ok from what it looks like tketeg put...the people that are going crazy over this are not looking at the big picture

like, if u look at the second graph you can kinda see how its not really that bad in the long scope of things....and besides...hopefully nc will start having winters like southern florida

i mean i want an ozone and shit but i mean in the large scope of things it doesnt seem so bad

it looks like over time its gradually increasing anyway...no need to get worried in our lifetime or our kids kids lifetime

3/27/2007 12:41:30 AM

if its the hottest its been in AT LEAST 750,000 years how come Antarctica is getting thicker

3/27/2007 9:43:14 AM

Playing devils advocate here... but the answer to that probably has something to do with the fact that they're suggesting a net-warming effect, rather than an absolutely continuous warming effect over the entire globe...

3/27/2007 9:53:11 AM

^thats a clever model they introduced...they're basically saying the whole earth is warming...yet when you point out a region thats COOLING, they say "yes thats also due to global warming"...they're really covering their bases

I'm sure the same shit went on in the 70s during the cooling craze...I'm sure if you pointed out a part of the Earth that was actually warming, the global cooling proponents would explain how they thought the global cooling was causing the local warming

3/27/2007 9:57:35 AM

http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050516/full/050516-10.html

just so people don't take ^that as the full story.

[Edited on March 27, 2007 at 10:28 AM. Reason : .]

3/27/2007 10:27:38 AM

if you buy credits from Al's company you'll be ok

3/27/2007 10:28:59 AM

glad you're contributing

3/27/2007 10:38:30 AM

glad some of you don't recognize that the person that has created the most stink about this stands to gain the most monetarily and politically...


take off your blinders

3/27/2007 10:41:43 AM

but i thought only the right engaged in shady profit-driven politics?

3/27/2007 10:46:09 AM

honestly...i think in our life times there are more important thing to worry about...it'll be like another 500 years before the earth is prolly fucked anyway

3/27/2007 11:44:08 AM

Aristotle, the 1920s were warmer than the 90s. How many times must we go over this.

I'm glad to see some level heads prevailing in this thread.

3/27/2007 12:01:56 PM

I really wish we could talk about how humans effect global warming without having to mention Al Gore or oil companies.

3/27/2007 1:43:11 PM

Quote :

"These are the lamest arguments I have ever heard, especially the rain barrel one. The cost of your time, what are you a contractor? Can't go out on a date either because you bill $50 an hour and its not cost effective?"

How is my car choice argument lame? Don't be lazy trying to make your case.

And since you are being a nuisance, I'll tell you about what it would take for me to do a rain barrel setup, this is just a non specific non sequential thought process I might follow.

1) start looking at rain barrel technology.
2) Calculate how much rain barrel I want or need.
3) figure out if my HOA allows it
4) Figure on any and all tools Ill need to install this myself
5) Start figuring cost of all capital required from the tools to the cost of the barrels + shipping to get this installed and how long it will take me to recover the cost vs just using more water from the hose
6) Will it ugly up my abode? Will I regret sticking it in? Maybe I can do more landscaping to "hide" the barrels. More $$$.

This is before considering how much time I want to take out of my "fun" to install it.

Maybe I am a contractor?

Maybe I work 50 hr weeks, and workout for triathlons another 10hrs a week, plus get my regular 8hrs of sleep a night + have to cook for myself + all the other chores I have to do around the house (pay bills, clean, standard yard work, repairs, etc).



Or I could just do the "blind green" thing and pay $texas for someone to come install a full system without me having to think about it. I probably won't recover that cost in my lifetime, but boy my conscience will feel great, won't it?

3/27/2007 1:53:15 PM

gosh its hot outside today

only explanation is global warming

thats fact, right Aristotle?

3/28/2007 3:06:49 PM

I only fart INSIDE now, as to not contribute to global warming, ya know?

