Go to Otherpower.com Home Page Go to Forcefield Shopping Cart Go to Wondermagnet.com Home Page
Front Page - [Homebrewed Electricity-- (wind) (solar) (hydro) (steam) (controls) (storage) (mechanical)] - Classifieds - Site News
Everything - Newbies - [Remote Living-- (housing) (heat) (light) (water)] - Rants & Opinion - Diaries - Our Products
Global Warming


By wdyasq, Section Rants & Opinion
Posted on Mon Aug 6th, 2007 at 01:55:35 PM MST
What's a fellow to do?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece

Stirring the pot and observing ... driving a 4 X 4 more earth friendly than taking the train? Organic milk is bad for the environment? Who would have thought!

Ron

Global Warming | 47 comments (47 topical, 0 editorial)

Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#1)
by dinges on Mon Aug 6th, 2007 at 08:26:32 AM MST
(User Info)

"Save the planet, kill yourself"

(Peter hands Ron the revolver)



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#2)
by fungus (info@reenergy.co.uk) on Mon Aug 6th, 2007 at 09:51:21 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.reenergy.co.uk/

Not everyone eats meat/milk...takes 10kg of plant matter to make one of meat..so otherwise you would come out less than the car...

'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.'-Albert Einstein
Fungus - www.reenergy.co.uk


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#4)
by SpirckleM on Mon Aug 6th, 2007 at 05:12:38 PM MST
(User Info)

Good point fungus.  The problem with these kind of calculations always seem to be about the built in assumptions and what is left out of the calculations.  For instance, if you look at just what a beef cow emits, then you can see a problem, but what about the work that a cow does or can do if allowed its natural inclinations.  For instance, fertilizing the soil and helping plants bulk up faster has got to reduce greenhouse gases somewhat which would seem to counteract the methane produced.

Animals can do other important work that could eliminate other fossil fuel usage.  For instance, goat herds are now being used to clear construction sites of brush and brambles instead of using a bulldozer, and the goats are happy to do it.  Chickens can do more than just cackle and lay eggs; they can also be used as chicken tractors to follow after cattle and scratch the manure into the soil and clear weeds.

The whole idea of these ivory tower calculations is just laughable.

--------
Using the best of today's thinking to create the problems of tomorrow

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#6)
by fungus (info@reenergy.co.uk) on Wed Aug 8th, 2007 at 08:21:53 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.reenergy.co.uk/

'Chickens can do more than just cackle and lay eggs; they can also be used as chicken tractors to follow after cattle and scratch the manure into the soil and clear weeds.'
Not in a factory farm. But thats getting into a whole different argument :-)

'Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.'-Albert Einstein
Fungus - www.reenergy.co.uk
[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#7)
by finnsawyer on Fri Aug 10th, 2007 at 08:44:42 AM MST
(User Info)

And pigs, if put in a corral type pen, will plow up the ground for you, getting it ready for planting a garden.
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#3)
by Stonebrain on Mon Aug 6th, 2007 at 12:18:47 PM MST
(User Info)

Don't worry,

soon the cars will eat all the cereals,only the crumbs be left for us

The cars will be "green" and humans will be starving.

cheers,
stonebrain



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#5)
by finnsawyer on Wed Aug 8th, 2007 at 08:19:24 AM MST
(User Info)

Michigan won't build any more ethanol plants to produce ethanol from corn.  They figure there is no more land available to grow corn.  But the deal is now to use wood and other organics.  The problem is these other processes apparently cost more per gallon.  As someone who has had a hand in small scale farming for years, I figure there must be some way to cash in on this ethanol thing before the bubble bursts without loosing my shirt (never trust a politician).  Even here where we have nine months of winter and three months of tough sledding.
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#8)
by joesfoundry (joesfoundry@hotmail.com) on Fri Aug 10th, 2007 at 10:26:07 AM MST
(User Info)

All this global warming crap is exactly that.  The has been going the warming and cooling cycles since is was formed.  Example would be during on of those dinosaur times peroids there where tropical forrest as far north as canada.  Way way way warmer than today, and geuss what there were as far as we know no dinos driving around in suv or huge dino coal fired power plants.  
  Then you dont ever hear Al hypocrite Gore talk about when temp goes up water vapor goes up which in turn creates more rain, more rain means more CO2 gets scrubbed from air entering the ocean.  Then that make Calcium Carbonate.  That what people dont under stand the ocean and rain scrub far more CO2 from the atmosphere than plants.  In the 70's it was GLOBAL COOLING AAAH WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE.  Now its the same sentence but with warming instead of cooling.....i say give it some more time and they will change it again to cooling.



