|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
Global Warming
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: Digitalphatman
I am just Curious.... How many ppl feel that Global warming is for real or is just part of earths natural cycle. Can someone so insignificant as human kind do all this damage?
Posted by: Kdr Kane
Nope. There is less pollution in Britain and Europe than there was 50 years ago. Has it made it colder?
Posted by: Gerbilo
Only time will tell...
Posted by: redwench
well, to be a nitpicker......global warming is simply a trend toward warmer average temperatures. it does not assume a cause. the real question is whether we cause it?
and yes, overall pollution is down. but carbon dioxide emissions are up. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. other pollutants, particulates especially, which were once much more common, have little effect on temperature.
so although air quality is much better in many places, those pollutants which have been lowered are not greenhouse gasses.
man can certainly make a large difference. seen a dodo recently? heard about endangered species such as rhino, elephant (asian and indian), tiger? and maybe of more concern to some: the catches in the worlds oceans are becoming much skimpier. smaller and/or fewer fish are being caught. mainly because of commercial overfishing.
so, do we cause global warming? possibly 
we definitely arent helping. 
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Hell, someone "insignificant" can have access to the red button that canl trigger a nuclear holocaust... Man is the most destructive creature on earth, no doubt about that....
Posted by: Digitalphatman
You guys give to much credit to humans.....We cannot be the sole reason for the sift in Global warming. Through out all of the earth's history there have been massive changes to the earths climate. None which could have been caused by us overbearing humans. Scientists belive that both mars and Venus were once much more hospitable than there current conditions today.
Gee did humans cuase that too......
People give humans to much Credit for the so called destruction of the earth.
Oh yeah i heard from my 5th grade teacher that the Rainforst is being destroyed at the incredible rate of a mile a minute...suprised any of its left today.
Posted by: redwench
hehe. you are young, i can tell :P
no one said it was the sole cause. there is no sole cause of much of anything. for instance, there are many causes of melanoma. however, people are advised to use sunscreen, even though the uv radiation is only a partial cause.
lets, see, what are the causes of global warming. changes in earths orbit? no.....
increased volcanic activity (which was the cause in the past)? doubtful. we would have noticed that.
therefore, it seems likely that we have something to do with it. a combination of increased co2 emissions and decreased greenspace could certainly contribute to the problem.
too much credit to humans? we could nuke the entire planet if we wanted to. and we have caused micro climates to change, as well as the extinction of a number of species. its not that far of a leap to small global climate changes. oh, and if humans were on mars or venus, then id say we were the problem.
Posted by: AK47
lets not be silly here. man isnt doing anything to this planet. this big old rock has seen ice ages, metor showers, dinosaurs, whatever.... all I'm saying is that it's seen alot worse than Ford F350s and styra-foam.
People who think we need to protect the planet are absolutely insane. We are nothing. You, me, and your nextdoor neighbor will all die. The planet will out live all of us. Dont wory about this planet- its been around millions of years- humans havent. Look at the dinosaurs. They were all around, but now they are all gone. Some day, humans will be just like that- totally gone. We are just a gnat on the earths neck. Its just waiting to swat us away.
Posted by: Null Actor
I think you can probably blame global warming on nuclear weapons. All that heat and energy ends up warming the atmosphere, the ground, the oceans.
The energy released by nuclear blasts doesn't just go away. It stays trapped in the atmosphere.
Posted by: Chako
It amazes me that anyone could say that. Sigh, I was going to stay out of this one. Oh well...
Humanity has the capacity and the will to do great damage to this planet. We have reaped benefits from this planet and we also have a tendency to not put it back. AK, your argument is flawed drastically. I would agree with you if and that is a big IF, we were common ordinary animals with the technology base to support it. As it is, we do and will cause great harm to this planet. We mine minerals from deep in the earth, taking what we want and leaving the rest as waste products. Problem is that these waste products are high in minerals you just don't see on the surface. You see, these minerals are produced when the correct conditions such as immense pressures, and elements combine together. When we leave this stuff lying around, it leeches into our water ways, killing lots of fish and other aquatic life. That is only the mining industry. Are there any other animals that mine deep in the earth for products...I did not think so.
