Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered
A
Please take this anonymous survey on global warming. The results will be used for a study on how people create their knowledge on the topic of global warming. The survey should take 2-3 minutes.

Go To: http://www2.gvsu.edu/~santurea/gwsurvey.html

THANK YOU!

.
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 11
S
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 11

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 11
S
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
S
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 11
Link does not work:(

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 962
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 962
Snowbird,
I followed all your links and they worked for me. You have found a nice set of presentations for refuting global warming. Thank you for balancing the presentation.

Amaranth smile


If you don't care for reality, just wait a while; another will be along shortly. --A Rose

Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Yes indeed. Nothing I haven't heard before (in general), but overall, I feel like they support my contentions.
More later!

Overall review:
1. A very soothing film.

2. I especially liked "On the financial front, global warming is now a multibillion-dollar industry with clear intentions of becoming even bigger."

3. ...and my favorite here was "Are there really plausible alternative explanations, including one that shows that the amount of cloud cover as influenced by sun activity, gamma and cosmic rays is a better explanation of global warming than CO2 levels?"

Thanks for the inspiration, I will get back for some serious comments. p.s. I may have refs. 2 & 3 reversed.

~~SAM

"A whole second level of discussion would involve reasonably deciding what, if anything, we can realistically do that would actually make a difference."

smile


Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,164
Why do I feel the AGW film supports my contention? Because it says the climate is beyond our control. Guess I'm contending that we should remedy that situation. They say we should adapt, and I think, "y'mean like wearing sunscreen and using a thermostat to keep our homes comfortable?"

I know, I'm getting into the "second level" here.

So, here's Sam's Movie Review of the link provided (somewhat magically) again by snowbird.


One of the items that hit me on that canadian film(AGW), was the big graph going back 500 million years, showing many divergent relationships (no relation) between CO2 and Temperature.

That record goes back to before Oxygen levels stabilized in our atmosphere, the continents were in vastly different positions, biological influences on the atmosphere were vastly different (just off the top of my head). But what about the past 10-20-40 million years? Guess I shoulda looked first; but how is that correlation? That would strike me as more meaningful period to examine, because the living order was fairly well established, grasses evolved, India hit Asia to give us monsoons, and the Alps and Andes developed.

As for CO2 following Temperature increases:
As the positive feedback mechanisms kick in.....
Heck, there's probably big jumps in methane following temperature rises also.

Don't you think that as the planet warms (and warmer oceans hold less CO2, btw) and the large geological/ biological deposits get released, there will be jumps in CO2 (following temp. rise)?

Oh yea, I also remember that Indian guy who talked about cyclones and (I think) the Canadian Ice Storm.
All he was saying was that nobody can directly link a specific weather event to GW, and he added that another Ice Storm could happen again if the conditions were right. Now that's profound.
About the cyclones, he says, for “reasons we don't quite understand,” there are more cyclones in years with cooler air (so it couldn't be GW making cyclones). What about the delta T (temperature differential between ocean and air). Warmer oceans mean more storms, but only if the delta T is still there (cooler air).

I think the film talked about adapting also. Take a look at how other animals have adapted to rapid climate change. It's those precipitous cliffs and jumps over the past several million years (and 35 thousand years) related to glaciations that scare me.

And talking about scary stuff, I've seen a correlation between the LENGTH of a sunspot cycle and temperature that is closer than the CO2 correlation over the past 120 years.
I certainly agree that the sun is a very big player. I did not appreciate the woman who chirpily told us what “exciting news” it was that even our galaxy influences our climate (ala Mike Kremer's post on the Physics forum).

Well, those where some thought's on the film. Overall the soothing gentle tones of the AGW's and the strident shoutings of the PGW's (anti/proGW) gave it the look of a slick propoganda film, similar in style to Incovenient Truth (IT).

Certainly a good conversation starter, but lots of disjointed points and not very conclusive (much like IT). I'd watch it again, because there's lots of points I can't recall now.

~~SA


Pyrolysis creates reduced carbon! ...Time for the next step in our evolutionary symbiosis with fire.
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,031
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,031
That's all very well. But Snowbird, was it necessary to post the links on every thread?

Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 30
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 30
A debate over global warming is whether or not rising worldwide temperatures are due to natural cycles of some kind and/or due to humans spoiling the environment. Ok fine. Well haven't drastic climate changes occured throughout the fossil/geologic record. My point is: Humans have survived these changes before- long before today's great scientific debate. Won't we survive, within reason, what mother Earth throws at us?
Sincerely,


Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Carl Sagan
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
R
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
R
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,840
Mitth: "Won't we survive, within reason, what mother Earth throws at us?"

I'm not trying to be amusing, but we might also be able to survive a nuclear war or an asteroid impact. It's just better not to let the worst happen if it can be avoided, right?


"Time is what prevents everything from happening at once" - John Wheeler
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 30
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 30
I agree, redewenur- IF it can be avoided.


Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Carl Sagan

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5