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#9)
by joesfoundry (joesfoundry@hotmail.com) on Fri Aug 10th, 2007 at 10:28:06 AM MST
(User Info)

TYPO: the earth has been going through warming and cooling cycles since the planet was formed

[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#37)
by luckeydog (bryan@coloradowindpower.com) on Sat Aug 18th, 2007 at 03:09:56 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.coloradowindpower.com

Joesfoundry

Yes you are right!

But we cant allow the earth to have any kind of
weather change the earth has no right to get warmer
under no circumstances... we must control this
rebellious planet.....lol

Luckeydog

.
wind gens are much funner to watch than solar panels. Broomfield,Colorado
[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#11)
by finnsawyer on Sat Aug 11th, 2007 at 09:04:58 AM MST
(User Info)

At one time the carbon dioxide level was supposedly 10 times what it is today.  I really wonder how they can really measure natural processes accurately enough to tell what is really causing the global warming.  There is no law that says the energy output of the sun can't change.  Can they measure it at all frequencies accurately?  And how do you measure the total CO2 coming from volcanoes and geothermal vents?

Perhaps the real issue is that the Global Warming Alarmists seem to be turning into the Global Warming Gestapo, threatening to destroy the careers of those who disagree with them, or worse.
GeoM
[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#12)
by DanB (danb@*no spam*otherpower.com) on Sat Aug 11th, 2007 at 12:40:32 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.otherpower.com/

'At one time the carbon dioxide level was supposedly 10 times what it is today. '

I wonder when that was or where you got that information?

From stuff I read - it amazes me that all this is still so controversial...  I think a lot of people are in denial actually.  The article ron posted was quite interesting though...

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#13)
by finnsawyer on Sun Aug 12th, 2007 at 08:40:29 AM MST
(User Info)

There's more.  Originally the atmosphere was methane until those oxygen fixing bacteria appeared.  Since methane and oxygen can't co-exist in the atmosphere, the oxygen won out.  It's level has also varied greatly.  The planet has also gone through at least one period of time lasting millions of years when it was completely covered with ice.  The evidence for that is the existence of drop stones in the tropics.  It was rescued from this condition by the slow, but large, build up of carbon dioxide by volcanoes and other geothermal processes, which led to the factor of ten compared to today.  When the planet warmed up enough the rains came bringing that CO2 into contact with the surface.  This resulted in the formation of a type of limestone having no fossils, which is the evidence for the process.  There have also been geologic upheavals affecting the atmosphere, such as the Siberian Traps, an extremely large area of volcanic activity, which they think was caused by an asteroid impact on the opposite side of the planet.  The shock waves set off the volcanic activity.  Most of this comes from the Science Channel.  They do seem to present reasonable evidence for their conclusions.    
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#14)
by joesfoundry (joesfoundry@hotmail.com) on Sun Aug 12th, 2007 at 02:33:09 PM MST
(User Info)

yes I agree I've heard of the snowball theory.  Without rain to scrub the atmosphere of CO2, the CO2 level roase (volcanoes, animals, bacteria, etc.)  

One must also look at the motivations of some of these people.  Kofie butthead former UN head honcho (dont have direct qoute)said something about global warming being such a threat bla bla bla that countries may need to give up their soverienty*.  and some have said that commies and socialist have hijacted the environmentalist agenda in order to destroy capitalism.  Sry for the bad spelling in a hurry.

