What

[cowbla1]

You know what doesn't make sense? al gore talks about global warming and where i am its getting colder and colder. That just doesn't make sense to me. Like this year, it hasn't snowed where i live for 7 years and so far this year its snowed twice does this make sense to you? Plus it is 3 degrees colder than last year.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

You know what doesn't make sense? al gore talks about global warming and where i am its getting colder and colder. That just doesn't make sense to me. Like this year, it hasn't snowed where i live for 7 years and so far this year its snowed twice does this make sense to you? Plus it is 3 degrees colder than last year.

Global warming isn't about every country in the world getting hotter, its about some countries getting hotter and drier and others getting wetter and warmer or drier and colder etc- really i think they should call it "dramatic climate change" instead of "global warming" as global warming is kinda misleading. It might be getting colder for you guys right now, but my country is certainly warming up- the last few years have broken so many records concerning warm temperatures and stuff.

 

[andywg]

Although records for weather have only really been kept for about 200 years at tops. Considering the Earth is around 4,600,000,000 years old, one can't help but feel it is scratching the surface for looking back.

Climate change (as it tends to be referred to now) is certainly an issue, though the true root cause of it (too many people) is never discussed due to, inter alia certain religious views on contraception.

 

[FcF]

i wonder who still got the last laugh...
maybe you are affected by global colding??
haha!

 

[Colin_T]

there is global dimming as well as warming. Global dimming is caused by all the smog in the air blocking out or reflecting the sunlight, thus reducing the amount of radiant energy hitting the earth. Less sunlight hitting the earth means cooler temperatures.

 

[geo7x]

Another thing that annoys me is when people go round saying "save the planet", the planet will be fine whatever we throw at it, none of it will make a difference, planet earth has been through every temperature change and atmosphere make up imaginable, the only thing that could happen is that we could only be effecting wildlife along with our own existence.

 

[FcF]

Another thing that annoys me is when people go round saying "save the planet", the planet will be fine whatever we throw at it, none of it will make a difference, planet earth has been through every temperature change and atmosphere make up imaginable, the only thing that could happen is that we could only be effecting wildlife along with our own existence.

aren't we part of the planet?

 

[OohFeeshy]

Not geographically (as it were).

Personally, I'm not too bothered. If we don't get killed by global warming, we'll get killed by bird flu, or a bit chunk of space rock, or a supervolcano, or a nuclear war, or famine, or drought, or when the Sun eventually dies, or...

We're insignificant. The Universe doesn't care if we're killing our planet. If not, it'll only do the job itself, in time.

 

[cheesy feet]

Indeed, eventually earth will be drawn to the sun and it'll become toast anyway.
Thing is we will get more extreme weather and its always the LEDC's who suffer, along with the wildlife.
It depends if anyone makes and effort to reduce carbon emissions.But what happens if its done, yet we still get 'global warming'?Global warming is the earths surface/atmosphere heating up, so often whats debated has little to do with the true meaning of global warming.
Researchers do have sufficient evidence that the climate temp is changing overly fast, compared to the past millions of years, through ice core samples.
As said before though there is so many factors which could/is causing a rise in temp.

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

Regardless of whether man-made global warming exists or not, we are driving thousands of types of animals to despair and extinction- we still need to do a heck of a lot more about what we're doing to the planet, like over-polluting it, because we're undoing millions of years of evolution by driving so many animals to extinction etc- what is worse is that we're aware of this, and yet many of us still fail to really do anything about it.

Another thing that annoys me is when people go round saying "save the planet", the planet will be fine whatever we throw at it, none of it will make a difference, planet earth has been through every temperature change and atmosphere make up imaginable, the only thing that could happen is that we could only be effecting wildlife along with our own existence.

Whats your definition of the planet being "fine"? Its true this planet has been through a lot, yet that doesn't mean that mega extinctions didn't happen. I think when people go around saying "save the planet", they are talking about preserving or saving the life/ecosystems/wildlife/cleanliness of planet as we know it should be- is this not important to you?

 

[cheesy feet]

Regardless of whether man-made global warming exists or not, we are driving thousands of types of animals to despair and extinction- we still need to do a heck of a lot more about what we're doing to the planet, like over-polluting it, because we're undoing millions of years of evolution by driving so many animals to extinction etc- what is worse is that we're aware of this, and yet many of us still fail to really do anything about it.

