Climate change real or trick ?

Soo do you think it real or trick ?

both

Is global warming possibly screwing future generations? My uneducated guess on the matter leans towards yes.

Do I believe humans are being wasteful and destructive towards their one and only planet? Yes.

Do I take part in the wasting and destruction? Yes.

We are emerging out of a little ice age. Yes really. Thus it makes sense for things to get warmer.

now are we making things worse? Possibly, maybe even yes.

i luike it i sense some drama from that question ^^

you know if we stop all CO2 or other gaz with greenhouse effect . It will keep getting worse in the next 15 year. Since it the time for them to reach the high atmosphere.


and both of you are wrong on one thing . You shouldnt call it global warming. Since it more like the climate getting change overall. for example in europe will get colder since marine flow getting change.

and right now our gaz pollution increase the natural rate of change in the climate. basiclly we screw up everything. But well whos care if we all that it going to by a good thing for earth ^^.

Ouglouk wrote:

i luike it i sense some drama from that question ^^

you know if we stop all CO2 or other gaz with greenhouse effect . It will keep getting worse in the next 15 year. Since it the time for them to reach the high atmosphere.

That assumes that you accept that correlation and causality are one in the same.

It also assumes that we don't do things like build carbon scrubbers, plant an insane amount of trees etc.


There are solution but politicans don't stay in office with solutions. They stay in office with problems.

llol it more like to every solution there is problem and they prefer to face problem them know

Quote :

It also assumes that we don't do things like build carbon scrubbers, plant an insane amount of trees etc.

tree can helps us here since we cant a shit load of them. And you see it not the only thing. Since the water getting warmer the co2 is was keeping deep into it coming out now same for the ice

Ouglouk wrote:

. And you see it not the only thing. Since the water getting warmer the co2 is was keeping deep into it coming out now same for the ice

Again conclusions based on models based on assumptions. Not that they're completely wrong but that they are relying on data that may or may not lead to the conclusions they're drawing.

Will I say they're wrong? No will I say they're right? No.

Professor Nomos wrote:

It also assumes that we don't do things like build carbon scrubbers...

Actually, Carbon Scrubbers do very little to help with the output of pollutants. Yes, they trap the carbon that would otherwise escape into the atmosphere, but said carbon is relatively harmless compared to the numerous gases that do pour out into the air.

As for my opinion on the whole matter, it seems more likely we're following more along the natural warming/cooling cycle of the planet, and that we've caused only a very slight change in that progression. As I believe someone has said before, it seems rather arrogant to think that we as humans can drastically change the course of the planet.

LoL

Quote :

drastically change the course of the planet.

we dont it jsut enoguh to kill alot of specie and humy like all other beast can die .

Quote :

Human influences on climate change

Anthropogenic factors are human activities that change the environment and influence climate. In some cases the chain of causality is direct and unambiguous (e.g., by the effects of irrigation on temperature and humidity), while in others it is less clear. Various hypotheses for human-induced climate change have been debated for many years, though it is important to note that the scientific debate has moved on from scepticism, as there is consensus that human activity is beyond reasonable doubt as the main explanation for the current rapid climate changes.[4] Consequently in politics, the debate has largely shifted onto ways to reduce human impact and adapt to change that is already 'in the system.' [5]

The biggest factor of present concern is the increase in CO2 levels due to emissions from fossil fuel combustion, followed by aerosols (particulate matter in the atmosphere), which exert a cooling effect, and cement manufacture. Other factors, including land use, ozone depletion, animal agriculture[6] and deforestation, also affect climate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change

there soo many factor yes it hard to poitn withc one is the cause or if every single one as a affect. But the climate is fragile. Soo it better to by warn them sorry.

[img][/img]

you can make say anythign to graphic what the link tothe website ?

Quote :

The information on this website shows weather and historical trends from approximately 600 B.C. to the present day. Much of this data was put together by the Weather Science Foundation in Illinois back in the early to mid 1970s. At one time, over 60 people were employed to gather worldwide data.

Unfortunately, funding for this project evaporated and the Weather Science Foundation shut down its operation. However, some of this unique information was given to Climatologist Cliff Harris. By an agreement, Cliff did not use or publish any of this information for 30 years.

that mean those data are not reliable.

the same page you took the graphique.

This reminds me of a picture i saw a few weeks back. It was of an arial shot some logging area, all along next to the road there were 2-3 lines of trees, but past that it was just laid to waste barren.

Oh ya and the term Global Warming is more suited then Climate Changes, cause climate changes happen all the time. Winter, spring, summer, fall (all you got to do is call....) Anyways, thats climate changes, refering to different parts of the world. Whereas Global Warming is well dealing globally....

The world is warming up, to deny it is pretty ignorant. However the part about humans causing it is pretty stupid.

Ouglouk wrote:

that mean those data are not reliable.

the same page you took the graphique.

By what standard does this Data reach the threshold of Unreliable? Age does not matter when the point is historical overview.

Otherwise Archeology, History, Anthorpology not to mention things like Geology even Astronomy and Physics would all be "unreliable."

Now you could argue that this data is "obselete" but that presupposes two things.

1)that the techniques used to gather information where so inferior when compared to today that the quality of the data is compromised.

and

2)that as such the data used here is significantly different than the data used by others.


I won't say I'm an expert in Climatological modeling. I'm a sociologist but I do know methodological structure.

The first presupposition is likely true in so far as Today's measurement instruments are better. But when every model requires "old" data to compute their results, this becomes a net wash.

The second presuppositions assumes bias on the part of the researcher. I don't know these men and maybe they are conniving SOBs who just want to be contrarian and "reactionary." But I like to be as charitable to arguments as possible.

Which is why since I can't completely dismiss either claim, I personally argue that both are taking place. Now whether its 80 humanity/20 Mother Nature or 20 humanity/80 Mother Nature, I don't know and won't claim an answer.

But I'll accept that both are taking place.

dude it pretty simple if he doesnt give this source the whole thing dont worse anything.

Ansten wrote:

The world is warming up, to deny it is pretty ignorant. However the part about humans causing it is pretty stupid.

These guys aren't anti-climate change. They are anti-blame industry.


I won't say I suppot them but I will say they bring up interesting points.

Ouglouk wrote:

dude it pretty simple if he doesnt give this source the whole thing dont worse anything.

Okay for the first time, I don't think I know what you mean.


When you say "worse anything" should it say "mean anything" or what?

Professor Nomos wrote:

Ouglouk wrote:

dude it pretty simple if he doesnt give this source the whole thing dont worse anything.

Okay for the first time, I don't think I know what you mean.


When you say "worse anything" should it say "mean anything" or what?

Yup. If he doesn't give the source of the image, then the image has no value of proof.

I can accept that.


I admit this guy is not an academic and maybe he's making at all up. but at the same time, I watched on the History Channel an hour long special on how the little ice age changed Europe, So I know the guy's not a complete nutjob.


That being said is his entire conclusion that we'll peak this warming in 2038 true? I don't know.

Well only time will tell

Interesting Green services/products

Greenful Technologies

yep

something we forget is it house with top of grass reduce by alot the heat in a city.
i dotn remember the exact number but it can reduce the city heat by about avg 5 celciuls during the summer.