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#16)
by finnsawyer on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 08:58:18 AM MST
(User Info)

There were no animals at that point.  And due to the ice cover there was very little biological activity anywhere.  They figure cracks in the ice and such allowed enough light to penetrate to the water below to keep the bacteria alive.  Of course, we know today that various bacteria and forms of life can survive at ocean vents even if there is no light, but it was necessary for some of the oxygen producing bacteria to survive to restart the biosphere.  
GeoM
[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#10)
by DamonHD (d@hd.org) on Fri Aug 10th, 2007 at 02:21:14 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.earth.org.uk/

Another poll on this topic that I started elsewhere:

http://www.publisher-world.com/read.php?3,11985

Rgds

Damon



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#15)
by luckeydog (bryan@coloradowindpower.com) on Sun Aug 12th, 2007 at 03:21:06 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.coloradowindpower.com

I personally don't believe the global warming "Theory"
It is only theory with flawed science backing it up.

I Believe in Renewable Energy not for the reasons
of "global warming" But just because it is the
Smart thing to do. and it helps me free myself from
the slavery. I am so sick of sending large portions
of my hard earned money to the power companies.
energy is all around us and almost free
you just need to harvest it

Free yourself of the slavery and build a Wind Turbine!

Luckeydog
.
wind gens are much funner to watch than solar panels. Broomfield,Colorado



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#17)
by Tritium on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 09:43:38 AM MST
(User Info)

The global climate is doing exactly what its designer intended since he already knew exactly every action man would take even before man was created. Use things reasonably and don't worry about it.

Thurmond



Caution Heresy... (3.00 / 0) (#18)
by TomW on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 10:36:34 AM MST
(User Info)


The global climate is doing exactly what its designer intended since he already knew exactly every action man would take even before man was created. Use things reasonably and don't worry about it.


I'm sorry?

He?

Not everyone buys into that intelligent design theory. And not all of those who do buy into the intelligent design theory buy the the "He" part, either.

But, I guess it relieves individuals of any responsibility for their actions because it is already decided?

Sorry, but, like other absolute statements I see here, I tend to try to see it from different angles.

My angle is it is simply an accident of nature that we are here and that we need to be careful of how powerful we think we and the God[s] we have created are.

Just providing another viewpoint that does not conform to your absolute statement. No need for a crusade, just keep an open mind.

To each their own. The real major difference between creationists and evolutionists seems to simply be time at least from here.

Cheers.

TomW

"Education consists mainly of what we have unlearned."--Mark Twain
[ Parent ]



Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#19)
by pepa on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 11:32:18 AM MST
(User Info)

Tom, do you realy think that the earth can survive the population expansion for any length of time without something to kill some of us off. i would love to see some sign of hope, wouldn't you? pepa

[ Parent ]


Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#20)
by TomW on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 11:59:44 AM MST
(User Info)

pepa;

Nothing against hope. Exactly why I challenged the statement. I dislike the "everything is good, God will fix it" line of thought.

We need to take responsibility as a species to at least try to improve things. That is regardless of faith.

I have hope that humankind will pull its collect head out of its collective rectum one day and realize we need to exist in harmony with nature and not in domination of nature.

If our actions are already decided as tritium states what happened to free will then? It just doesn't ring true that it could be both ways.

But, first, remember he brought up the Deity angle and I just responded with my view. It is not "Anti God" it is just a view that just wringing your hands and praying is not the answer for all of us.

I could go on but will not because it will just lead to either a Jihad, Holy War or Crusade where everyone will lose. I mostly want people to understand that sitting on our hands got us here and action is needed to improve things.

I am not sure I buy into the whole Global Warming / Carbon thing either.

I do what I can to affect my corner of things but thats all I can do until we kill off the corporations that just use up resources and move on like immortal locusts.

Cheers.

TomW

"Education consists mainly of what we have unlearned."--Mark Twain
[ Parent ]



Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#21)
by pepa on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 12:14:12 PM MST
(User Info)

good reply Tom, pepa.

[ Parent ]


Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#22)
by ghurd on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 02:32:21 PM MST
(User Info)

Maybe it's from a movie.  I don't remember.