Ignorance, 'if it doesn't affect me It doesn't matter' is the attitude of a lot of people.By 2050 they predict most the worlds rainforest's will be gone, if the current status is carried on.That will include something like 90% of the worlds insects and reptiles.The first holiday I'm taking is definitely to the amazon.
I can't believe Whaling still has not been stopped...
Look at how many people who may bail out of the beijing olympics because of the smog in the air http/canadianpress.google.com/article/AL...sE1Ydjaxz--UFlA
This is plain wrong.
http/www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...in_page_id=1811

 

[geo7x]

Regardless of whether man-made global warming exists or not, we are driving thousands of types of animals to despair and extinction- we still need to do a heck of a lot more about what we're doing to the planet, like over-polluting it, because we're undoing millions of years of evolution by driving so many animals to extinction etc- what is worse is that we're aware of this, and yet many of us still fail to really do anything about it.

Another thing that annoys me is when people go round saying "save the planet", the planet will be fine whatever we throw at it, none of it will make a difference, planet earth has been through every temperature change and atmosphere make up imaginable, the only thing that could happen is that we could only be effecting wildlife along with our own existence.

Whats your definition of the planet being "fine"? Its true this planet has been through a lot, yet that doesn't mean that mega extinctions didn't happen. I think when people go around saying "save the planet", they are talking about preserving or saving the life/ecosystems/wildlife/cleanliness of planet as we know it should be- is this not important to you?

The word "planet" does not include animals and humans, which are not connected to the earth. I mean the planet in the geographical sense, as in the big ball of rock that we live on. The earth itself is not going to blow up due to global warming, millions of years ago the whole earth was just volcanoes and molten rock, with no oxygen in the air at all. Seeing as the earth has been through that I doubt a few degrees is going to be detrimental to the planet.

I know thats they are "talking about" but it's still not literally true and people should perhaps get their facts straight that just because global warming may be the end of many species of animals and even humans it will not be the end of planet earth. I think it's stupid how such people that go round saying "save the planet" are so naive as to think that without us the planet is nothing, when in fact we are nothing to the planet.

I agree that something must be done quickly to stop climate change, but just because some fantastic species may be driven to extinction it doesn't mean all wildlife is going to be wiped out, the animal kingdom has survived through a lot more and in the end they will come out better than we will.

Something definitely has to be done about climate change and in fact I'm as worried as any other person, but I think people just need to see the broader picture and stop being swayed by the media so much. I think that if an asteroid hit the earth tomorrow then the media would blame humans in some way.

I personally think that the government needs to make it much easier and much cheaper to go "green", and I don't see the point in building millions of houses, millions of cars, millions of factories and millions of power stations that still use loads of energy and will need to be upgraded to be greener. Why can't houses be built with solar panels and wind turbines to create renewable energy? Why isn't something happening faster to find out more about alternative fuels to cars? Why are car companies still churning out gas guzzlers? And why are power stations still being built that run off fossil fuels?

I just find it worrying that even top of the range buildings and cars have a large carbon footprint, what does that say about the future?

 

[Tokis-Phoenix]

I personally think that the government needs to make it much easier and much cheaper to go "green", and I don't see the point in building millions of houses, millions of cars, millions of factories and millions of power stations that still use loads of energy and will need to be upgraded to be greener. Why can't houses be built with solar panels and wind turbines to create renewable energy? Why isn't something happening faster to find out more about alternative fuels to cars? Why are car companies still churning out gas guzzlers? And why are power stations still being built that run off fossil fuels?

I just find it worrying that even top of the range buildings and cars have a large carbon footprint, what does that say about the future?

The reason for all the house building and stuff is because people need these things a lot right now and the reason why they aren't all being environmentally friendly built is because its still very expensive to build these sorts of eco-friendly buildings, and the government is trying to create cheap affordable properties rather than expensive ones of which they are already plenty of.
Solar panels are not very popular right now because they're very expensive to afford/install, and people aren't too fond of wind turbines because they create a lot of noise and are a real eyesore. Plenty of research/funding is going into alternative fuels, but this kind of stuff is never going to be achieved overnight- companies produce gas guzzling cars simply because people buy them (demand=supply), if people didn't want to buy such cars then the companies would stop making them (or go bust).
The reason why we're still using coal stations is because its still affordable, and while nuclear power is a lot more environmentally friendly and efficient than burning fossil fuels, due to the Chernobyl incident in the 80's the general public has a stupid irrational fear of nuclear power, even though such an incident would now be impossible to repeat (nuclear power generators now have thick concrete domes covering them, so if anything bad does happen like the plant goes into meltdown, the radiation is contained in the concrete dome and so doesn't kill off everything in the surrounding area for miles around etc).

 

[Lynden]

Although records for weather have only really been kept for about 200 years at tops. Considering the Earth is around 4,600,000,000 years old, one can't help but feel it is scratching the surface for looking back.