3/28/2007 3:16:37 PM

yeah but make sure you spray a lot of air freshener inside to cover up the fart smell...preferably an aerosol with lots of chlorofluorocarbons

3/28/2007 3:17:37 PM

My refrigerator was made in 1940...still works like a champ!

3/28/2007 3:24:01 PM

i still have cases and cases of Right Guard spray...its the best deodorant cause it has extra CFCs so you know its working!

3/28/2007 3:27:24 PM

this one guy had a good point. the only reason we are noticing all of this and the CO2 stuff (and some warming indeed) is because we've done a pretty good job cleaning up the sulfur compound pollutants that humans where pumping into the atmosphere, sulfurs in the atmosphere cause cloud droplets to form in much smaller sizes, increasing the effective albedo effect of clouds reflecting more solar radiation now with out the sulfur in the air there is more solar heat coming in.

on a side note, human measurement/measuring techniques of temperature have not remained constant or accurate as you all might believe. older thermometers register consistently cooler than modern ones (comparitively) and the methods of measuring sea temperatures has also changed again skewing the data....

additionally we have not been measuring this stuff for very long....

climatic changes are based on 30 year measures....

and just b/c you are a scientist (I'm one for instance) doesn't mean you aren't a fucking moron (I deal with dozens of them every day)

4/2/2007 12:56:45 PM

some good points

hopefully they dont fall on deaf ears (or blind eyes or whatever for messageboard equivalent)

4/2/2007 1:03:30 PM

^^wait a minute, do you mean to tell me that our weather recording technology hasn't been consistent or precise since we've started recording it?!?!

(nice post)

4/2/2007 1:24:52 PM

Quote :

"climatic changes are based on 30 year measures"

actually, all of the actual data used is based upon things like ice core samples from antartica.

4/2/2007 1:26:44 PM

i wonder how much humans put into the air in like 1000bc

4/2/2007 1:45:23 PM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6518539.stm


And where the fuck did ScubaSteeds go? I want him to tell me why my very valid reasons for not being a green-o-maniac aren't legit?

4/2/2007 2:29:47 PM

RealClimate reports on some groundbreaking research into global warming:

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-sheep-albedo-feedbacki/

Quote :

