[OT] Man-made global warming : myth or fact?

[ethios4]

I realize I'm opening a big ole can of worms with this thread, but I'm genuinely interested in the opinions of people on this board. Lots of smart people on here.

So what do you think, is global warming happening and if so, is it caused by human activity? What should we do about?

Here's an interesting read from the Wall Street Journal....
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 25400.html

My opinion : I don't know. Man-made global warming makes sense, but I don't know if the evidence really supports that. I think the consequences are serious either way, meaning that I think it could be just about as dangerous to act as though global warming were real and it not be real, than it is to not act and for it to be real.

Another aspect.... suppose the US really tightens down on emissions through regulation and taxation. Due to the way free trade agreements have been structured, many US manufacturers would simply move their operations to a place like China where the government is less concerned about environmental issues, labor rights, civil rights, etc. The net result of that move would be increased pollution, including greenhouse gases, plus support for an abusive government. Thoughts?

Let the debate begin!

[Ed J]

nah, it's the most brilliant conspiricy known to man, think about it:

In 10 years time, when there's a low-carbon policy being made every 10 seconds, and no-one can travel anywhere in a motorised vehicle or use their oven, and the temperature of the Earth still hasn't changed, we'll have all the left-wing tosspot government guys going "SEE, if we hadn't put in all this low-carbonness the world would have GOT HOTTER!", when in fact it wouldn't have got hotter anyways.

Read an article about how the sea level in the maldives was in fact getting lower: explain that one with global warming

[McQ714]

here's how i see it.

the earth is warming up... again! it's a vicious cycle that's repeated time and time again.

take a glass of ice. is that ice going to melt at the same rate until it is room temperature water? no it's not. the thawing accelerates as time goes on. do people really think that glaciers were going to stay frozen forever? it's already been proven that glaciers had stretched as far south as the continental United States during the last ice age.

it's not our choice of whether or not the earth warms up. it's inevitable. the earth's core is hotter than any other place on earth and that alone could warm the earth's crust enough to melt polar ice caps. and when those glacier and ice caps begin to melt, they release methane gas. probably more than humans produce.

i don't think it's possible for man to reverse the natural occurences that have kept this planet here for billions of years.

[hoffman2k]

Even if its a myth, I'd rather be breathing air than smog.

Agreeing with Global Warming isn't going to get me that damn jetpack. Though I was never keen on the idea on having that much firepower aimed at my legs anyway.
Solar and Wind power, clean air, a new industrial revolution, saving parts of the world that may hold cures and undiscovered species, using food for ehrm food, etc..

If you argue against global warming, what are you really arguing against?
Sure, windmills kill birds. But you could fix that with some damn sirens or go nuts and use scarecrows. But I'll take those dead birds over an oil spill near our local bird sanctuaries.

Hehe.. What a can of worms indeed. There's just too big of a picture.
Clean energy = No oil tankers spilling shit on my beach
No oil dependence = No need to bug the middle east for a refill
No need for nuclear energy = No more lame excuses for whoever wants to enrich. First step to building down the nuclear arsenal

Wishful thinking, I know. But I'd rather smoke a chimney than to walk through Athens on a bad day.

[smartass303]

phew,
whatever...

nah really, i think its totally irrelevant IF global warming is man made. it is indeed getting warmer but its totally silly to think that it is reversible. climate conferences can change in fact nothing at all. i think humanity should face it and do some research how it would be to live in a hotter world.

and this is going to be ugly,

303

[McQ714]

for the record, i'm not saying things shouldn't change to save and discover what we can. i'm just saying the idea behind global warming doesn't seem logical or well thought out.

[stringtapper]

Even if its a myth, I'd rather be breathing air than smog.

Agreeing with Global Warming isn't going to get me that damn jetpack. Though I was never keen on the idea on having that much firepower aimed at my legs anyway.
Solar and Wind power, clean air, a new industrial revolution, saving parts of the world that may hold cures and undiscovered species, using food for ehrm food, etc..

If you argue against global warming, what are you really arguing against?
Sure, windmills kill birds. But you could fix that with some damn sirens or go nuts and use scarecrows. But I'll take those dead birds over an oil spill near our local bird sanctuaries.

Hehe.. What a can of worms indeed. There's just too big of a picture.
Clean energy = No oil tankers spilling shit on my beach
No oil dependence = No need to bug the middle east for a refill
No need for nuclear energy = No more lame excuses for whoever wants to enrich. First step to building down the nuclear arsenal

Wishful thinking, I know. But I'd rather smoke a chimney than to walk through Athens on a bad day.

This is a typical misdirection of the debate.

"Well I don't want to get into the debate, so let's just talk about how being environmentally conscious in general can be a good thing."

No reasonable person thinks it's a good thing to pollute. But we're not talking about whether it's good to pollute. We're talking about whether what have been perceived as drastic climate changes in the last century are due to human action.

But of course going off topic is the norm on this board...

[LoopStationZebra]

Agreeing with Global Warming isn't going to get me that damn jetpack. Though I was never keen on the idea on having that much firepower aimed at my legs anyway.

Oh my. I am SO with you on this jetpack thing. Grrr. I wanted mine, like, yesterday.