You see, our constant quest for technology causes much harm to our planet. We pave our cities, drastically changing our landscape. This seriously effects runoff. We build our cities on the best possible land which tends to be in river basins and deltas. We alter water ways to benefit our species. We build hydroelectric dams to garner power. We think nothing of regulating and changing water levels to get maximum output from our power dams regardless of how this effects fish spawning habitats such as the salmon. We destroy lake shores with development because everyone knows that those are the best properties. We build highways across vast distances. Studies have shown that these highways bisect natural territories of large mammals, thereby squeezing them into smaller and smaller areas. If they want to go somewhere else, they risk death crossing these busy highways. We produce plastics which do not biodegrade and are not natural products for they where synthesized in labs. We spill oil into our waterways, run boats that spill gas, and diesel. All the negative effects to aquatic life. We alter everything we touch, we mold our environment, we change our planet. You have the temerity to say that we should just let it go, it will take care of itself. That is true folly to think that man is not doing anything to this planet. Take a look at your city. Once that used to be forest and waterways, natural habitat. Now it is the veritable concrete jungle. Do you see any animals other then those that prosper on the back of man? Didn't think so.
We tear down forest, and replant with a monoculture of neat rowed trees so that they can go back in five years and repeat the process for maximum profit. We attack all wildlife that has a possible gain to it to the brink of extinction. Why? Because nobody owns them and they are free for the taking. You say I am insane...Nay, I say you are insane for thinking that humans are nothing. I have been to places where nothing grows. No plants mean no animals. It is awful what humanity can do. We also tend to stick our heads in the ground and say there isn't a problem. Got news for you, there is a major problem. Ever notice the increased smog, the light pollution that doesn't allow for proper viewing of the stars, the noise pollution that scares away most wildlife, everything we do has an impact. We are dangerous because we can manufacture and alter things. We are the only species that can do this. We are run by profit and greed. Money makes the world go around, regardless of the cost to our planet. Dinosaurs did nothing to this planet other then walk, sleep, procreate, and hunt. We on the other hand have changed all aspects of our surroundings. We create acid rain, we create pollution, we create dead habitats, we destroy marshlands, forest, and even oceans. We cause extinction in the most quickest manner. You may scoff at me and classify me as a tree hugger. But I am not. I am someone who has a science background. I have done studies and learned from first hand experience at what humans can do. Often times, unwittingly. Problem is that everything is complex. Everything is tied together, and we only know a small piece of the puzzle. Our ignorance often cause a domino effect. Did you know that salmon often only has 1 or 2 spawning beds in some lakes. If you build a dock on these prime locations, you have just destroyed the salmon in that lake. Stuff like that is frightening. Because someone didn't know that a fish species required a 3 meter x 2 meter patch of lakeshore, they ruined fishing for their children. That is only a small example. Unlike all that came before us, we will leave a telling legacy of our disregard for our habitat. AK, I can give you a long list of why we are not "Gnats" or insignificant nothings to this planet.
As for global warming. I would say that the earth is in a warm period, and that we are making it several degrees warmer with all the crap we pump into the air. Don’t even argue that we have no effect. It is pointless. There is too much evidence that we are slowly altering our climate. I can cite northern lakes fish studies among other things.. However, we still only know a small piece of the puzzle. There is only accurate or in the very least, scientifically admissible temperature measurements for the last 200 years or so. That is to short of a time period to say much about anything.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
bah... We had more global warming from Mount Penatubo in the Phillipines from about 1992-1997. If you tell me that didn't have any warming effect, you don't know what you are talking about. So, if the Earth recovered from that, what makes you think people can have such an effect on the Earth.
I'm not saying it's impossible. Just not very probable.
Most people seem to forget that the land mass of Earth is only 1/7th of the total surface area. Airplanes, telephones and television make the world seem enormously small. Giving people credit for being able to severely alter the Earth is like bestowing God-like powers on them.
Life isn't an RPG.
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Hehe, it's Mount Pinatubo, Kane, and I was in college during the eruption - rained white ash for almost two weeks, and we were hundreds of miles away from the volcano... caused millions of dollars in damages and left hundreds dead and thousands homeless... it was pretty bad...
Anyway, if you think about the amount of time that human civilization has been in existence (which is less than 1 percent the amount of time that the dinosaurs ruled the earth), and you see all the changes that took place althroughout that time, some of ya could learn to not underestimate the power of human knowledge and its potential for destruction.
And the scary thing is man doesn't have to be intelligent or brilliant to cause damage. For now it may not be evident, but hundreds of years from now, when all the natural resources in the planet have been used up or wasted away, when there are too many people per square feet to accomodate, when man has gone tired of using up the land and sets their sights on our oceans and even outer space, people will look back and say "damn, that was where it all started."
Kinda reminds you of locusts, does it?
This does not mean that man will actually DO these kinds of things. The debate here is whether or not they could, which does not necessarily mean that they would.
Giving people too much credit for altering the Earth may be like giving them God-like powers, but NOT giving them credit or recognizing the extreme possibility that they could do something like this is like saying a tiny malignant cell has no possibility whatsoever in causing massive cancer...
Posted by: Canis Lupus
Also, anyone who can debunk my statement about man being the most destructive creature on Earth is free to do so ...
Posted by: AK47
wow chako- you could write a book.
The earth is stronger than us. Dont underestimate it. Something killed the dinosaurs. It could kill us too.
Posted by: Chako
Kane, have you ever heard of "homeostasis"? It is the concept that systems like a balance. If something disrupts the system, then other failsafes will kick in and bring the system back into the norm. For example, take the human body. When we get hypothermia, our body temperature is very low. The body will then try and generate heat to maintain its normal body temperature. In fact, our body temperature follows a sin wave. Too cold, and it goes up by doing muscle contractions, shivering, etc. Too warm, and we sweat to get some evaporation going. So our body temperature follows the rule of homeostasis. Now the earth is much like our body. It also follows homeostasis. Geologist have pieced a record of warming and cooling cycles of the earth. It follows a sin wave pattern. The earth goes into cooling stages whereby we see ice ages, and then it warms up. These cycles takes millions and millions of years. It is nothing you or I will see a difference in our life time. We are talking about vast periods of time here. Not 10 years or even 300 years. When a volcano such as Mount Pinatubo blows, it creates lots of ash and soot and sulfur gases into the atmosphere. This has the most effect in the microclimatic region that the volcano finds itself. The fine particles then go into the upper atmosphere and causes lots of green house effect to occur for a short period of time. This would account for the warming effect you mention. Now, these particles do not stay in the upper atmosphere for a long time. They react with elements such as oxygen and hydrogen and fall back down to earth. The upper winds help in this cleaning up process. There is also gravity pulling it down eventually. This is why the Earth recovered from that. It was a small blip that lasted only a few years. Yes, the land mass is small compared to the water mass, however, we tend to drive and burn lots of petroleum products which are known to mess around with the status quo. This has been going on for a 100 years or so, and every year, it rises. We are not talking about a small blip. We are talking about a constant input of harmful gases and particles in the upper atmosphere that increases our aspect in regard to the sun. This is a different matter. We are now negating the Earth’s defenses in maintaining the status quo. We are unbalancing homeostasis. I don't, for one instance believe that we are not affecting our climate. It is a slow process, but it is warming up. Many may attribute this to natural cycling, but I think it is rising too fast in too short of a period to not be worrisome. I think this will be the last of my overly long diatribes on this subject. If you want to know more, go read a text book on the subject. 
Posted by: AK47
Chako, you probably wrote the book!
Posted by: Kdr Kane
Chako,
I think you proved my point. There is a balance. I just don't think that we have the capacity to break that balance. The earth has too much inertia (for lack of a better word).
The problem is that I can read all the books on the subject. I'm just not going to believe them. I see what's in front of my eyes.
I've even heard scientists say it may be good for the earth to warm up a few degrees.
When you go to sea and only see ocean for weeks before you can reach the nearest land, you become awed with the vastness of the earth.
When I see Mt. St. Helens erupt with decades of power stronger than a nuclear bomb and the gases escape, the earth still recovers.
Mount Pinatubo exploded. The scientists said that we should be blanketed with a darker atmosphere for a few years. I watched. My summers and winters were milder for about 4 years. Less extremes of temperatures.
What happens when we push out more CO2 into the air? More plants grow because they have more fuel. Resulting in more oxygen. Life in the ocean becomes more fruitful. The ocean provides most of the oxygen in our atmosphere. The rain forests provide a small portion of that. It all balances out.
The resiliency of the earth amazes me.
I'm sorry I disagree. I just don't see how I can ever change my mind. I grew up in the "liberal" schools where they taught environmentalism and such. I didn't grow out of it because I run a big business. I don't control anything thing that would benefit from harming the environment. So, why did I disregard those teachings?
Because, when people use fear to prove their point, they have no point.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
Laggy,
Sorry for the spelling on Pinatubo. I did a search and it came up the other way too.
That was the most devastating natural disaster I've ever seen, on TV of course. It must have been completely horrific to be so close to it.
Posted by: Null Actor
You guys are missing the point. It's not wether we harm the earth or not, it's wether or not we make it inhabitable for ourselves.
And that IS happening. Just look at cities where people on bikes wear air filters and gas masks so that the pollution doesn't kill them. Look at the oceans, lakes, and rivers, where it's near impossible to catch fish anymore. Look at the species that are being wiped out of both the food chain and the natural order of things.
Posted by: Ion Silverbolt
 Quote:
Originally posted by AK47
People who think we need to protect the planet are absolutely insane.
|
Yeah, I doubt several BILLION people living in the world could have any effect on the Earth. People wanting to protect the planet? What's wrong with that anyways?
Here's some points where we have inflicted damage already:
- Destroying rainforests will eventually start showing itself. A lot of medicines and exotic ingredients come from rainforests. A lot of plant species have already become extinct in rainforests due to the reduction.
- Some of the local rivers here you can't even eat the fish. Fresh water fish for some odd reason retain a lot of pollutants that enter the water. So it is advised by the EPA to not eat fish from the local river.
- Time outdoors in some major cities is limited due to the amount of smog. Both from factories and mainly automobiles. Sure you think one city is tiny compared to the Earth's size, but these cities are churning it out every freaking day.
Sure the Earth will go on, but the quality of the air and water WILL be worse and won't fix itself overnight if left unchecked. A lot of water pollutants have made it into the aquifer as well. When was the last time you could drink faucet water? Do you think people like buying bottled water to drink? wtf? Why buy water now?
If pollution can do that to our water supply, it sure as hell can effect the atmosphere and air quality.
Posted by: Bishop
Will the earth outlast us?
Of course.
could we make the earth uninhabitable?
I doubt it.
Do we have the potential to seriously **** things up for ourselves in the meantime?
of course, the fallout series was based on a very real possibility you know.
When you get down to it, fanatical people who cry about the earth annoy me, but then again so do the fanatics on the other side of the board, who say we can do what we will and be damned with the rest of it.
precaution should be taken of course, but not to the point where the planet is more important than us unless the situations are dire.
For now, we need it to survive. a hundred years from now? who knows? a thousand?
Sometimes I wonder what would have happened if someone wrote a completely different set of laws for physics.
Posted by: redwench
hehe bish.
yes, the planet will still be here until the sun goes supernova. that doesnt mean it will support life, although that would be the extreme case.
more likely, well just end up making the planet a living hell. dunno if anyone has read the paratwa series. its sci fi, dont remember the author. anyway, the entire population has to move off planet for some reason. so only criminals are now on earth. what a lovely concept.
but, as we take precautions against melanoma, for instance, we need to take precautions against severe global warming. it may be unlikely to happen, but if it does, its devastating or deadly.
using more solar, wind, and nuclear power would reduce the co2 emissions significantly. and would not hurt the all important economy.
oh, chako. tree farms are better than what they used to do: just cut down virgin forest without replanting. tree farming for paper and wood products is the reponsible thing to do. much better than destroying established habitat.
personally, i think we need to go total recall  you know, mining on mars. that would be a good way to get a lot of the nastier pollution and dangerous manufacturing off this planet. tho it would be nice if we could terraform mars.
Posted by: taco_fox
Quote:
Originally posted by redwench
personally, i think we need to go total recall you know, mining on mars. that would be a good way to get a lot of the nastier pollution and dangerous manufacturing off this planet. tho it would be nice if we could terraform mars.
|
Well, if movies and computer games have tought me anything, being on Mars is NEVER a good thing.
I mean.. look and DOOM. And Red Faction. They were miners, but then, BAM! I, er.. the character starts killing everyone! Do you really want the families of those poor guards to learn their daddy has been killed by some crazy miner on another planet? And Total Recal. Would you really want to see Arnold's eyes bug out like that again? I, for one, DON'T.
Uhh.. anyway, if we terraformed Mars into a habitable planet, we'll just mess it up. As Agent Smith of The Matrix said, humans are a disease... they use all the natural resources in an area and multiply. Or something to that effect.
Posted by: Chako
Hehe, I am not one of them "Save the world" fanatics. My post may say such, but you will not find me doing environmental rallies, or joining Green Peace. I have read many scientific journals on the subject, looked at the data, seen the computations. It looks like we do have the means to warm the planet. I did not enter this discussion to argue. I know people are set in their ways, and that is respectable and as things should be. I am a Biology teacher. My motto is "Biodiversity rules". We effect biodiversity, mostly in a negative impact. Red, I will have to disagree with you there. Nature will cause succession on its own. You will get Primary, secondary and finally tertiary growth occurring into a clear cut logging patch. Nature will take care of itself when left alone, but it is a slow process. The logging industry does not want to wait, and they don't want to waste money in fetching the lumber again. So what do they do? Why not plant huge fields of poplar for paper products etc....There is a problem with this, and it is a significant one. Whenever you get a monoculture (These things are never found in nature), it will aid in pest and disease problems. Reason being that there is no more biodiversity. No more prey/predator relationships because we make the area hostile to some species, and heaven to others. All farmers know this problem, and some are beginning to mix their crops to better combat the problem. Bah...and it wouldn't be so bad if the logging industry would only farm a selected area, but they don't. They replant, and wait 5 or so years to come back. Meantime, they are reaping other forest and then replanting, ect. Is there a right or wrong way about it? I fully understand that lumber and wood is very important. It creates a lot of jobs, and produces essential materials. So I am most definitely not a tree hugger. I like the lumber industry, I just think they have a long way to go in refining their practices to be more environmentally conscious. What they should do is plant the trees all over the place, not in neat rows. They should also plant different species. What they are doing now is not better then clear cutting. At lest with clear cutting, a new natural forest will emerge in a few dozen years. I have visited several "model forests" sponsored by logging companies, and it is awful. People can take a walk into these protected areas and walk among rows of neat trees lined up like soldiers on parade. Not my idea of a model forest.
