Global Cooling

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='littleflower+JMJ' post='1469243' date='Feb 26 2008, 02:45 PM']I think she means she's irish too. And catholic of course. But her avatar is about being Irish. [/quote]
YEP. I have green blood! or does that make me a vulcan??

[Fidei Defensor]

[url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png"]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm..._Comparison.png[/url]
Global temperatures over the past 2000 years.

[url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png"]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Temperature.png[/url]
Temperatures based on ice cores.

And before you go off and say "oooh oooh! It's a cycle! Obviously, we'll be fine" keep in mind how these "cycles" happened. The huge increases in global temperatures were caused by a buildup of greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane when the earth was undergoing rapid changes. This obviously settled down and the earth cooled. But the reason it's different this time is because it's not the earth that's putting out CO2 and methane into the atmopshere, it's us. We're cutting down the forests that keep the CO2 balanced in the environment and we're pumping tons more out than we ever did. This is man made crisis, not fluctuations of the earth. So this isn't part of the cycle, this is our doing.

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1469345' date='Feb 26 2008, 02:45 PM']This is man made crisis, not fluctuations of the earth. So this isn't part of the cycle, this is our doing.[/quote]

Prove it.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1469345' date='Feb 26 2008, 05:45 PM'][url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png"]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm..._Comparison.png[/url]
Global temperatures over the past 2000 years.

[url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Ice_Age_Temperature.png"]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...Temperature.png[/url]
Temperatures based on ice cores.

And before you go off and say "oooh oooh! It's a cycle! Obviously, we'll be fine" keep in mind how these "cycles" happened. The huge increases in global temperatures were caused by a buildup of greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane when the earth was undergoing rapid changes. This obviously settled down and the earth cooled. But the reason it's different this time is because it's not the earth that's putting out CO2 and methane into the atmopshere, it's us. We're cutting down the forests that keep the CO2 balanced in the environment and we're pumping tons more out than we ever did. This is man made crisis, not fluctuations of the earth. So this isn't part of the cycle, this is our doing.[/quote]
But in this country we are not out there cutting down all the forests. In Pa we have more forested land than we did 100 years ago.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1469393' date='Feb 26 2008, 05:01 PM']But in this country we are not out there cutting down all the forests. In Pa we have more forested land than we did 100 years ago.[/quote]
Absolutely true. But globally, the tropical and temperate rainforests are disappearing. Which is really sad, especially the loss of all the unique biological diversity that used to live in them.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='T-Bone _' post='1469346' date='Feb 26 2008, 03:49 PM']Prove it.[/quote]
Levels of CO2 in atmosphere:
[url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide.png"]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...bon_Dioxide.png[/url]

C (carbon aka coal and fossil fuels which are dead biological matter made of carbon) + O (oxygen, by burning) --> CO2

C + 2O --(burning)--> CO2

Burning fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which means it tends to hold the heat energy from the sun more than other gases.

Both facts are true.

The concentration of CO2 has increased by 31% and CH4 (methane, another greenhouse gas which we burn as natural gas, which also then gives off CO2. CH4 + 2O2 --(burning)--> CO2 + 2H2O) has increased by 149% since the beginning of the industrial revolution (mid-1700s). These levels are higher than at any time during the last 650,000 years (based on ice core data, see above post). Fossil fuel burning has produced about 3/4 of the increase in CO2 levels. This is made worse by deforestation because with fewer trees absorbing CO2, more of it remains in the atmosphere.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1468891' date='Feb 25 2008, 08:41 PM']But... people... the facts are here!!! Check out this graph!
[img]http://www.seanbonner.com/blog/archives/piratesarecool.jpg[/img]

As you can see, the lack of those treasure hunting rascals have gone down in the past while, and the global temperature has gone up. Maybe their steal-from-the-rich mentality has kept others from polluting the environment?[/quote]While the chart is cute and used by some people attempt to use this to show that correlation in example does not necessarily suggest relation. Although, pirating is a serious issue that shouldn’t be joked about. It is one that still exists and is dangerous. While modern pirating is not what some may imagine from children’s stories. [b]This interjection is not necessarily intended to defend or attack any positions here[/b], [i]only to keep this in mind[/i].
[quote][b]Piracy[/b]
Reports of piracy attacks were declining worldwide since 2004, but seems to have bottomed out in 2007. Figures reported by the International Maritime Bureau indicate incident reporting fell for the third year in a row in 2006. Ships reported 239 incidents to the IMB during the year 2006, down from 276 in 2005, and 329 in 2004. But the piracy rose by 14 percent in the first nine months of 2007.

The maritime watchdog group points to better awareness of the magnitude of piracy and subsequent involvement by governments in combating piracy as factors in the decline.
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piracy[/url][/quote]

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1469476' date='Feb 26 2008, 05:41 PM']Levels of CO2 in atmosphere:
[url="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Dioxide.png"]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...bon_Dioxide.png[/url]

C (carbon aka coal and fossil fuels which are dead biological matter made of carbon) + O (oxygen, by burning) --> CO2

C + 2O --(burning)--> CO2

Burning fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which means it tends to hold the heat energy from the sun more than other gases.

Both facts are true.

The concentration of CO2 has increased by 31% and CH4 (methane, another greenhouse gas which we burn as natural gas, which also then gives off CO2. CH4 + 2O2 --(burning)--> CO2 + 2H2O) has increased by 149% since the beginning of the industrial revolution (mid-1700s). These levels are higher than at any time during the last 650,000 years (based on ice core data, see above post). Fossil fuel burning has produced about 3/4 of the increase in CO2 levels. This is made worse by deforestation because with fewer trees absorbing CO2, more of it remains in the atmosphere.[/quote]

You have yet to prove this is man's doing.