Those of us over the age of 30 were promised these and flying cars by the year 2000, and so far we haven't gotten shit. Bah.

[UKRuss]

Those who don't believe global warming is happening or that man has contributed to it are members of the new 'Flat Earth Society'.

Human nature, there will always be those that believe/disbelieve.

IMO, til the govts change the behaviour of industry by legislation they can kiss my arse when it comes to splitting my rubbish into separate piles...

[Machinesworking]

Was going to write a bunch of stuff, but..
Best videos on this I've seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE6Kdo1A ... re=channel

Really can't poke any holes in these, if any of you can, then I'm interested in your reasoning.

[OvertoneZero]

I agree that it's probably happening and there's little that we as individuals can do to stop it.

I am not super psyched. I think it's going to be a rough century for the human race.

[Machinesworking]

IMO, til the govts change the behaviour of industry by legislation they can kiss my arse when it comes to splitting my rubbish into separate piles...

Word, governments banning burning a fire on your own property while corporations grease some palms and get away with murder.
Hate that crap, hate it until the day I die!

[stringtapper]

Was going to write a bunch of stuff, but..
Best videos on this I've seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zORv8wwiadQ


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE6Kdo1A ... re=channel

Really can't poke any holes in these, if any of you can, then I'm interested in your reasoning.

But again, that's not this debate. It's fine if you think the debate is moot. But whether you can find an argument to make the debate moot is not the debate itself, which I believe is what this thread is about.

Personally I hope it is man-made and we do nothing about it. But I just want to watch the world burn.

[LoopStationZebra]

Even if its a myth, I'd rather be breathing air than smog.

Agreeing with Global Warming isn't going to get me that damn jetpack. Though I was never keen on the idea on having that much firepower aimed at my legs anyway.
Solar and Wind power, clean air, a new industrial revolution, saving parts of the world that may hold cures and undiscovered species, using food for ehrm food, etc..

If you argue against global warming, what are you really arguing against?
Sure, windmills kill birds. But you could fix that with some damn sirens or go nuts and use scarecrows. But I'll take those dead birds over an oil spill near our local bird sanctuaries.

Hehe.. What a can of worms indeed. There's just too big of a picture.
Clean energy = No oil tankers spilling shit on my beach
No oil dependence = No need to bug the middle east for a refill
No need for nuclear energy = No more lame excuses for whoever wants to enrich. First step to building down the nuclear arsenal

Wishful thinking, I know. But I'd rather smoke a chimney than to walk through Athens on a bad day.

This is a typical misdirection of the debate.

"Well I don't want to get into the debate, so let's just talk about how being environmentally conscious in general can be a good thing."

No reasonable person thinks it's a good thing to pollute. But we're not talking about whether it's good to pollute. We're talking about whether what have been perceived as drastic climate changes in the last century are due to human action.

But of course going off topic is the norm on this board...

Hmm. Misdirection? Perhaps. But a valid point nonetheless.

How many of you are old enough to remember THIS symbol?





In the 60s and 70s it became the trademark of the growing ecology movement. A movement that was not really based on any science (real or imagined), but on the simple premise that we should be taking a lot better care of the Earth. The movement gained a fuck of a lot of traction. Even in the 80s, Reagan let some things pass in his administration's (still horrid) EPA bills that would have been unthinkable in any other prior Republican administration.

When's the last time anyone saw that symbol used? Christ, I even had a little sticker on my schoolbag.

Then comes Global Warming, and the entire Ecology Movement is decimated. Replaced by something that, by it's very nature, is open to scientific debate. It's no longer about doing what's right, it's about polarizing the entire issue. Fail.

What really bothers me is how many prominent scientists have utterly and completely abandoned the scientific method altogether on this issue. Instead of continuing to truly be objective and keep researching, most have simply adopted what has been studied so far as Absolute Fact. That goes for both sides of the argument. None of them seem to want objectivity. There's far too much grant/government/seed money at stake now. Shameful. Imagine if all the physicists out there decided that Einstein was absolutely 100% correct in this Theory of Relativity. Not only would Einstein be appalled, but we wouldn't be getting these interesting new theories that the speed of light might not be constant, and that tachyons might exist that go faster than light.

I'm ready to believe that mankind is the sole cause of Global Warming. I'm also completely open to any evidence to the contrary. In the meantime, I'm still going to recycle my empty Newcastle bottles.

[Pasha]

I'm following this topic on both sides (myth or fact)since late 80's
and I have derived the conclusion that global warming is not a myth,
is a fact and has no politic side. This is not about politics, this is
about us. Facts are controversial sometimes. Scientists are not
100% on the same page but the majority party is.
I suggest some readings I have found useful, from the man that
more than the others, IMHO anticipated the subject since the 70's,
with the GAIA hypothesis : John Lovelock.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Revenge-Gaia-Ea ... 10&sr=1-12

You might want to read this first:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Ages-Gaia-Biogr ... 92&sr=1-24 to get acquainted with the subject of a 'living' earth.

Media should not be the only source of information to make debates and discussions.
Scientific ideas live by continuous adjustment and debates. Scientific thinking is always different from what it's presented to the public. Beware.
Take your time, it's a long journey.

- my 2 cents
- Best,
- Pasha