ContraBardus Posted November 7, 2015 Share Posted November 7, 2015 This is a cool visualization and article about the cause of Climate Change... What Really Causes Climate Change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Didn't have time to watch the link... sorry. Will do later. An increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere... methane doesn't help either. That's pretty much it in a nutshell. Fossil fuels can cause it, loss of forests can cause it, volcanoes can cause it, methane and carbon dioxide trapped in the soil or at the floor of the ocean and then released can cause it. (the Tundra thawing is probably not so good a thing) Loss of the ozone layer probably adds to it (and the increase in skin cancer). Warming oceans can cause it because warmer oceans hold less gases. We need to figure out how much is human caused (fossil fuels, ozone depletion, loss of forests) and how much is not human caused. Ultimately pumping megatons of fossil fuel byproducts into the air... polluting the oceans, destroying large forests and the increase in cattle farms (methane) does not help. This is not propaganda; it's physics, and chemistry. Whether there is also a natural cause or climate rhythm is yet to be determined... an open mind to our affect on the earth is necessary... because 7 BILLION people and the industry required to sustain those people is going to have an effect. It's just common sense. First law of reality... cause and effect. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction (paraphrased). Since TREES breathe carbon dioxide and create oxygen, I think the number one thing to do first is to protect the vast swaths of rainforests, and plant new forests. TREES should be seen as the lungs of the earth - which they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted November 10, 2015 Super Moderator Share Posted November 10, 2015 If the history of our climate was a twelve hour clock, you'd see that we're trying to get all our answers from the last thirty seconds. Remember when using aerosols was considered the final blow of doom? Now they say aerosols counteract warming assumed to be caused by CO2 emissions, among other factors. According to this week's climate wisdom it would seem we need to get a handle on cow flatulence and return to big hairdos with lots of hairspray. Oh, and just drive your gas powered car normally as the processes for creating and disposing of the materials to make electric cars could do more harm than internal combustion engines. Or maybe not. Personally, I blame the cows. And Obama. I don't know how people can be confused. Either Fox News or NOAA or NASA or IPCC or Al Gore needs to tell me what to think and whom to pay my penance to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 I agree that the statistics are extremely recent. It's a new science. BUT... should we wait until we have hundreds of years of data? hmmmm not sure that is a great idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qadeshet Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 "What really causus Climate Change?" If it's not Greenhouse gases, then it must be bloviating Republicans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 Ayup all that hot air coming from the voids between rightards' ears gotta have some effect... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted November 10, 2015 Super Moderator Share Posted November 10, 2015 BUT... should we wait until we have hundreds of years of data? I didn't say to wait. I asked what we're supposed to believe, do and pay for this week? The only thing that doesn't change week to week is the fact that both sides who are interpreting the piecemeal pronouncements of the infant science are religious in their zealotry. It's become a doomsday industry and also a backlash industry. According to some alarmist predictions, by now all the polar bears should be dead and half of the 50 United States should be under water. Yes, it's just common sense to reduce pollution of all types as much as possible in this modern, mobile, technological world. I just don't get the religious/political stance people have been persuaded to adopt. An expanding and mobile population with rapidly advancing technologies lives on a rock with finite resources. Guess what happens? I don't think wringing our hands and beating ourselves up for existing makes any sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 BUT... should we wait until we have hundreds of years of data? I didn't say to wait. I asked what we're supposed to believe, do and pay for this week? The only thing that doesn't change week to week is the fact that both sides who are interpreting the piecemeal pronouncements of the infant science are religious in their zealotry. It's become a doomsday industry and also a backlash industry. According to some alarmist predictions, by now all the polar bears should be dead and half of the 50 United States should be under water. Yes, it's just common sense to reduce pollution of all types as much as possible in this modern, mobile, technological world. I just don't get the religious/political stance people have been persuaded to adopt. An expanding and mobile population with rapidly advancing technologies lives on a rock with finite resources. Guess what happens? I don't think wringing our hands and beating ourselves up for existing makes any sense. We're ecological sinners. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravenstar Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 It's a shame that this has been politicized 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
midniterider Posted November 10, 2015 Share Posted November 10, 2015 If the history of our climate was a twelve hour clock, you'd see that we're trying to get all our answers from the last thirty seconds. Remember when using aerosols was considered the final blow of doom? Now they say aerosols counteract warming assumed to be caused by CO2 emissions, among other factors. According to this week's climate wisdom it would seem we need to get a handle on cow flatulence and return to big hairdos with lots of hairspray. Oh, and just drive your gas powered car normally as the processes for creating and disposing of the materials to make electric cars could do more harm than internal combustion engines. Or maybe not. Personally, I blame the cows. And Obama. I don't know how people can be confused. Either Fox News or NOAA or NASA or IPCC or Al Gore needs to tell me what to think and whom to pay my penance to. Science. Which denomination do you believe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderator Margee Posted November 10, 2015 Moderator Share Posted November 10, 2015 I always love what George Carlin has to say. He is hilarious!! I have to agree with a lot of this. Here's his thoughts..