truman Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 CAn I throw this into the mix.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8786565/War-of-words-over-global-warming-as-Nobel-laureate-resigns-in-protest.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Originally Posted by MrSmith View Post You aren’t making any sense; you say cutting our CO2 emissions could cause an ice age, yet you would be happy for us to stop polluting the oceans, and start reforestation both of which would give our planet the ability to use more of the CO2 we produce, which could lower the amount of CO2 and according to your theory cause an ice age. First of all, I said, could. I didn't say would. The point is that we really don't know. What we do know is that deforestation is bad for a number of reasons just like polluting the ocean which causes a whole raft of damage to the ecosystem, not doing that would just be common sense. Did you read about the 'normal' length of interglacial periods? I quoted you as saying could and yes I have read about interglacial periods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdRacheru Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 Ugh. Okay. The green house effect or "global warming" is the result of many contributing factors, one being the release of CO2 (carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere. When radiation from the Sun (ultraviolet/infrared) enters the Earth's atmosphere, it "bounces" off the surface of the Earth and back out into space. However, the CO2 that is trapped in the atmosphere "blocks" the radiation, pretenting it from leaving the atmosphere and effectively "locking it in". Why is this relevant? Because of our excessive use of oil, or 'fossil fuels'. These 'fossil fuels' are made up of hydrocarbon chains (they contain hydrogen and carbon). When we burn them, they react with the oxygen in the air forming H20 (water) and CO2 (carbon dioxide). This carbon should stay buried deep within the Earth, but we are burning it at an alarming rate and releasing all of that carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide) into the atmosphere, and ergo, we have the greenhouse effect. Global warming is a huge issue and yes, there are other contributing factors, some natural, some otherwise. However, our excessive output of CO2 is a huge factor and is definitely, undeniably, speeding up the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulgarian Posted September 30, 2011 Share Posted September 30, 2011 I'm pretty sure the ozone hole is our fault, and the resulting climate change that has contributed to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 … New attractors emerge and others dissipate, slowly, in response to factors outside the system, factors immune from the feedback loop, like precession, obliquity, sunspots, dinosaur-killers and the like. Anyone with me? I guess this concensus model of discussion doesn't really interest anyone. Typical GCC denier behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shinyhappy68 Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 Our planet is warming slightly, but its not man made. Its part of the cycle we are now going through, as predicted by the Mayans etc. We are apparently coming to the end of the last cycle in a five part cycle, which lasts over 1,000 years. The collapse of the economy, the natural disasters and war are all happening for the same reason. Its time for change and new beginnings......according to scientific proof from Gregg Brayden. http://www.greggbraden.com/home/fractal-time-calculator/ Fractal Time - a very very interesting read x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 1, 2011 Share Posted October 1, 2011 I guess this concensus model of discussion doesn't really interest anyone. Typical GCC denier behaviour. Don't you mean AGCC denier? Or at least AGCC agnostic. I'm still interested in what you have to say, but maybe if you could get on an say it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phanerothyme Posted October 2, 2011 Share Posted October 2, 2011 It was in jest, partly. I'll get back to it ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.