There is this big flood.
Preacher gets to the 2nd floor of the church. So does the water.
Then the 3rd. Then the 4th. Etc. Etc. Etc.
Then the bell tower.
The preacher is sitting on the peak bell tower.
A boat comes by.  The seaman asks "Need a lift preacher?"
Preacher says "No.  God will provide for me."  The boat leaves to rescue other people.
A 2nd boat, and the same thing.  Then a 3rd boat.
Then the water gets higher, and he is standing on the lightning rod, head barely above the waves.
A helicopter arrives. Same conversation.
Water gets higher.
Preacher drowns. Goes to heaven.
Preacher asks God why God did not save him, after all, he was a believer.
God answers "I sent 3 boats and a helicopter!  What did you expect me to send?"

Maybe God sent wind, sun, falling water, and breeder reactors?
Even if the French like breeder reactors.

(TomW, seems On Topic at this point.  Feel free to Zap if you desire)
G-

[ Parent ]



Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#23)
by Tritium on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 03:03:08 PM MST
(User Info)

No No, not preaching head in the sand here. Not preaching pre-destination. All your decisions are your own, However each choice you have made or will make are already known. I am saying the system was designed with the abuses that exist in mind. Personally I don't believe that any one individual or family can do any appreciable damage to the planet at least not in the way a megacorp bent on profit does but even that was planned for. Yes do anything you can as good stewardship has been a big topic for the last 6000 years. But if action is beyond your control then there is no need for worry.

Thurmond

[ Parent ]



Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#25)
by etownlax on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 08:27:16 PM MST
(User Info)

"All your decisions are your own, However each choice you have made or will make are already known."-Tritium

That is what I believe, too. You decide what you do, what you believe, what you think. But its just that its already known what you are going to do, etc, and where you'll end up.

I also believe global warming is just another million dollar(if not billion) industry and nothing more than that. People these days will try every way to take your dime. Airlines are even providing you an option to make your cross atlantic flight's carbon foot print zero. You just pay them an extra 15 bucks and they magicly take the carbon out of the air. Then there's Al Gore... He made a moive about global warming. Enough said about him. Some electric utilities also provide you the option to buy wind power electric, again, for more money.

Not all this is bad. It does help to increase research and developement. Whether its NASA or Chevy taking the lead it all helps to pull our selves away from oil. But I just see it also being used to make money. Which if thats the only way and the fastest way, then so be it.

So if your still wondering what I think about global warming then its this: The earth goes, has gone, and will go in temperature cycles. They will change and continue to change for many years. It might be increased by humans but it is impossible for it to be created by humans and substanded due to humans. So I believe then one day it will cool down and then it will be the Global cooling Billion dollar industry.

My 3 cents worth.

-Randy

[ Parent ]



Re: Caution Heresy..to some. (3.00 / 0) (#27)
by finnsawyer on Wed Aug 15th, 2007 at 08:59:53 AM MST
(User Info)

The Detroit Free Press reported this Sunday that John Dingell wants to greatly increase the Federal tax on Gasoline.  I fired off an E-mail saying what about developing the massive Alberta Tar Sands to increase the supply instead.  Supposedly producing oil from that would be economically viable at a crude oil cost of $50 a barrel.  Well, crude is running around $70 a barrel.  And you hear nothing about it.  This whole thing does look to me more and more like a conspiracy to take away more of our freedoms and control what we do without having any real effect.  Send more money to Washington and watch it disappear down a black hole.  Need I remind you about a bridge to Nowhere Alaska in light of the bridge collapse in Minneapolis.  We have politicians that can't govern and an electorate that keeps sending the same idiots back to Washington.

If they really want to impact CO2 generation, the only viable short term solution is nuclear power generation, electrification of the railroads, elimination of long haul trucking as much as possible, and electrification of short haul trucking and private commuting.  Long term, perhaps space based power generation will become viable.  While the overall system efficiency would currently be low (7% is the last figure I saw), the energy is as free as it gets and as massive as you want.  
GeoM
[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#24)
by luckeydog (bryan@coloradowindpower.com) on Tue Aug 14th, 2007 at 07:58:55 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.coloradowindpower.com

there is talk of population explosion. and weather
the earth can handle it or not.

this is the way I look at it.
if you have one acre of land and that land
can support three rabbits with out harm to the
land then this is a healthy population.

but when two of those rabbits breed and create
6 more rabbits then the land will become unhealthy
and the rabbit population will be reduced to 3 to 4 rabbits again.

the human population is no different than the rabbits in the one acre
field of land.

