If global warming is true or not we still need to switch to Green fuels because the oil and natural gas fields are drying up and the demand goes up but the supply goes down. if a F3+ hurricane hit the gulf the gas prices would easy go over $4 a gallon nation wide, so imagine if the oil fields started to dry up completly and there was a very low supply of oil?
Things you can do that are simple to keep the planet healthy
1: buy compact light bulbs - can save $50 a year per light and keep the airs cleaner, no matter how ugly they are you should buy them over the regular light bulbs if you care about the future of earth
2: buy a hybrid or a car/truck that gets 50+ MPG (hybrids save more money in the price of gas then it cost to replace the battery) so they help the planet and help keep more money in your wallet
3: keep the garbage down in your house to keep the landfills less full.
4: contact your power company to find out if Green power is in the area where you live.
IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OR EVEN GRANDCHILDREN OR CARE ABOUT OUR PLANET DO THESE 4 STEPS..OR DO EVEN MORE.
1: buy compact light bulbs - can save $50 a year per light and keep the airs cleaner, no matter how ugly they are you should buy them over the regular light bulbs if you care about the future of earth
2: buy a hybrid or a car/truck that gets 50+ MPG (hybrids save more money in the price of gas then it cost to replace the battery) so they help the planet and help keep more money in your wallet
3: keep the garbage down in your house to keep the landfills less full.
4: contact your power company to find out if Green power is in the area where you live.
Do you have proof global warming? It has been proven that just throwing out those compact light bulbs is damaging to the environment. Yes they do save on $ but what is more important. You have good intentions but before you take for granted of what you hear, try to understand what is happening.
If one is concerned about light and the future of the earth one should understand that conpact light bulbs contain mercury. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=7431198 I cite NPR because they're not usually considered some sort of group 'in bed with big oil'.
Hybrids?
"A lot of people equate hybrids with great fuel economy. And while that may be true in some cases, it's not always accurate, says Phil Reed of Edmunds.com.
Performance hybrids, for example, don't necessarily save you more gas than a traditional car. Plus, hybrids are notoriously far off from the miles per gallon, or MPG rating, designated by the EPA. For example, the Toyota Prius was given an MPG rating of 60, but in real-world testing that number was more like 43 MPG, according to Edmunds.com."
While those MPG ratings are still higher than most non-hybrids, the idea remains that you're not going to be saving loads of money in the end.
But your idea is correct (though the execution was fumbled): Use logic and the idea of the pocket book to convince people - not scare tactics about dead penguins or polar bears. Those things aren't going to convince me humans are the cause since Mars has melting ice caps as well...
No one really knows how much oil there is int he world, the only thing we estimate is proven oil reserves (i.e.: those found). With technology and the demand for more, who is to say that more will not be found (as more has been found every year historically)? No, I'd not rely on oil forever, but the idea that tomorrow we'll be dry is unfounded.
"True or not" is a strange way to try to convince someone of a point though.
Precisely! Just because some people say Global Warming is false doesn't mean that we can just stand around and watch while earth goes to hell in a handbasket!
Also, if it's true volcanos put more toxic material(CFC's) into the atmosphere than humans could ever hope (not) to, then it's a moot point then. Think of all the eruptions since Krakatau blew its top in Aug. of 1883.
I concur, with the title of this document. We would be arrogant and self absorded if we did not weigh the fact that this could be possibly happening. If we take a moment and stand back, trying to figure this out. We get contradictory facts told to us; Such as volcanos and what not and we couldnt do as much damage as nature would. Well in thinking like that it is possible to fathom that could be true, meteor for one that would put hole in something. As I am not a scientist with absolute fact and only relative to theory and opinion base I guess I would have to use some common sense to feel whether it is a true concern of ours. So lets take in some simple facts, found on the web (using the first or second one, found for info): 1 billion in 1804 - 6 billion in 1999 -[http://bioweb.wku.edu/courses/Biol115/wyatt/Population/pop1.htm] This would explain many species going extinct and declining numbers. My sense of it is, you can only fit so much in the bottle. In saying that I mean we take something elses habitat for our own. ( On a side note seems getting actual numbers is hard to do, since it seems noone really knows whole lot about total world numbers) So I guess Ill do some low esitimation hopefully that seems rather logical and self explanatory. So lets begin our estimation of the crisis. having used google earth before I gone over the continents a few times I would have to say we have removed about 4% of the Earths greenspace. As well i consider anything green Green space grass etc. Interesting notes found along my search. (The world's cattle alone consumed enough to feed 8.7 billion humans. ...http://food.netscape.com/story/2007/06/24/the-fight-for-the-worlds-food) interesting thing I ran across) Cars - "A 1997 report claimed that in that year, over 600 million motor vehicles existed in the world. " http://ask.yahoo.com/20061013.html. http://geography.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=..._facts_030722-1.html
As the search engine google angers me for not finding the relative data I require to make an approriate asumption I have to think about this logically since noone really seems to come with indisbutble fact in this matter that I can find at the time of delving myself into this topic.
Ill compare pollution to lets say us a human. So lets say nature pollutes alot but all at once like single 24hr-flu (major disasters) with the occasional itch/pimple from a fire(little natural diasters). Now lets add dangerous bacteria to the equation. A steady bacteria deposit in one area of your body builds up. Your immune system helps to manage the bacteria but is unable to sufficiently eliminate enough of it to keep it from continuing to grow. Growing so much that the body itself then dies and thus the world. Now how do we go about fixing this problem with the body, we can try to find a solution to this problem or we can sufer the logical fate of what would happen if this bacteria is allowed to continue to grow. We may not be in global warming but we most certainly are on our way there, so after careful decision in my own opinion, is it so hard to care of the only planet we have. Its as important as our body and we kinda need to live in our planet, right? In forsight it would be in our best interests to do things RIGHT now rather then later. Cause we all no last minute shaningins can go to hell in hand basket some time. ^.-! Eh scienceguy^^
well I stumbled across this late at night took sometime to reply to this. hopefully its not garbled as I am tired. zzzzzzz JE
At first I thought it arrogant of Man that he could cause Global Warming. However, look at what Man has accomplished that at one time was considered impossible: Ø He has changed the course of rivers, Ø … Dug paths though mountains, Ø … Plumbed the depths of the sea, Ø … Climbed, not to the top of the world, but to touch the Moon itself. Ø … Man has also even split the atom, unleashing forces beyond comprehension. Perhaps the arrogance is not that Man could cause Global Warming, but that nothing he does has any impact on the Earth. –One need not know how a clock works to stop it running.
Any possible bad science aside, I think the ideas and suggestions to use renewable resources, clean up the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the environment in general, are not such bad ideas anyway.
Clearly, global warming is anthropogenic (man-made). It exists mainly in the human mind and is manufactured from two sources – careless data acquisition and dubious data processing.
Note the recent "correction" in the temperature data that push 1998 out of the top position for hottest and made 1934 the hottest year. Even though the change was small it shows just how poor the base data is that all the computer models are based on. Even good non political scientist will come up with the wrong answer if the raw data is bad.
The US and US companies spends billions of dollars on foreign oil! We can have all the energy we need and want by using solar power, water power and wind power. Especially sun, because it will aways be there, atleast for another few billion years. This is a tremendous amount of energy hitting the earth. Its, monetarily, free energy, once the proper installations are in order.
