Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The Great Global Warming a.k.a "Climate Change" Thread and The "Science" Behind It...... Conspiracy Theory or Fact???
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Great Global Warming a.k.a "Climate Change" Thread and The "Science" Behind It......... - Page 2  

post #16 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudu View Post

The amount of research on this is legion. It matters not a smidgen what is presented in any film.

Whether or not global warming is going to affect our current image of the world deserves the same consideration and discussion as topics such as Is the Earth older than 6500 years?, How do seashells end up on top of mountains?, and Flat or Round ... you decide.

What to do about it is another matter.


So MIT scientists/ professors, etc that specializes in this field is not worth a damn "smidgen" as well, huh? Why do people judge things without even watching it 1st, it's akin to dismissing/ praising a iem or headphone cuz you read what others said/ wrote about it without ever trying it/ owning it yourself.

 

Exactly so can that so called carbon tax/ credit system do ANYTHING to curtail CO2 emissions if countries such as China is not held up to it??? And rich countries/ corporations can basically buy their rights to pollute from poorer/ less industrialized nations, hence further stagnating their industrial development??? Something is not right here, seems more like a pyramid scheme to me. Folks austerity measures are not fun and is nothing to look forward to, just look a nations such as Iceland and Greece today.

post #17 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfwalcer View Post


So MIT scientists/ professors, etc that specializes in this field is not worth a damn "smidgen" as well, huh? Why do people judge things without even watching it 1st, it's akin to dismissing/ praising a iem or headphone cuz you read what others said/ wrote about it without ever trying it/ owning it yourself.

...

If it's part of an attempt to use selective information to push an argument - then nope, not worth anything. That ain't science.

Also you seem to assume that anyone who hasn't watched these two particular films has no background or familiarity with the topic.
post #18 of 51
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudu View Post


If it's part of an attempt to use selective information to push an argument - then nope, not worth anything. That ain't science.

Also you seem to assume that anyone who hasn't watched these two particular films has no background or familiarity with the topic.


Welp, alls i am saying is that there are a lot of experts presented in those 2 films who specializes in this field of research. And that the lay person is not gonna take their time to read scientific papers on this topic. So those films are the best way to get started. Hey i am no expert but i have looked at both sides of the argument and i know where i stand regarding global warming.

 

Not judging anyone on what their "background" is here, but just try to present your arguments without having to say things like this is "stupid", etc like that tangster poster. At least say something constructive my god. And that open block was funny, like really??? haha


Edited by sfwalcer - 3/6/13 at 1:24am
post #19 of 51
My point of view is that the time for honestly discussing the validity of global warming passed us a long time ago. Getting drawn into such discussions serves only to obfuscate and delay public acceptance of an unpopular reality. The right discussion is one that tries to address the issue

Like with evolution and creation, pretending that both sides deserve serious consideration is the last refuge of a side which needlessly cannot accept an overwhelming body of scientifically accepted evidence. Only here we are switching faith for finance.
post #20 of 51

It's funny that in 1,000AD the earth temp was warm enough that Greenland was able to grow grapes and olives.

In  circa 1400AD  the Thames river froze over 4 years running.

 

What caused that?

 

I am old enough to remember when all the climate modellers said we're going into another ice age.

 

The ozone hole is supposed to be caused by CFC's getting up there. They are from 5 to 9 times heavier than air, so normal convection currents can't get them up there to do the damage.

 

The northern and southern sections of the atmosphere don't mix very much to the point that a nuclear war in the northern hemisphere would not pollute the southern atmosphere except in trace amounts.

The only real hazard to the south is from ocean currents bringing the radiation down.

 

Most of the world's atmospheric pollution by far is in the northern hemisphere and yet the largest polar ozone hole is in the southern hemisphere. How does that happen ?????

 

If you want to research the ozone hole scam, do some research on Dupont and their problem with CFC's coming out of patent and into public domain.

post #21 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudu View Post

My point of view is that the time for honestly discussing the validity of global warming passed us a long time ago. Getting drawn into such discussions serves only to obfuscate and delay public acceptance of an unpopular reality. The right discussion is one that tries to address the issue

Like with evolution and creation, pretending that both sides deserve serious consideration is the last refuge of a side which needlessly cannot accept an overwhelming body of scientifically accepted evidence. Only here we are switching faith for finance.

This. Along with everything else you've said.