I believe the population of humans on this earth are reaching the max
sustainable population it may have exceeded this already.
only time will tell.

just my .02 cents

Luckeydog
wind gens are much funner to watch than solar panels. Broomfield,Colorado



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#26)
by electrondady1 on Wed Aug 15th, 2007 at 06:33:42 AM MST
(User Info)

it is the rate of change in co2 levels and the resultant rise in temperature that
is unprecedented.
there is no time for ecosystems to adapt.
we have already puked 200 gigatons of co2 into the air
even if we could somehow initiate a 0 emissions policy today
it will take at least 100 years before the repercussions of that end .
the ice is melting.
a lot of people are going to get there feet wet.
while millions die of thirst.
whether some deity knew this was going to happen or not is totally irrelevant.

   

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#28)
by joesfoundry (joesfoundry@hotmail.com) on Wed Aug 15th, 2007 at 09:15:06 AM MST
(User Info)

"220 gigatons???" prob 90%(if it is really that much) of that 220 gigatons has been either metabolised by plants,  scrubbed by rain water and the ocean to form Calcium carbonate, etc etc.  So really it gets old hearing about how much we have spewed into the atmosphere ,which I don't know but, I would bet that it is no more than what would happen during increased volcanic activity.

[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#31)
by finnsawyer on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 08:37:50 AM MST
(User Info)

There is no need for the ecosystem to adapt.  Life on a fundamental level is very tough, and bacteria are found deep underground.  If the surface of the planet was destroyed tomorrow by the heat of a massive asteroid impact, life would reestablish itself on the surface very quickly.  The real issue is that the planet is halfway through its lifespan and in all that time has managed to produce only one bipedal, opposable thumb, somewhat reasoning species.  Could it do it again in the time remaining for it?  Well, that assumes there is some point in preserving the existence of this bipedal species or life in general.

As I mentioned earlier the Global Warming Alarmists have turned into the Global Warming Gestapo, with their threats to ruin the careers of, or even find some way to criminally prosecute those who disagree with them.  It has now gone beyond reasoning.  They have made a religion of it with all the bad potential that implies.  What do we get next, the Global Warming Inquisition?
GeoM
[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#32)
by DamonHD (d@hd.org) on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 11:06:30 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.earth.org.uk/

At the risk of stirring the pot: I happen to be mildly sceptical on the GW issue in its most alermist versions, though the evidence seems to be mounting.  The fact is that we must balance risks * costs.  So ignoring GW entirely and refusing to defuse the potential risk can be seen as very selfish.

Just as building an (unsafe) fireworks factory in a residential area has laws to mitigate such risks, so, I think, should be pointless pollution or inefficiency.

People/megacorps too idle or selfish to mitigate the risks if they can do so easily should be punished or coerced because their actions are antisocial and potentially fatal.  The really key issue here is 'easily'/reasonable.  I don't think this issue is "should we just cover our eyes and ears and hope we don't suffer" but rather "what are the best/simplest reasonable steps everyone can take to minimise the risk*cost".

Rgds

Damon

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#33)
by snowcrow on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 11:35:34 AM MST
(User Info)

Well put, Damon!!!!!!!!!!!

Blessings, Snow Crow

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#34)
by Bruce S (bruce(dot)stahl <at>gmail (dot)(com)) on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 01:12:51 PM MST
(User Info)

GeoM;
  Well put.
It is a scientific fact that life will always find a way.
The biggest problem I see is that we, the bi-peds will make it unliveable for ourselves and not necessarally for the rest of the planet.
For far longer than we've walked on this planet, life has found ways and are still doing so.