"The already-reeling "consensus" supposedly linking climate change to CO2 is about to receive its final coup-de-grace from a remarkable new result announced in a press conference today by Dr. Ewe Noh-Watt of the New Zealand Institute of Veterinary Climatology [1]. Noh-Watt and his co-workers, describing work funded by a generous grant from the Veterinary Climate Science Coalition, declared "We have seen the future of climate -- and it is Sheep." Prof. Jean-Belliere Poisson d'Avril, star student of Claude Allegro Molto-Troppo (discoverer of the Tropposphere) reacted with the words, "Parbleu! C'est la meilleure chose depuis les baguettes tranchées!" The hypothesis begins with the simple observation that most sheep are white, and therefore have a higher albedo than the land on which they typically graze (see figure below). This effect is confirmed by the recent Sheep Radiation Budget Experiment. The next step in the chain of logic is to note that the sheep population of New Zealand has plummeted in recent years. The resulting decrease in albedo leads to an increase in absorbed Solar radiation, thus warming the planet. The Sheep Albedo hypothesis draws some inspiration from the earlier work of Squeak and Diddlesworth [2] on the effect of the ptarmigan population on the energy balance of the Laurentide ice sheet. Noh-Watt hastens to emphasize that the two hypotheses are quite distinct, since the species of ptarmigan involved in the Squeak-Diddlesworth effect is now extinct. The proof of the pudding is in the data, shown in the Figure below. Here, the Sheep Albedo Index is defined as the New Zealand Sheep population in each year, subtracted from the 2007 population. The index is defined that way because fewer sheep means lower albedo, and thus a positive radiative forcing. It can be seen that the recent warming can be explained entirely by the decline in the New Zealand sheep population, without any need to bring in any mysterious so-called "radiative forcing" from carbon dioxide, which doesn't affect the sunlight (hardly) anyway -- unlike Sheep Albedo. Some researchers have expressed surprise at the large effect from the relatively small radiative forcing attributable to New Zealand Sheep, or indeed to New Zealand as a whole. "This only shows the fallacy of the concept of Radiative Forcing, which is after all only a theory, not a fact," says Noh-Watt. "Evidently there are amplifying feedbacks at work which give the Sheep Albedo Index a disproportionate influence over climate." "A real breakthrough was using the statistical technique pioneered by Frusen-Glädje and Haagendassen in their study of the solar-climate connection." said Noh-Watt "Just as in their case, to get a good match to the observed climate, we had to optimize our smoothing algorithm by smoothing some parts of the sheep record more than others, and then rescaling the results." The optimized smoothing was applied to the years 1975-1991. Noted skeptic Rasmus Benestad has criticized this technique as meaningless curve-bashing (see footnote [3] below), but according to Noh-Watt, " All these guys are interested in is getting rich by riding their bicycles to work and selling carbon credits to the EU." Not everybody agrees with the Sheep Albedo Hypothesis. Leading the flock of skeptics is the New Zealand Sheep Farmers Guild. Their spokesman, Steve Ramsturf (no relation) was quoted as saying "Baaah, Humbug. No matter what goes wrong with the world, they're always trying to blame the poor New Zealand Sheep Farmer. First it was the methane belch tax. Now this Albedo thing. " The recognition of the role of sheep albedo opens up some fascinating new possibilities for climate change mechanisms. There is in fact an important destabilizing feedback in the system: as climate gets warmer, there is less demand for wool sweaters and wooly underwear. Hence the sheep population tends to drop, leading to even more warming. In an extreme form, this can lead to a "runaway sheep-albedo feedback," which is believed to have led to the present torrid climate of Venus. Most researchers do not think this could happen on Earth, though. In fact, Oprah and Averell Chanteur, authors of the popular "Unstoppable" series (soon to be a major motion picture) say that the warming will usher in a new era of peace and prosperity, with less enslavement of domestic wool-bearing animals. The hypothesis is laid out in their forthcoming book, "Unstoppable Sheep, every five or six days," which expands on earlier popular titles in the series, such as "Unstoppable daylight, every 42 hours," "Unstoppable Summer, every 17 months, " and the ever-popular autobiographical work "Unstoppable nonsense, every two or three years." However, Dirk Blitzen, noted researcher from Hogwartz Institute of Technology, has proposed an additional wrinkle on the sheep-albedo idea, which he calls the "sheep-Iris effect" (see Dasher et al. [4] for details). According to Blitzen, a reanalysis of Landsat images shows that as the climate gets warmer, sheep tend to huddle together less. Since wool has a lower emissivity than bare ground, the lack of huddling allows more infrared emission to escape from the ground, cooling the planet and stabilizing its climate. "Frankly, I don't see how the climate can change much at all," stated Blitzen in recent testimony before the House of Lords, "To be honest, at this point I have a little trouble figuring out how there can even be summer and winter. In the end, I think it will turn out to be a problem with the data." Ozark Junior College satellite expert Jhon Chrystal agrees; his new analysis of MSU satellite data in fact casts doubt on the "consensus" that summer and winter have different temperatures. But the sheep story may not be as simple as it seems. Hendreck Svampmark of the Danish Institute for Solar-Sheep Interactions notes that at the same time the number of sheep has been going down, the number of cows (which have a lower albedo than sheep) has been going up. "We believe that what is really behind it all are Galactic Cowsmic Rays, which are transmuting sheep DNA into cow DNA." Svampmark hypothesizes a currently undetected particle flux, which he calls "Cowsmic," because there is no observed trend in any of the better-known components of the Galactic Cosmic Ray flux. "We are trying to get money to put sheep in dark-matter accelerators to test our hypothesis, but there's a hold-up with PETA. It's all a big conspiracy to protect the consensus, I say.""

