

My dad gave me a few years back called "Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths" and when I get bored, I flip through my dad's books in his office.

EDIT: I don't really want to write much more in this thread because I don't want to fight with anybody.

If you are going to come in and say "I think global warming is a myth, and here is why..." then that works.

If you just say "Global Warming is BS" and then walk away, it doesn't work so well.

And we have gone from "I have read a few books" to you flipping through a book a few years old.

I am not trying to pick on you, Yuna, but this is how Internet discussions go.

[MMM]

ANd Yuna, here is a quote from John Bailey, the author of 2002's "Global Warming and Other Eco-Myths".

Anyone still holding onto the idea that there is no global warming ought to hang it up. All data sets—satellite, surface, and balloon—have been pointing to rising global temperatures. In fact, they all have had upward pointing arrows for nearly a decade...

This was only a couple years after the book published:

We're All Global Warmers Now: Reconciling temperature trends that are all over the place - Reason Magazine

[MMM]

I don't like graphs that don't start at Zero.

Anything can look dramatic when your range is 320 to 380.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Nevertheless, it is a rise of what, 20%? It won't start at zero, because nature does contribute CO2 herself. To start at zero you would have to go back at least 4.5 billion years...

I just want to know where it came from. He says we only contribute 0.12% of the CO2. Does that mean that the natural causes have increased by 20%? Or is it more plausible that we have bumped it up, and we are responsible for somewhat 30% of CO2 levels?

I am not disagreeing with you, and I am not saying the starting point must be "zero". I am saying graphs that don't have "zero" as a baseline throw up a red flag to me.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

I know what you mean. I don't think it is the case here, but.

The graph is only designed to show the rise, and a rise of some 20% is actually quite a large one.

fair enough.....

[noodle]

Originally Posted by Tenchu

Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 22 billion tonnes per year. Human activities release more than 150 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes; the equivalent of nearly 17,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea.

Where did you get these numbers from? I've seen a lot of stats from pro and con man made global warming groups and none have ever been as far fetched as this... 22gigatons by humans? The only time I've seen a number like this is when they haven't accounted for how much has been taken back by nature! Even then, your number seems to have a factor of 2 higher than anything I've seen!

As far as I can tell you got these numbers from Yahoo answers or Wikianswers. Not from a sound scietific report!

[Mazen]

Well, simply replying the question of the topic: Yes, you can blame me.
Everyone of us is to blame, and maybe some luxurious socieities don't feel how awful human beigns are, because they are blinded by luxury and they need to defend it against all the strikes from ( Save The Earth ) protestors.
I live in a city which has changed dramatically within 50 years, from a paradise drinking from 7 rivers, to semi-desert land, predicted to be a desert by 20 years, green areas reduced to 10% to provide every family with a house. I think it's a synchronous incident: Population Explosion with Global Warming...maybe.
But who's to blame ? Mankind has chosen its way and followed his own Chaos Theory in reproduction, commerce, industry and everything. He has found answers for many questions, but still doesn't know what the hell is going on around him ???!!! How shameful, we don't know whether it's because of our deeds or a periodic phenomenon happening every 300 years ??
... Mistuned ideas propelling inside our minds when we think about our planet, lost between science and believe, but fear is controlling our situation and we don't know where we're going.

[zed]

Originally Posted by Sangetsu

There is no such thing as non-degradable waste. Some waste takes longer to degrade than others, but it all eventually degrades. I agree that pollution is a problem, but we aren't talking about plastic or paper here, we are talking about global warming.

Co2 is not a pollutant. It is necessary to life, as plants breathe it as we breathe oxygen. It does not cause respiratory problems, it does not cause sickness, and, it does not cause global warming.

The current levels of Co2 in the air are as low as 1% of their levels at other times in history, and the world is still around, isn't it?

You aren't even educated enough to spell "break" properly, come back in a few years when you've learned enough to speak coherently about the subject.

As for cars producing Co2, the average car produces less than 1/3 the amount of Co2 that the average house does. If you really want to reduce Co2 you should be living in your car.

First of all, thank you for noticing my "brake" error, I will try to make sure it does not happen again,also you have to check my signature, and I want to point out that, that does not undermines my capacity of reasoning, my ability to comprehend or understand the subject nor my inteligence, logic or judgement. if you got so pissed off for one misspelled word there is something wrong with you.
now back to the subject.
I will say that Global Warming is not real only for those who have been misinformed,
All the sientists that you have to back you up are been paid by the oil and coil industries.
here are some examples:

all started with this.

In 2003 Frank Luntz (a pollster consultant) adviced Republican politiciansto cultivate the uncerttainty about climate change.
quote "Therefore you need to continue make lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate","

-Beteen 2000 and 2003 ExxonMobil gave more than $8.6 million to anti-Kioto organizations.
-Even the "Friends of Science" who are supoused to be independent are geting the money from oil companies.
in a very clever way. they recieve it from a charitabe org. via the Science Education Fund at the Calgary University. Were the oil industry conviniently makes donations.
-Sallie Baulinas, a senior Scientist and an Anti-kioto, recieves money from ExxonMobile.
-Fred Singer, received over $20,000 only acording to one oil company.and he is also linked to Exxon, Shell,Arco,Unlocal,Sun Energy and The American Gas Assosiation.

And the list goes on and on.
As Charls Montgomery (jounalist) said
"Those groups promote the minority of scientists who still dispute the IPCC consensus on climate change, creating the appearance of widespread scientific disagreement."
all this to fight government regulations that will cost alot of money to the oil and coil industry

ha. talking about making richer the rich,

I must say you have been tricked into denying what is infront of your eyes.
Or maybe your mouth is where your interests are, only you know, but you have come only to create more desinformation.
You just lost all credibility.

if you want to get more info about how it's all been cooked up by the oil and coil industries visit this site.
<mrcool>
and read it since you have been answering without checking my references.


And thanks Aniki for sticking out for me while I was away.

[zed]

Originally Posted by Sangetsu

There is no such thing as non-degradable waste. Some waste takes longer to degrade than others, but it all eventually degrades. I agree that pollution is a problem, but we aren't talking about plastic or paper here, we are talking about global warming.

Co2 is not a pollutant. It is necessary to life, as plants breathe it as we breathe oxygen. It does not cause respiratory problems, it does not cause sickness, and, it does not cause global warming.

The current levels of Co2 in the air are as low as 1% of their levels at other times in history, and the world is still around, isn't it?

As for cars producing Co2, the average car produces less than 1/3 the amount of Co2 that the average house does. If you really want to reduce Co2 you should be living in your car.

Co2 is not pollutant?

you say that Co2 concentration is at 1%, lets say I buy it, the maximum safe amount for humans is 0.01% (by OSHA and NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health )

also this is what it causes: Symptoms of high or prolonged exposure to carbon dioxide include headache, increased heart rate, dizziness, fatigue, rapid breathing, visual and hearing dysfunctions. Exposure to higher levels may cause unconsciousness or death within minutes of exposure.

looks like you are just talking like you heard it somewere without making the proper research.