I applaud all who are helping to make the air cleaner the water swimmable and so forth. There's more that can be done to increase the air quality and standards of living for ALL.
BUT those who seek to do this for their own gains ,,, need to take a long holiday first and get over theirselves.

I read the entire article and the people making assuntions need to take a reality check and think about what they put out.
This article should've been put out on fools day.

Cheers
Bruce S

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#29)
by joesfoundry (joesfoundry@hotmail.com) on Wed Aug 15th, 2007 at 09:16:05 AM MST
(User Info)

Typ: 200 gigatons.....ooops.  



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#30)
by snowcrow on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 07:01:27 AM MST
(User Info)

"The troubling fact is that taking a lot of exercise and then eating a bit more food is not good for the global atmosphere. Eating less and driving to save energy would be better."

This is "FUZZY LOGIC" at best, if you ask me!!! Starve are selves and feed are cars? It doesn't take much to figure out who paid for this study!!! Yes, I can see where cutting calorie intake would benefit a growing number of the population, no pun intended, but driving to save energy would be better, I don't think so!!! At some point, the lack of exersice and poor diet will catch up with us, and we will be driving to the doctor's office once or twice a week, so how does that help the global atmosphere?

Heres a thought, how about a Health Club, with staff, including a RN, salad bar, and where all of the exersice machines are made in such a way as to produce electricity when it is being used!! Might as well put burning calories to good use!!! The only membership requirements are that you arrive and leave by "Green Means", (bike, bus, or walking), that you workout if you hang out, and you pay a small members fee, (which is waved for the top 10 members who lose the most lbs. that month). If you have enough members, it should paid for itself in no time!! You could sell the extra power to the grid. It may sound silly, but its got to work better than the above statement!!!

Blessings, Snow Crow



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#35)
by Bruce S (bruce(dot)stahl <at>gmail (dot)(com)) on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 01:18:00 PM MST
(User Info)

Snow Crow;
 Someone was listening. Check out the link:-D

http://www.engadget.com/2007/03/09/fat-burning-members-power-hong-kong-fitness-club/

Cheers

Bruce S

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#36)
by snowcrow on Thu Aug 16th, 2007 at 07:34:11 PM MST
(User Info)

Thanks for the link Bruce, Story of my life, always a day late and a dollar short on the big idea!!

Blessings, Snow Crow

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#38)
by spinningmagnets (velmis1450bc(at)aol(dot)com) on Sun Aug 19th, 2007 at 07:02:13 PM MST
(User Info)

I used to hear in the 1960's that it was Carbon Monoxide (CO) from car exhaust that was causing the worst damage to the environment. Then during the Mount St Helens eruption, I heard that MSH belched more CO in one week than all the cars in the history of the world. This isn't even counting Vesuvius, Krakatoa, and Pintaubo.

Now they say that its methane from cow belches, and Carbon Dioxide (from people breathing?). People eat too much meat, and have too many babies, but there's not much of a chance that anyone can legislate China and India into "cutting back". They're burning coal without exhaust filters as fast as they can.

As far as the oceans level, The north pole is a big floating pancake of ice with 90% of it underwater. Water is bigger when its frozen (ever split a milk jug when freezing water?) so if it melts, the level will be the same. Ice on land (Antarctica, Greenland, Canada, Russia) will run into the ocean, but if everything is hotter, there will be more vapor in the atmosphere, so level stays the same. I imagine there will be more rain and hurricanes from the increased atmospheric moisture. I recommend avoiding the purchase of property in New Orleans that is 17 feet below the sea level.

The K-T Boundary is the thin layer between the "giant dinosaur" era and the small animal era. It is rich in meteoric iron and volcanic ash. The bubbles in petrified tree resin called "amber" show the pevious atmosphere was over 30% oxygen. Trillions of hot iron meteorites raining through the atmosphere pulled O2 levels (rust, the oceans floors are covered with meteoric rust) down to 21% making it hard for the big dinos to breathe, the volcanic ash from a giant asteroid strikes (Yucatan, Antartica, etc...) blocked out the sun for months, killing much plant life, killing giant herbivores, which denied giant carnivores of viable prey.