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 I agree that the statistics are extremely recent. It's a new science. BUT... should we wait until we have hundreds of years of data? hmmmm not sure that is a great idea.If economies are affected, yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 This is not propaganda; it's physics, and chemistry. You forget that the right wing in America doesn't believe in physics and chemistry. Or science. Or facts. Or reality. So your "it's just physics" argument will not work in America. It might work in Canada. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 It's a shame that this has been politicized Anything involving huge amounts of money is going to be politicized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thurisaz Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 Correction: Anything involving the potential to make lots of money will be politicized. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest realchild Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 I know what causes climate change, when huamn bio electical transmission over loads the environmental control protocols. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 This is not propaganda; it's physics, and chemistry. You forget that the right wing in America doesn't believe in physics and chemistry. Or science. Or facts. Or reality. So your "it's just physics" argument will not work in America. It might work in Canada. Can confirm: am Canadian. Argument may not work in Alberta. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 If the history of our climate was a twelve hour clock, you'd see that we're trying to get all our answers from the last thirty seconds. Remember when using aerosols was considered the final blow of doom? Now they say aerosols counteract warming assumed to be caused by CO2 emissions, among other factors. According to this week's climate wisdom it would seem we need to get a handle on cow flatulence and return to big hairdos with lots of hairspray. Oh, and just drive your gas powered car normally as the processes for creating and disposing of the materials to make electric cars could do more harm than internal combustion engines. Or maybe not. Personally, I blame the cows. And Obama. I don't know how people can be confused. Either Fox News or NOAA or NASA or IPCC or Al Gore needs to tell me what to think and whom to pay my penance to. In the last 2 seconds of those 30, we've cut down half the planet's C02 eaters/Oxygen generators and unearthed the past 10 hours worth of carbon and kicked it into the atmosphere. You have to be a special kind of special to think that hasn't had an impact. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted November 14, 2015 Share Posted November 14, 2015 I agree that the statistics are extremely recent. It's a new science. BUT... should we wait until we have hundreds of years of data? hmmmm not sure that is a great idea.If economies are affected, yes Really? Economics isn't even a problem today. We produce far more than we can consume; assuming that's a venerable goal in the first place. The only issue is how it's distributed and we weigh that against the future habitability of the planet. That's just crazy to me. BTW, it's a vast overstatement that we don't have enough data to know. That's merely a propaganda point. There's a reason this is not controversial amongst those who have an understanding of the data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted November 14, 2015 Super Moderator Share Posted November 14, 2015 You have to be a special kind of special to think that hasn't had an impact. I wish I were special enough to figure out a fix. Apparently nobody's that special. Population grows, population uses resources in greater quantity. Pretty much all I can actually do about it is drive some shitty electric car as an empty gesture, then hang my head while moaning 'mea culpas' into the poorly lit night. What else should I do? It seems the alarmists (who, by the way, said that by now I'd be under water and the polar bears would all be dead) just want me to feel bad and take personal responsibility for the Industrial Revolution and modern day China. Seriously, what do you want other than agreeing that people are ignorant, selfish and greedy and have always been so? I didn't invent people, nor did I invent the internal combustion engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vigile Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Well, solutions and whether or not we're the cause are two very different questions. IMO, we'll have to drop capitalism in order to really turn it around. I don't see that happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qadeshet Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Once the Human Race is extinct, the Earth will return to it's natural state. Just a matter of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Once the Human Race is extinct, the Earth will return to it's natural state. Just a matter of time. What we are doing now isn't beyond the range of Earth's natural state. Earth was much hotter then this during the time of the dinosaurs. We could never push Earth out of it's natural range. But one thing we can do is push Earth out of the range where we can survive. If nothing else the Tardigrades will continue to thrive. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted November 15, 2015 Share Posted November 15, 2015 Once the Human Race is extinct, the Earth will return to it's natural state. Just a matter of time. What we are doing now isn't beyond the range of Earth's natural state. Earth was much hotter then this during the time of the dinosaurs. We could never push Earth out of it's natural range. But one thing we can do is push Earth out of the range where we can survive. If nothing else the Tardigrades will continue to thrive. This is exactly it. The Earth will be fine. It's us we should be worried about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ContraBardus Posted November 16, 2015 Author Share Posted November 16, 2015 I like the way Sam Jackson explained in in Kingsman: When you get a virus, you get a fever. That's the human body raising its core temperature to kill the virus. Planet Earth works the same way: Global warming is the fever, mankind is the virus. We're making our planet sick. A cull is our only hope. If we don't reduce our population ourselves, there's only one of two ways this can go: The host kills the virus, or the virus kills the host. Either way... I don't think the situation is drastic enough to consider his solution valid, but he does make a good point here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts