have all the scientist lost their mind..none of the ideas on this show make any sense. have they forgotten the ice age? what caused it? a meteor strike caused a large dust cloud, right? well, you take a large cargo plane (ie. C-5 galaxy) and spreed ash in the atmosphere over the polar caps, blocking the sun and causing it to refreeze. duh!!
added poss. benefit of the ash attaching to the carbon in the atmosphere and pulling it down and locking it away in the ice. not sure if that would work, but something that could be looked into.
Now i have a serious concern about reversing the damage to our world that has been done so far. Our eco system has had hundereds of years to adapt,change it's own behavior, and try to overcome what we as humans have done. My question is, if we try to undo the damage so quickly, might our eco system not be able to handle or have time to adapt to the new clean changes we will be making? If you think about it,the time that the eco system had to adapt to the severe climate change and particals in the atmosphere was great, and we will reverse it in about 10% of the time. I believe that life will go into a catastrophic collapse; photosyntheses,marine life, and all that is still holding on to the way the earth is right now. It is possible that it wont, but the dramatic change could through our enviroment for a loop. Please give feedback and i would very much appreciate a scientist explain to m how this could not happen. THANKS
5 Million <a href="http://www.5milliongreenjobs.org">Green Jobs</a> in the US - pretty cool. Hurry and submit your resume for these jobs on this portal http://www.5MillionGreenJobs.org . These are well paying job and will revitalize our economy and the world. Go Green Go USA.
1) the "Average Global tempature" and it's trend of getting "gloabally hooter" is statistical via adding up all the select weather stations temaptuer over the year then divinding it to get the "AGT" and the trend is too easily manipulatable by including or excluding stations
I think the IPCC report uses 40? stations for the whole world. Hardly a good representation
Plus they fail to mention the Margin of error which is -5f to +5f cause of regular tempature swings that can and does happen thus the .5f drop form one source and the 1.4f rise 150 years in IPPC 3rd preport and .75f rise in 150 years in IPPC 4th report are actually all in the Margin of error
3) THe Global Average Tempature or the trend being thumped on is't "Climate" which is the effect of weather on a local ecosystem over a great deal off time
There us no such thing as "Global Climate Change". tempature and Climate are not inter-related
I live in Hawaii and we were as cold as we are now in the 70's, were warming in the 80's,got really hot in the 90's and are now cold again but we are still a "tropical Climate"
Likewise despite the Snow in Vegas the last couple years Las Vegas is still a "Desert Climate"
3) Co2 does not heat the air, GHG theory is disproven
Svante theorized that Co2 and other GHG gase coujld heat the air because the only thing he noticed about Ice ages taht was unusual in the ICe core records was a lack of CO2 and the other GHG gases and theorized that IF thier absence caused Ice ages then maybye adding more may raise tempature
Problem here is that we have gone from 180ppm before the Industrial revolution to 390ppm this year, thus Doubling Co2 which according to CO2 doomsdayers should have caused our tempature rise to be +20f, but instead the Red river is rising and they just got hit by a snow blizzard a week into spring while it is in the high 70's here in Hawaii,formally the high 90's in the 90's (Global warming...pfft)
3) Co2 can hold about 5f degrees more thermal heat then Air at 100% Co2, but cannot make Heat from IR rays, or asor mre heat then the heat source
The heat source is the Sun
Ir rays are not heat, but one kind of radiation a thermally heated body emmits
Humans emmit IR cause we are "IR red hot" in some spots
The Sun is "Gamma ray hot" thus emmits the whole radio wave spectrum in addition to it's 7500f Solar wind
Our major defence against the Solar Wind is Earths Electromagnetic field that deflects the bulk of the radiation
Below that is the Thermosphere that catches any remaining heat,Menosphere who is as cold as -133f,Stratosphere whos top is 133f withot co2 and 32f where it touches the Tropposphere,and troposhpere which is 32f despite co2 top through bottom and heated to different tempatures near the surface as Heat is conducted from the Surface to the Air via Humidity(water vapor %) and the evaporation/precipitation cycle
4) The Earth Core is sensitive to orbit and Planetary bodies
change in orbit, we are closer to the sun then we have wever been in 33,000 years...this is what the Mayan long calander is based on and the effects it has is and increase the tempature extremes as the temparate lines changes
1) More earthquakes,as predicted by Mayans whic will also cause a axis tilt of 1/2 degree causing more extrem winters and Summers and allow for the sun to rise up the spine of the Milky way on Dec 21,2012
2) More volcanic erruption, as predicted by Mayans, especially in the deep sea
3) the Weakening of the magnetic field that lets more radiation through the EM field that heats the surface more thus more extreme storms...as predicted by the Mayans
In the Deep sea there is c13 Co2 hydrate that can be dislodged by all the earthquake ans volcanic activity. This acidfies the oceans then join the c12 co2 that rides the Evaporation/precipitation cycle thus the measurable increas in c13 to c12 co2 levels that is blames on fossil fuels that supposedly contain c13 co2 or makes it (It doesn't, gasoline only has c7,c11,andc12 carbon chains)
So unless we can figure a way to pull the earth back from the sun to stablize the EM field to stop the extra radiation from getting in, we cant stop the "global Warming"
But if it is any consellation, like how the 11 year calander rotates and the 33 year calander rotates, the 33,000 year calander actually rotates too and goes back to the year 0 and earth will slowly pull away from the sun and the "global Warming" will stop happening all on it's own
Originally posted by TheRealArchAngel: There is a few problems
For brevity....
