The Day After Tomorrow

[Paladin D]

[url="http://www.thedayaftertomorrowmovie.com"]http://www.thedayaftertomorrowmovie.com[/url]

Pretty freaky movie, I'm wanting to see it myself. This also brings up an issue to talk about: [b]Global Warming[/b]. If you go to the home page, and put your cursor over the 3rd nav bar from the left, (Weather Gone Wild) and click "Future Predictions", it's pretty scary.

What are your thoughts on this global warming issue?

[Iacobus]

Gobal warming is real and a threat but it is long term and if we try and help slow it now closer to the NATURAL rate we will be safe. It won't happen with the insane weather changes like the moive shows, it will be slow and long term.

[BLAZEr]

Global Warming is a myth:

[url="http://www.aim.org/publications/briefings/2002/27mar2002.html"]http://www.aim.org/publications/briefings/.../27mar2002.html[/url]

[url="http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm"]http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm[/url]

[url="http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html"]http://www.ncpa.org/ba/ba230.html[/url]

[Matty_boy]

global warming is a lie. there is no such thing. When Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines erupted, it released more than 1,000 times the amound of ozone-depleting chemicals than all of the fluorocarbons in history. And we're all doing okay. Volcanos have been erupting like that since the creation of Earth and we're still here. We couldn't destroy the earth if we wanted to, except if we nuked it to hell, but that's a diferent story altogether.

[Philippe]

the carbon cycle keeps everything intact in terms of Global Warming and also that movie 10.5 or something ... the pacific coast will never fall into the ocean

[Iacobus]

[quote name='lifeteener' date='Apr 26 2004, 07:44 PM'] the carbon cycle keeps everything intact in terms of Global Warming and also that movie 10.5 or something ... the pacific coast will never fall into the ocean [/quote]
LTer do you know the half life of CO2? 50 years. And the C cycle does NOT affect C in the air.

2001 IPCC

"There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming seen over the last 50 yrs is attributalbe to human activies."

"There is a 90-95% chance that earths mean surface temp will increase 1.4*C to 5.8*C between 2000 and 2100."



2001 NCS (as per REQUEST by Pres BUSH)

"Greenhouse gases are accumulating in teh Earths atmosphere as a result of human activies, casuign surface air temps and subsurface ocean temps to rise... These changes observed over the last several decades are likly due MOSTLY to human activites... Global warming could have serious adverse societal and ecological impacts by the end of this century."


There is still a [i] very small minority[/i] if scientists that say GW is not an issue.


And FYI, Matty_boy CFC are NOT CO2 CH4 or N2O, etc. CFC eat away at the O3 layer whereas CO2 traps sunlight in the earths area. Differing spheres here. (Troposphere vs. Stratoshpere)

And BLAZEr, I have nothing but respect for you. But regardless of if GW is happening or not, shouldn't we cut back on our pollution? God entrusted the Earth to our keeping, but did not give us the right to abuse it and hurt it with pollution, etc. And if there is GW and we cut back on the pollution that is speeding it up, than are we not better off physicaly? And if GW is not happening are we still not better off but cutting back on pollution in respect for the creation of God?

BTW: "It is not pollution that hurts the enviroment, it is the impurities in our air and water" ~Dan Quayle (sp?)

[Matty_boy]

Nobody can conclude that this is the first time that the earths temperature is getting warmer. We've only recorded the weather for the last 300 years of the however billion years of creation. there's no way to tell that there wasn't another time when the earth got warmer. We had an ice age, why can't the same thing happen with warmer temperatures. There's not enough evidence to say that man has made the temperature warmer. Also, scientists use fear to keep people interested in their projects so they can get more funding and keep their jobs. How many times a year do we hear about global warming or about a meteor that could crash into the earth and kill us all, then only to die off like the last one thousand reports about meteors and the ice caps melting.

I agree that God entrusted us with the creation and that we need to take care of it, but it's not the immediate crisis that the media makes it out to be.

Also, Bush and Kerry and many other politicians are pushing for more non-fossil fueled automobiles by 2010. That's always good to know.

Edited April 27, 2004 by Matty_boy

[Paladin D]

I don't know.

[crusader1234]

all i can say is that everyone who calls me a tree hugger is going to feel MIGHTY STUPID one day

[mamalove]

I believe that global warming is a myth. But I am all for new technologies that burn fuel more efficiantly and stuff like that. Though I don't think those gasses contribute to global warming, I don't think they are very good for the environment or us.

[Iacobus]

[quote]Nobody can conclude that this is the first time that the earths temperature is getting warmer. [/quote]

Plant life in rocks, they kinda can. They say that the temp of Earth changes over time.

[quote]We've only recorded the weather for the last 300 years of the however billion years of creation.[/quote]

Directly, but we have ways of guessing at the temp years ago but studying plant life. Also 300 years ago there was not a great deal of factories, thus we had a base line measurement and a level of increase (Hudson Bay Comapny).

[quote]there's no way to tell that there wasn't another time when the earth got warmer.[/quote]

Plant life in fossils.

[quote]We had an ice age, why can't the same thing happen with warmer temperatures.[/quote]

That would mean the world got warmer and by your own statement one sentace above "there's no way to tell that there wasn't another time when the earth got warmer." That statement is void and of no effect.

[quote] There's not enough evidence to say that man has made the temperature warmer.[/quote]

The Hudson Bay Company took ice measurements and some temp readings back in the 1600's at the fur forts on the Hudson Bay. They needed these readings to plan shipments, they feared ice trapping boats.

[quote] Also, scientists use fear to keep people interested in their projects so they can get more funding and keep their jobs.[/quote]

Read some sciene writing. It is bland, dull, and uneventful. Than read the CNN FOX ABC Washington Post form. They want to sell copies, the scis want to talk with peers.

[quote]How many times a year do we hear about global warming or about a meteor that could crash into the earth and kill us all[/quote]

Seeing as last year we have a NEO the size of Texas, I think we had right to worry. Rember scis think ahead not now. The chances, stat only, of a NEO hitting us in the next 1000 years? What would a 5.8*C rise in temps mean for us? These are long term threats.

[Iacobus]

[quote name='Matty_boy' date='Apr 26 2004, 10:04 PM'] Also, Bush and Kerry  and many other politicians are pushing for more non-fossil fueled automobiles by 2010.  That's always good to know. [/quote]
You don't read sci news do you. The big phyiscs counicl meet and said that Bush's H power plan is insane and unattiable and unrealisty with the funding he wants on that time line. I am sure the same would apply to Kerry.

Pal, it isnt a publication, it is my way of talking about all the science news online, papers, books, etc.

Edited April 27, 2004 by Iacobus

[Paladin D]

Sci News? Link?

[Iacobus]

[url="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60D1EF83B5F0C758CDDAB0894DC404482"]http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html...DAB0894DC404482[/url]

There

[Paladin D]

I'm not saying I don't believe you. I'm just wondering if there are some good sites for science news, I'm too lazy to search.