There were thick lush forests in Alaska/Siberia which were neccessary to feed enormous herds of Mammoth elephants. It was so warm there was coral in the water there. Then it then got so cold, there was a ridiculously thick glacier covering most of North America.

The Earth is going through a warming cycle, but man is not the cause. I hadn't heard before about CO2 being scrubbed by the ocean and being converted to calcium carbonate, but there is more CO2-to-O2 conversion going on by oceanic plankton than by trees (those camera whores!)

I haven't seen any published measurements of Methane and CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere, and I suspect its because you can't fake an easy to replicate measurement. Mars and Venus are warming at exactly the same rate as the Earth, so its not people.

Right now oil-drillers and low-pressure helium reactor builders will bend over backwards to be clean, but the environmental lobby is using the Endangered Species Act ("spotted owl, tiger salamander, gnatcatcher", etc...) to stop all developement. The only thing that can bypass it is a presidential order during a "national emergency", and when that happens, it's going to get very messy.

Solar desalinated sea water will be expensive, and so will syn-fuels from tar-sands and shale-oil. Learn everything you can about self-sufficiency, because its coming.

 



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#39)
by snowcrow on Sun Aug 19th, 2007 at 07:27:40 PM MST
(User Info)

"Mars and Venus are warming at exactly the same rate as the Earth, so its not people." Spinningmagnets, where did this info come from?? Inquiring minds want to know!!

Blessings, Snow Crow

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#40)
by luckeydog (bryan@coloradowindpower.com) on Mon Aug 20th, 2007 at 12:47:17 AM MST
(User Info) http://www.coloradowindpower.com

Mars and Venus are warming at the same rate because
of the solar flairs from the sun.
wind gens are much funner to watch than solar panels. Broomfield,Colorado
[ Parent ]


Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#41)
by snowcrow on Mon Aug 20th, 2007 at 05:17:44 AM MST
(User Info)

luckeydog, send me a link to this information!! Well, I'll tell you right now as a seasoned student of astronomy, this the first that I've heard of solar flairs heating up the planets!! It may make for some good story telling, but I can tell you it just isn't so!!

I don't know how other people may feel about the global warming debate, but I for one, have my eyes open wide, and my mind as well. Be careful what you see and take as truth, for you maybe deceived, and find in the end, that the "Endangered Species Act" applies to you as well!!!

Blessings, Snow Crow

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#42)
by luckeydog (bryan@coloradowindpower.com) on Mon Aug 20th, 2007 at 12:13:59 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.coloradowindpower.com

Here are two videos ans just a few links
on some news sites.

there are tons of references to solar flares and
global warming

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3309910462407994295&q=global+warming&total=17088&am p;start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=1

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3028847519933351566&q=global+warming&total=17088&am p;start=0&num=100&so=0&type=search&plindex=7

http://fathersforlife.org/REA/warming13.htm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/56456.stm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/03/030321075236.htm

wind gens are much funner to watch than solar panels. Broomfield,Colorado
[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#43)
by snowcrow on Mon Aug 20th, 2007 at 12:44:56 PM MST
(User Info)

luckeydog, you can't really believe all that you see on the web to be truth, and one of the links you sent me states their intent, plain as day!!!

On http://fathersforlife.org/REA/warming13.htm , the top of the page they state where their loyalty is:

"Working in the interests of the owners of rural electric services"

Blessings, Snow Crow

[ Parent ]



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#45)
by luckeydog (bryan@coloradowindpower.com) on Mon Aug 20th, 2007 at 03:50:23 PM MST
(User Info) http://www.coloradowindpower.com

Snow crow

Yes you are right

you cant believe everything people say
especially politicians.

look at all points of view and do some thinking
and come up with a reasonable answer.

we cant predict the weather 7 days out accurately
so we sure cant predict it 50 years out.

I still know there is a lot of misinformation
out there. ya just got to swim threw it.
wind gens are much funner to watch than solar panels. Broomfield,Colorado
[ Parent ]



I can't believe this... (3.00 / 0) (#44)
by TomW on Mon Aug 20th, 2007 at 12:56:32 PM MST
(User Info)

Ron sure suckered in a LOT of you guys with this joke.