4/2/2007 3:44:05 PM

^I'm going to call bullsheep on that

4/2/2007 4:53:42 PM

(note the date)

4/2/2007 4:57:36 PM

Quote :

"bullsheep"

4/2/2007 5:23:57 PM

enough of this people...

denial is not going to be a water source for the millions of waterless people in thirty years.

4/2/2007 8:31:16 PM

Dude, some people come in here and make some good points, and then you come in and spout the dumbest shit.

OMG theres no water! It's a crisis! The stuff falls from the sky and covers 75% of the Earth, but millions of people are gonna be "waterless" soon because the temperature is rising .17 degrees every decade!!! OMFG WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO??!?

4/3/2007 12:35:08 AM

Are you trying to deny the speed at which temperate glaciers are meltin? Some areas simply don't get anough rain and have been settled because of rivers which are going to run dry unless we think of a way to get more snow to fall on the places are experiencing longer melting periods. Human caused or non human caused theres no way you can deny that certain rivers are going to run dry and soon.

4/3/2007 12:52:37 AM

Quote :

"Some areas simply don't get anough rain and have been settled because of rivers which are going to run dry unless we think of a way to get more snow to fall on the places are experiencing longer melting periods."

?

Thats one hell of a run-on sentence.

I don't give a fuck if all the glaciers in the world melt over the next 5 years. People are still gonna get water. It's really not that tough of a concept. If they don't get water piped in from nearby rivers or lakes, they'll get it from the ocean. Desalination plants aren't exactly rocket science.

Why do you insist that water is a scarce resource? It is the most abundant molecule on the planet.

4/3/2007 1:02:14 AM

ahahahaha "just get it piped in"

you really don't have a clue. i guess they can just go buy it at walmart as far as you're concearned. use water treatment fascilities!

Desalinazation isn't quite free.

4/3/2007 1:23:25 AM

Quote :

"Why do you insist that water is a scarce resource? It is the most abundant molecule on the planet."

Um, actually Silica is the most abundant molecule of the planet's crust. But your larger point is about as
ill-informed. Have you ever lived in the West? People bicker about water here all the time. De-salination isn't exactly cheap and pumping the water somewhere uphill is extremely expensive.

4/3/2007 1:26:30 AM

Quote :

"Are you trying to deny the speed at which temperate glaciers are meltin?"

so when a glacier gets smaller...by melting...doesnt it melt off.....water? wheres the shortage? seems to me if some solid ice turns to liquid water...that would be...more liquid water

^and water is more abundant than silica fyi

4/3/2007 9:58:42 AM

http://www.charlotte.com/115/story/72471.html

Sunday morning the low is in the 20s? But that just doesnt make sense!

4/3/2007 11:33:27 AM

Jesus, why is this thread still going on?

Across two threads, about 20 pages now of the same circular arguing BS by a bunch of kids that know just enough to prattle on about basically nothing.

4/3/2007 11:40:29 AM

and you're still completely clueless to the entire subject so stfu baldy

you're not even commenting on the subject...you're just bitching about a thread...wow you are pathetic

4/3/2007 12:57:10 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth%27s_crust

4/3/2007 1:05:32 PM

why do you keep throwing in "planet's crust" instead of "planet" like Prawn Star mentioned?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_(molecule)

[Edited on April 3, 2007 at 1:08 PM. Reason : .]

4/3/2007 1:08:14 PM

Well, "planet" rather than "planet's crust" is even more inaccurate. If you read the link it is "planet's surface" not in fact "planet" if we really want to get precise. But the point remains that Prawn's post was stupid.

4/3/2007 1:15:28 PM

^^^^but see, this thread has Aristotle, and his moronic comments require us to rebuff him with facts and true statements.

Quote :

"enough of this people... denial is not going to be a water source for the millions of waterless people in thirty years."