I believe we are accelerating the heating of the atmosphere because underground, there's crude oil, which our cars depend on in order to run, at least the older ones...Now, remember the "Industrial Revolution"? It kicked started this warming, because we depleted the oil, which came from the dinos, and that is why there's lots of oil sands in Alberta. Now, do you see this long pipeline going from beaufort sea to southern provinces? You should check the weather temperature at the western arctic and some experts are wondering why it has recently rose in it's temperatures. This extraction should explain, but stubborn experts fail to see it. We should stop extracting crude oil.....
Posts: 41 | Location: Barrenlands, Hudson Bay | Registered: 01-23-09
Well, the whole issue is completely irrelevant. We'll run out of oil eventually, so why not start replacing the technology now while it's not imperative.
Posts: 4301 | Location: A small irrelevant blue dot on the edge of a vast, black ocean | Registered: 11-04-08
Well, the whole issue is completely irrelevant. We'll run out of oil eventually, so why not start replacing the technology now while it's not imperative.
They were supposed to start doing that thirty years ago. Do you have any idea why the DOE was founded?
There are small things that you can do to lessen the requirements for oil. But right now, you can not get completely off of oil without increasing the costs to the government, providers, and consumers by many times what they pay now. Nor will you be able to do so in the near to late future.
Nuke could alievate many of our problems, but that would take several decades, and we would still need hydrocarbons. Though you won't be seeing any new nuke faciliaties anytime soon. Why you ask?
None of these government types that harp on AGW really care to do anything about it. They only care to make tolken gestures to please their interest groups.
okay I think that scientists loose there brains and everything is simplicity rather then complexity. plants,tree's grass are basic air cleaners taking out of the air what kills us. But plants use the things that are bad for air breathing creatures and replace it with things that keep air breathing creatures alive. We as humans are adding way to much carbon deposits into the air then the green plants can get rid of. And with us cutting tree's down and plants and other plants that get rid of carbons it gets worse. So heres a simple suggestion to scrub the air of the carbons and since it would be alot faster then waiting for a tree to grow. Build air scrubbers to take out the bad and leave the good. And since we are using more oxygen in every application from breathing to gas driven items it is depleting the ozone layer since ozone is comprised mostly of oxygen which we are taken from that also. So when you get down to it what we need to do is release oxygen back into the air, make air scrubbers to take the carbons out of the air. Use the oxygen machines to replace the oxygen into the air. and in no time you will see the ozone layer return and the weather will be back to stable conditions that were used to. Less droughts and polar ice caps returning and the world we know as it once was will be back. Then in that time we can get on track with electric cars using solar and wind and water to create electricity. And find new ways to make buildings out of carbon resin plastics and stop the use of tree's. I dont understand what the problem is, its right in front of everyones face but I guess people are too blinded
Hot gasses coming out of your car oxidize into carbon monoxide.
Back in the day cars had cataylst converters that turned carbon monoxide into CO2. But in 94 they changed it, so now the emmisions control box catches almost all of the bad stuff before it can oxidize into carbon monoxide. What little gets past it is not CO2 but carbon monoxide, which is chemically stable and can't oxidize into CO2. Without that catalyst converter the only way your car is going to produce CO2 is by secondary fusion.
It's data from 2000, but it's still since your 1994 everything changed statement. CO2 is the main component listed, though they didn't list water vapor which is another major part of a cars exhaust.
quote:
Yes, it is toxic to humans. I can agree with you on that. However, it is not a greenhouse gas.
Please remember that this discussion is on global warming, not health concerns due to smog.
quote:
So, we can rule out our cars as something that is making our planet warmer.
Care to take a guess at what else isn't making our planet warm?
Now, please go back and read my previous post again.
I did, your statement is wrong. (except for the fact that I believe that we are having little effect on temperature)
I guess your not understanding what I was trying to say. We as humans are using up oxygen faster then it is being replaced. ok lets try this out there are roughly 450 milion passenger cars in the world. A cars engine lets say a chevy 350 at idle(700RPM) uses 53.2608 CFM now at 3000RPM now goes to 228.2608 per minute. Now times that by the 450 million cars in the world you get 102,717,360,000 Cubic feet per minute used to drive your car now times that by say 20 minute drive to work 2,054,347,200,000 and that is just the car usage. Thats formula does not include any other driving just strictly 1 use per day per passenger vehicle Lets not forget everything else that uses oxygen even oxygen breathing creatures. So basically we need to find a way to stop using oxygen period for any combustion engine in the world. And we need to do it now or there wont be a tomorrow least one that we can breathe in
Now i have a serious concern about reversing the damage to our world that has been done so far. Our eco system has had hundereds of years to adapt,change it's own behavior, and try to overcome what we as humans have done.