But as long as all the rats are fussing over WHY the ship is sinking, and more importantly who should be blamed for it, the other animals have an easier path to the exit. wink.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by sfwalcer View Post


So MIT scientists/ professors,

Might wanna also continue the story, where said MIT professor files a formal complaint stating that his involvement in the film mis-represents his perspectives and opinions. rolleyes.gif

Don't believe me?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/mar/11/broadcasting.science
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/binaries/enforcement/broadcast-bulletins/obb114/issue114.pdf
Edited by obobskivich - 3/6/13 at 7:02am
post #22 of 51

no clue why this thread was created only caught drift of this from the rap sucks thread, anyway since you want me here

 

earth don't give a single ... about its inhabitants, you can try to "save" it all you want, it will get its **** together by itself...eventually, bigger threat in totally messing earth with is probably excessive nuking

 

something amusing about the study in Inconvenient Truth: studying everything that can cause this "global warming" with the conclusion that CO2 as a big player, fails to look at the biggest producer of heat...the sun, if there could be a bigger player in heating this tiny planet in comparison to it, I would put my bets on the behaviour of the sun's release of energy...I can go extensively in this theory but logic to me says it can account to 95% of the warming

 

basically, global warming can be a fact at this point but pointing the reason to CO2 is retarded, any politician lobbying this as worth while issue is lacks scientifical background (as usual) or critical thinking (as usual as well)

 

edit:lol at you getting blocked


Edited by KamijoIsMyHero - 3/6/13 at 12:01pm
post #23 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KamijoIsMyHero View Post

 

fails to look at the biggest producer of heat...the sun, if there could be a bigger player in heating this tiny planet in comparison to it, I would put my bets on the behaviour of the sun's release of energy...I can go extensively in this theory but logic to me says it can account to 95% of the warming

 

 

 

 

OpoQQ.jpg

 

 

 

jackie-chan-are-you-serious.png

post #24 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

 

OpoQQ.jpg

 

 

 

jackie-chan-are-you-serious.png

reply to my post or a meme for that statement?

post #25 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KamijoIsMyHero View Post

reply to my post or a meme for that statement?

 

Bro, no sane individual is arguing the source of the heat. What we're saying is that these emissions are destroying the protective barrier that filters out most of the sun's radiation. Then, these gases also trap the heat (yes, from the sun) inside the earth in the same way that a lid would affect a pot on a stove.

post #26 of 51

I have a link for the op

 

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/start-here/

 

instead of watching your movies, read that site, all of it

post #27 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

Bro, no sane individual is arguing the source of the heat. What we're saying is that these emissions are destroying the protective barrier that filters out most of the sun's radiation. Then, these gases also trap the heat (yes, from the sun) inside the earth in the same way that a lid would affect a pot on a stove.

 

 

I am pretty sure I said behavior of the heat energy released, are you under the assumption the sun's heat emission is always constant or something? Although you can model it that way, the behavior is most certainly not. I am with the theory that the sun is emitting more heat than normal at this time which make it seem the barrier is not doing its job. These people called scientist trained in critical thinking are proposing their theory that CO2 are to blame, that's one way to account for the rising temperature. Its not the only one though.

post #28 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by KamijoIsMyHero View Post

 

 

I am pretty sure I said behavior of the heat energy released, are you under the assumption the sun's heat emission is always constant or something? Although you can model it that way, the behavior is most certainly not. I am with the theory that the sun is emitting more heat than normal at this time which make it seem the barrier is not doing its job. These people called scientist trained in critical thinking are proposing their theory that CO2 are to blame, that's one way to account for the rising temperature. Its not the only one though.

 

 

What you're basically saying is that our actions have little consequence?

 

By the way, Co2 is not the only gaseous culprit. Carbon monoxide, methane, and NO2 also play large roles in the greenhouse effect.

 

http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4564037_a-greenhouse-work.html

post #29 of 51
Quote:
Originally Posted by eke2k6 View Post

 

 

What you're basically saying is that our actions have little consequence?

 

By the way, Co2 is not the only gaseous culprit. Carbon monoxide, methane, and NO2 also play large roles in the greenhouse effect.

 

http://www.ehow.com/how-does_4564037_a-greenhouse-work.html

"earth don't give a single ... about its inhabitants, you can try to "save" it all you want, it will get its **** together by itself...eventually, bigger threat in totally messing earth with is probably excessive nuking"

  

so yes

 

I was gonna post about volcanic activity and their gases to the last post but meh, other things to think about that are mitigating factors involve deforestation and thermal pollution(believe it or not but it can mess up the surrounding ecosystem), also unknown unknowns, maybe something going on deep in the sea that aren't visible enough but are releasing large enough thermal energy in the ocean

 

anything else blame it on the penguins, IDK about you but them and being in Antarctica by themeselves is a little sketchy

post #30 of 51
Thread Starter 

^ Glad you decided to joined our hot discussion here Kami and LoL @ the penguins.

 

@wink

 

 

Have wondered about that CFC thing as well, mind providing us with some links to that Dupont patent thing??? PMs will also do.

 

@macbug

 

the funny thing is i have already read a lot of school texts and class lectures regarding most of the topics covered on that site. I glanced through some of it and a great deal is familiar. I will try to read through it though, but it seems A LOT of the links are provided by the IPCC, so.......rolleyes.gif And the films that i have linked is basically an overview of what is provided in your link.

 

@eke

 

Jackie Chan sucks, fail. biggrin.gif

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The Great Global Warming a.k.a "Climate Change" Thread and The "Science" Behind It...... Conspiracy Theory or Fact???