Ding ding, we have a winner. The prevalent problem in anthropogenic global warming "research" (meant in only the very loosest sense of the word) is that there simply isn't enough of it. The British government, and soon my own country's and our neighbour's to the south, stand to make an impressive sum of money from all these ridiculous "carbon taxes"; while the major oil companies can also benefit, though probably not as largely, from debunking their claims. Who to believe? Both sides accuse the other of propaganda, though to be honest the amount of it on the pro-AGW's side is much larger and certainly more threatening and frightening...

there is global dimming as well as warming. Global dimming is caused by all the smog in the air blocking out or reflecting the sunlight, thus reducing the amount of radiant energy hitting the earth. Less sunlight hitting the earth means cooler temperatures.

I recently watched a video regarding global dimming, and I had to come to the conclusion that it is about as correct or believable as is An Inconvenient Truth. One of the central issues in the video is that a planet without global dimming is worse than one with it, but consider this: according to current thinking the Mesozoic Era's CO2 concentration was, for the majority of the time, above 1000 PPM and hovered above 2000 PPM for several million years, and they expect educated people to believe that the 300 or so PPM we have now is going to literally - as the movie implies - roast the biosphere?

Another thing that annoys me is when people go round saying "save the planet", the planet will be fine whatever we throw at it, none of it will make a difference, planet earth has been through every temperature change and atmosphere make up imaginable, the only thing that could happen is that we could only be effecting wildlife along with our own existence.

Certainly. The species that apparently stands to lose the most from an AGW is us. We are the ones that need the most of everything that can be needed. Polar bears, penguins, etcetera will probably survive this current interglacial phase with ease, the same way they survived the Holocene Maximum. The "surprising" growth of the majority of ice sheets (especially in Antarctica, where 90% have been growing) and stable temperatures (if not slight cooling which has apparently been recognized) will probably not hurt them either.

Regardless of whether man-made global warming exists or not, we are driving thousands of types of animals to despair and extinction- we still need to do a heck of a lot more about what we're doing to the planet, like over-polluting it, because we're undoing millions of years of evolution by driving so many animals to extinction etc- what is worse is that we're aware of this, and yet many of us still fail to really do anything about it.

I agree - all these measures to "prevent" an AGW are probably fruitless (according to many current predictions) and highly pedantic, not to mention rather anti-human. By this I am referring to how many problems the development of Africa could solve, a development which AGW prevention acts aim to undermine; 1) the starving and disease, 2) if other developed countries are an example, gradually reduce the population size, and 3) help save the rainforests and other ecosystems as primitive methods of farming such as slash and burn are abandoned. Of course they would still need to follow some guidelines, those same that the other developed countries are trying to follow, with varying degrees of success.

 

[Colin_T]

there is global dimming as well as warming. Global dimming is caused by all the smog in the air blocking out or reflecting the sunlight, thus reducing the amount of radiant energy hitting the earth. Less sunlight hitting the earth means cooler temperatures.

I recently watched a video regarding global dimming, and I had to come to the conclusion that it is about as correct or believable as is An Inconvenient Truth. One of the central issues in the video is that a planet without global dimming is worse than one with it, but consider this: according to current thinking the Mesozoic Era's CO2 concentration was, for the majority of the time, above 1000 PPM and hovered above 2000 PPM for several million years, and they expect educated people to believe that the 300 or so PPM we have now is going to literally - as the movie implies - roast the biosphere?

The global dimming I was talking about is to do with fine particles from smog (air pollution, vehicle emissions and factory smoke) in the upper atmosphere. These collect in the clouds and very tiny amounts of water vapour gather on them and they act as mirrors reflecting the sunlight back out into space. CO2 is a separate issue.
To prove my theory have a look outside at night when the sky is cloudy. There is heaps of light being reflected back to earth from all the city lights, (street lights, buildings, etc). This never used to be the case. Years ago you could go out at night when it was cloudy and it was black. The cloud blocked out all the natural moon and star light. With all the smog particles acting as mirrors, the light humans create is getting bounced back to earth. And the sunlight that used to warm the planet is getting bounced back into space.
The earth is warming up slowly due to the build up of greenhouse gases but also from the electricity we use and the vehicle engines that are running. These things produce heat and in small quantities isn’t a problem. However, when there are 3 billion vehicles using internal combustion engines, running and producing heat, that is a lot of excess heat being produced.
And all the electricity that gets used produces a lot of heat too. Most household electrical items run on 12volts yet our house power supplies run between 160 & 240v. The conversion of the higher voltage into a lower voltage produces immense amounts of heat. This can be felt coming off the transformer in any electrical appliance. Many electrical appliances have motors that produce heat when running. The common refrigerator can actually warm a house by a couple of degrees. Even the home PC produces a lot of heat. And to compensate we use airconditioners to cool the local environment. But the air conditioners produce heat as well. They just happen to cool more air than they heat.