Bishop...think Love Canal.
Posted by: redwench
i didnt say those things were good. just that they were better than the alternative, which is deforesting old growth.
its simply a variation on the standard farm, only the crops are every 5-7 years instead of yearly. they simply rotate between farms for harvesting. not there to be pretty. and yes, disease is a problem, as it is on farms.
but those replanted areas, as opposed to farms, are in some ways worse. as you said, ugly as sin, with no biodiversity. i say leave the natural areas alone, and muck up the farms
Posted by: Digitalphatman
Yeah red I am real young....19 to be exact. You may consider that young, i don't know.
I guess you believe I have no idea what i am talking about since I am so "Young". People always seem to need a big deal out of everything. Doom and Gloom, the worlds gonna end, we are all going to choke to death, and become radioactive mutants. And humans are going to be the one to blame......
There is no concrete scientific proof that global warming is being caused by us and not by some change in the earth. THe earth may be warming a degree or 2 but really humans causing it. I read a lot of science publications, especially Scientific American, but all i see is probability that humans are causing the warmth.
I am simply talking about global warming...not deforestation, extinction of species etc.....those are different problems which are a much worse threat to the earth than Global warming.
Posted by: Gerbilo
Hey all of you, you are doing an excellent job with this topic,
LOL AK F350s hehehe....
as I said before, only time will tell for all these issue, but we are comming close to a point of no return in our destruction I think.... lets hope it all works out
Posted by: redwench
actually, i said why i thought you were young, but you apparently didnt catch it. only very rarely is there a sole cause for anything, much less a complicated phenomenon like global warming. only the young or the foolish think there would be only one single cause of anything with any complexity.
Posted by: Digitalphatman
I realize there is not a sole cause for everything, but everywhere I look I am bombarded with how humans are destroying the earth.... and 100 years from now we will all be dead because of it.
Posted by: tkron
Actually, If I remember right methane (sp) is one of the Greenhouse gasses, and one of the leading things that produce it is Cow Manure.
Posted by: Bishop
I highly doubt we'll be wiped out in 100 years.
the two most astonishing traits in the human species is gross stupidity and the keen yearning to survive, to live, to acomplish something.
The only way we won't be here in 100 years is if the earth itself cracks apart and seperates.
Gross majority of the population could be wiped out of course, but humans all-together?
I doubt it.
Posted by: Kdr Kane
Things must be getting better. The youth of the 60s and 70s thought we would be wiped out in 20-50 years. 
Posted by: Bishop
h0h0.
100 years from now we'll think we'll last a century or two and a comet will come out of nowhere and prove us wrong.
Posted by: Gerbilo
too many movies for bish!! or books in your case
Anyway, it's gonna be robots, like in the matrix and terminator, i was watching some show on TLC I think it was a few years back, multiple scientists were saying how they think the terminator scenario will take place 2040-2060 hehehe... let's wait and see!!
Posted by: Bishop
gerb.
way back in the day, multiple scientists thought we got blood from food.
Posted by: Gerbilo
we dont?
Posted by: Bishop
too tired right now to remember the study of basic biology but if I remember correctly back in the old days they thought food and such was the PRIMARY Source of blood.
Posted by: Gerbilo
what about leaches! you need a bleeding!
Posted by: AK47
Quote:
Originally posted by Bishop
100 years from now we'll think we'll last a century or two and a comet will come out of nowhere and prove us wrong.
|
thats what I was trying to say. Sure, we can "harm" the earth, but we could always get smacked by a comet or something and we'll all be gone. The earth is stronger than us humans.
I dont understand the debate- We will all be dead in less than 100 years (not the human race, just us who are alive now). I'm pretty sure the earth can last that long. We have nothing to worry about. As long as we are alive, the earth will be too. What about after we are dead? who cares- you'll be dead, let the next generation deal with it.
|
|
|
|
|