(BTW: If we burn methane, the concentration of methane would not increase...)

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='T-Bone _' post='1469506' date='Feb 26 2008, 07:29 PM']You have yet to prove this is man's doing.
(BTW: If we burn methane, the concentration of methane would not increase...)[/quote]
I'm sorry, I thought the whole burning of fossil fuels being man's doing was obvious. Oops. I hate when coal burns itself and gasoline magically appears in my car.

My point is, these activities actively increase the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is released naturally by cellular respiration. However, burning fossil fuels (burning pure carbon--basic chemistry of combining carbon and oxygen) and cutting down the natural absorbers of CO2 is how humans directly affect CO2 levels.

And I agree with your assesment about methane. My mistake. However, the increase in levels can be attributed to releasing it from the ground in our activities of searching for more oil. And either way, burning it makes more CO2 so we arent helping ourselves.

Edited February 27, 2008 by fidei defensor

[MissScripture]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1469678' date='Feb 26 2008, 11:27 PM']I'm sorry, I thought the whole burning of fossil fuels being man's doing was obvious. Oops. I hate when coal burns itself and gasoline magically appears in my car.

My point is, these activities actively increase the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is released naturally by cellular respiration. However, burning fossil fuels (burning pure carbon--basic chemistry of combining carbon and oxygen) and cutting down the natural absorbers of CO2 is how humans directly affect CO2 levels.

And I agree with your assesment about methane. My mistake. However, the increase in levels can be attributed to releasing it from the ground in our activities of searching for more oil. And either way, burning it makes more CO2 so we arent helping ourselves.[/quote]
Actually, coal can and has burned with no intervention from man.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='MissScripture' post='1469679' date='Feb 26 2008, 10:33 PM']Actually, coal can and has burned with no intervention from man.[/quote]
Point taken, but not at the level man has done it when it was finally discovered to be an effective source of energy.

[BeenaBobba]

I'm not a scientist, so I tend to leave this sort of thing to environmental scientists. To me, it seems like the general scientific consensus is that we're warming up, and I think that sounds quite plausible. Regardless of whether one believes in the veracity of the global warming threat, I think we should all try to take care of the planet and live "greener" lives. I think we can all agree upon that.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='BeenaBobba' post='1469688' date='Feb 26 2008, 11:52 PM']I'm not a scientist, so I tend to leave this sort of thing to environmental scientists. To me, it seems like the general scientific consensus is that we're warming up, and I think that sounds quite plausible. Regardless of whether one believes in the veracity of the global warming threat, I think we should all try to take care of the planet and live "greener" lives. I think we can all agree upon that.[/quote]

The problem with "leaving it to the scientists" is that environmentalists have made it extremely political. If "global warming" is man's fault, then they think that we must do everything in our power to stop it. I would disagree, anyway, but that is not the point. You should take a side at least politically, whether you believe in it or not. This could potentially make or break our economy- environmentalists are pretty extreme.

[BeenaBobba]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1469702' date='Feb 27 2008, 01:22 AM']The problem with "leaving it to the scientists" is that environmentalists have made it extremely political.[/quote]

What I meant was that scientists (especially environmental scientists) devote their lives to the study of this sort of thing. It's certainly not within my area of expertise, so I can't speak or write with any authority on this issue. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion, but unless we actually know what we're talking about, it's all hot air. Regardless of whether or not environmentalists have made global warming a political issue doesn't change the fact that it's first and foremost a scientific issue.

Not for nothing, but all I have to do is look at Roe vs. Wade to see what happens when scientific issues become politicized. C. Ward Kischer, an embryologist, [url="http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/817022/posts"]wrote[/url] that all embryologists believe that life begins at conception. Apparently, there wasn't a consensus that life [b]does not[/b] begin a conception, yet abortion was legalized anyway. That's a bit off topic, but that's an example of why I think bad things happen when politics is at odds with a scientific consensus.

[quote]If "global warming" is man's fault, then they think that we must do everything in our power to stop it.[/quote]

Well, I'd agree. One thing, though: I'm against population control.

[quote]I would disagree, anyway, but that is not the point.[/quote]

Why do you disagree?

[quote]You should take a side at least politically, whether you believe in it or not. This could potentially make or break our economy- environmentalists are pretty extreme.[/quote]

If forced to take a side politically, I suppose I'd cautiously support those dedicated to reversing the effects of global warming and pollution. Not all environmentalists are extreme. That's an unfair generalization. To me, it seems that most environmental groups advocate small, sensible changes (e.g., riding a bike instead of driving short distances, recycling, etc.).

As for our economy, I'm not sure what you mean, but I'm guessing you may be referring to our dependence on oil. I absolutely think we should look for alternative sources of energy and fuel. As oil becomes more scarce (which is inevitable), it's possible that there will be future conflicts over who gets what. If we switched to other energy sources, I'd assume there would be new jobs and industries, so I don't see how that'd be a problem, either.

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='fidei defensor' post='1469678' date='Feb 26 2008, 09:27 PM']I'm sorry, I thought the whole burning of fossil fuels being man's doing was obvious. Oops. I hate when coal burns itself and gasoline magically appears in my car.

My point is, these activities actively increase the level of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is released naturally by cellular respiration. However, burning fossil fuels (burning pure carbon--basic chemistry of combining carbon and oxygen) and cutting down the natural absorbers of CO2 is how humans directly affect CO2 levels.

And I agree with your assesment about methane. My mistake. However, the increase in levels can be attributed to releasing it from the ground in our activities of searching for more oil. And either way, burning it makes more CO2 so we arent helping ourselves.[/quote]

I meant that you have yet to prove that global warming is man-caused. If you think that you can prove that in one paragraph, I have very little respect for you.