Almost every link or supporting comment has its own agenda. Usually involving someone making or keeping their money.

Well, it is your forum....

Cheers.

TomW

"Education consists mainly of what we have unlearned."--Mark Twain



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#46)
by spinningmagnets (velmis1450bc(at)aol(dot)com) on Thu Aug 23rd, 2007 at 07:32:10 PM MST
(User Info)

I DO believe that the Earth is warming, and that this warming will cause a downward spiral of problems. I just also believe that mankind isn't the cause.

Something that is unknown, undefined, and widely debated is causing Mars to warm. The warming is causing enormous dust storms which affects its atmospheres absorption of solar heat, which is speeding up the warming, causing worse dust storms, etc...

http://www.marsdaily.com/reports/Global_Warming_Hits_Mars_Too_999.html

It might be an undiscovered "X" factor, solar flares, solar electromagnetic field variations (if the sun can keep a hold of faraway Pluto, the Earth is in a much stronger part of its grip [flux?]).

I'm certainly not in favor of "polluting for fun and profit", but if anyone is certain that the only cause of global warming is human activities, will you admit that the biggest human polluters by far are India and China? Sadly, they have been unresponsive to international influence.

On another note, The original post cites an article that posed the question "if you walk a few miles, you burn "X" amount of calories, and it would take "Y" amount of beef to replace those calories. Then, driving a modern car would cause less global warming than the cows needed to make up those calories. (when I drive a truck, I still get hungry, so its not either/or, though manual labor does make me slightly hungriER)

I think this is a little disingenuous. Who eats nothing but beef? wouldn't oatmeal and veggies/fruit, with a little chicken or fish be a better calorie source for a realistic comparison? (although, I AM a big supporter of Biodiesel and Ethanol).

I do get the point that, for instance, its better to get LOCAL veggies/fruit. Cutting back on meat and eating more V/F is good, but if the fruit you're eating is a Kiwifruit flown from New Zealand to Florida, that would be more bad than good.

Warm-water coral and forests thick enough to support elephants in Siberia? A ridiculously thick glacier covering North America? very big changes, and I believe mans contribution is just a spit in the ocean.

"Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." -Emo Philips



Re: Global Warming (3.00 / 0) (#47)
by electrondady1 on Wed Sep 26th, 2007 at 09:58:16 PM MST
(User Info)

 drawing a correlation between the earth and the red planet ?
it might very well be a red herring.

i hope you have more luck proving mars is heating up than they have had convincing people we have a local problem. lol

you can blame it on mysterious unknown forces or the two hundred gigatons of carbon dioxide we have released into this  biosphere.

i think it's past the point of blame and we just need to do something about it now.

one of the reasons the chinese are polluting so much is they are  busy making "stuff" for us.

" I believe mans contribution is just a spit in the ocean."

  man , thats a lot of spit !!

this 21 century may take a lot of getting use to,but the 22 century should be pretty good.
 so now i think we need a lot of trees ,a new fuel and a new outlook .

i think the crisis we are ALL going to be dealing with,
will not be the end of our reign as the dominate species.

with luck it will elevate us into a new and better harmony with nature.
we have proven we can mess it up. so now we will prove we can fix it up.

mankind has the power now to make this world anything we wants.
so do we want what we have now or do we want something else.

something better.

[ Parent ]



Global Warming | 47 comments (47 topical, 0 editorial)
Display: Sort:
Menu
· create account
· How to use the board
· FAQs
· search the board
· Google search the board
· Old Otherpower Board

Login
Make a new account
Username:
Password:

Total Views
  124 Scoop users have viewed this posting.

Related Links
· http://www.timesonline.co.uk/t ol/news/uk/science/article2195538.ece
· Also by wdyasq

Powered by Scoop
You must be a registered user to post here. It's easy and free, and the link is on the upper right side of your page.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Postings are owned by the poster, but may be deleted or moved at the ADMIN's sole discretion. The Rest © 2003 Forcefield.
You can Email the board ADMIN here. PLEASE include the username you signed up with!