First off, you retard, there are already billions of people without a steady, clean water supply on this earth. Perhaps we should spend more money on fixing that problem (a problem that is already here and very obvious) instead of something that might be happening.

Quote :

"Are you trying to deny the speed at which temperate glaciers are meltin? Some areas simply don't get anough rain and have been settled because of rivers which are going to run dry unless we think of a way to get more snow to fall on the places are experiencing longer melting periods. Human caused or non human caused theres no way you can deny that certain rivers are going to run dry and soon."

I'm not even sure what this means. But what do you have to say about the glaciers that are GROWING, and the fact that the ice mass on Antartica is getting THICKER. Personally, I'd be really concerned about the glaciers that are growing, since they're locking up water that could flow down the mtn to the villagers

4/3/2007 1:15:29 PM

I've decided that I can't say what main factor is causing global warming.

I still think we should limit our emissions though.

4/3/2007 11:50:33 PM

"fascilities"

4/4/2007 5:43:27 AM

yo if they run out of water and it keeps getting hotter just take whatever ice is left at the poles and melt that

4/4/2007 6:01:49 AM

There simply is no "might" about this.

I'm sorry but theres hard data that the ice of greenland, anarctica and the arctic are melting fast.


The largest atlantic shlef recently cracked in half. There is thickening in som places due to huge blocks cracking and sliding or elevation changes but the continent is losing a net 36 cubic miles of ice per year.

The westanarctic ice sheet is slowly disconnecting from the rest due to the increased velocity of underground rivers (due to increased melting) and being eroded away by the ocean on the other end. When it breaks off from the small part of it that is sitting on bedrock it will raise sea level by 20 feet. (Think dropping an ice cube into a glass of water)

Altitude glaciers are the source of almost all major rivers especially in Asia, Africa and South America where the poor people are. These mountains hav had white peaks and no net loss each year which has kept the rivers flowing. Well now as the melting period is lasting longer and longer there is a net loss in the amount of ice on them and you can tell the difference by looking at year to year satallite photos these things will be gone soon. Sure it means more water in the rivers as they melt but there are many rivers that flow seasonaly (dry up 100% during the winter when nothing is melting) and when the ice is gone in 30 years these rivers will simply never come back.

Hundreds of million of people get their water from "seasonal" rivers.

There is no debate about this part. Even the idiots know that the earth is warming up and stuff is melting they just don't agree with the 100% of the evidence that points to human cause. Theres no proof its human caused (only 100% evidence) but there is PROOF it is happening.

Yes h2o is the most common molecule but guess how much of it is drinkable? not much and theres no way people who make <2$ per day (~80% of earths population) are going to afford desalinzation when it is a big decision to make even here.

Threres proof we sure as hell aren't going to feed the world because a much smaller amount of poeple are starving/without now like you said. Our economic situation will save us nobody is going to starve or thirst here but most people don't have that luxury and its really scary to imagine the outcome.

4/4/2007 10:30:20 AM

Quote :

"Yes h2o is the most common molecule but guess how much of it is drinkable? not much and theres no way people who make <2$ per day (~80% of earths population) are going to afford desalinzation when it is a big decision to make even here."

Of course they will, with huge demand often comes huge supplies...eventually, driving the cost of desalinated water down.

Don't be a moron.

4/4/2007 10:36:04 AM

Quote :

"I'm sorry but theres hard data that the ice of greenland, anarctica and the arctic are melting fast"

I'm sorry but the ice in Antarctica is getting thicker...so why do you lie and say its "melting fast" when thats a complete lie?

Quote :

"Theres no proof its human caused (only 100% evidence)"

wow you certainly are a moron

4/4/2007 10:36:40 AM

Low temperatures in the 20s the next few nights in North Carolina in April

Any of the blind faith global warming proponents want to try and explain this?

4/6/2007 2:21:46 PM

setting up for the ocho ----------->

4/6/2007 2:45:28 PM