The Environment

[Xickin]

I am not going to watch an hour long documentary but I can assure there is a mountain of Scientific evidence backing man-made climate change as a reality.

But there are so many holes in the theory that the public is not aware of. For instance, the earth has actually been MUCH MUCH hotter than it is now back like 200,000 year ago, we're just at a certain point at the Earth's cycle. Also, you know that the basis for the global warming argument is that CO2=warmer climate, right? And that they say the reason for the excess CO2 is because of our automobiles and machines, right? But back in the 1930's before the major industrial revolution came about (due to WW2) our temp. had risen 1/2 a degree already. But no one had their own car or fridge or sort of gas heating.
Then, the science behind CO2=Heat isn't true. CO2 comes AFTER the warmth. That's a big hole in the argument for global warming.
And you know those ice caps? How they're "melting"? Some of them are actually getting BIGGER
Are The Polar Ice Caps Melting? New NASA Study Shows Mass Gains Are Bigger Than The Losses
Forbes Welcome
Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Record Maximum | NASA

And you know Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth"? He actually messed up a lot of of his facts and purposely stayed away from some truths.

Why would global warming be a conspiracy anyways? What benefit do scientists and politicians get for trying to change our energy sources into renewable sources? Certainly nothing from big oil, and nuclear power is definitely not something many scientists are promoting considering the detrimental effects it has on our planet.

Well here's the thing, one example they use is back in the 70's when environmental awareness was just kicking off and the British were still using coal for power, the miner's went on strike, putting England at an energy crisis. So what they Prime Minister did was use the new concept of "global warming" (not yet very well known yet) to advocate nuclear energy to the public and scare them away from coal, and it worked.
This resulted in a lot of politicians using global warming as a platform for their campaign. But nowadays politicians won't even question the validity of global warming because of how widely it's accepted.

Don't get me wrong, global climate change IS happening. I'm not one of the those die hard Republicans that's ignorant to the world around them and thinks that global climate isn't real. But we may not be the cause. Volcanoes are actually making more CO2 than we are as a species. I take this with a grain of salt but I do let the facts speak for themselves.

Do me a favour though, watch the first 5-10 minutes. Once you begin, your interest will surely be caught.

 

[Deleted member 36435]

But there are so many holes in the theory that the public is not aware of. For instance, the earth has actually been MUCH MUCH hotter than it is now back like 200,000 year ago, we're just at a certain point at the Earth's cycle. Also, you know that the basis for the global warming argument is that CO2=warmer climate, right? And that they say the reason for the excess CO2 is because of our automobiles and machines, right? But back in the 1930's before the major industrial revolution came about (due to WW2) our temp. had risen 1/2 a degree already. But no one had their own car or fridge or sort of gas heating.
Then, the science behind CO2=Heat isn't true. CO2 comes AFTER the warmth. That's a big hole in the argument for global warming.

Okay, first of all. The Earth was a VERY VERY VERY different place back then. A place not very suited to current life. The Earth was also much hotter like 4 billion years ago. It was literally a ball of magma.
Second, the industrial revolution happened around the 1800s, not in World War 2. Automobiles don't contribute all that much to climate change.
Thirdly, basic physics shows that CO2 concentration is directly correlated with increased global temperature due to the Greenhouse effect. Visible light from the sun travels through -> warms the Earth -> thermal radiation from the Earth bounces to the atmosphere -> some of this energy is 'captured' by Greenhouses gasses -> some of this energy is sent back towards the Earth.

http://climate.nasa.gov/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...en-far-warmer-in-the-past-whats-the-big-deal/

 

[Xickin]

Okay, first of all. The Earth was a VERY VERY VERY different place back then. A place not very suited to current life. There earth was also much hotter like 4 billion years ago. It was literally a ball of magma.
Second, the industrial revolution happened around the 1800s, not in World War 2. Automobiles don't contribute all that much to climate change.

https://www.newscientist.com/articl...en-far-warmer-in-the-past-whats-the-big-deal/

Of course the Earth was hotter, we're in an age where we've taken a VERY long break from any sort of Ice Age, the last ice age was 1.8 million years ago; soon, we'll probably go through another Ice Age or "Hot Flash". Also, have you SEEN the Titanaboa!?!? That sucker was massive! It grew to such proportions because the Earth was that much warmer, but we don't have those anymore because the Earth cooled down. The same goes for a lot of different species as well (bugs and reptiles mostly). And I'm sure in the future (not sure when) another Ice Age or "Hot Flash" will occur and the Earth will continue as is, whether or not we're around to see it is a totally different story. I also think that the paranoia and propaganda for global warming is WAY out there; literally, they keep saying the world will end, it won't end, we might be gone, and the resource might be low, and other species will suffer, but the Earth will still be there, and soon a new circle of life will emerge, who knows? Maybe our species won't die out, we as a species have been known to survive a lot.

And I'm talking about the Second Industrial Revolution (right after WW2) not the first, when the everyday family began to purchase machine after machine and our dependance on them really started to rise. But that's one of the main arguments for global warming, that all of our cars and air conditions and fridges and whatever else we use that makes CO2 is the main cause. True those things don't hold a candle to those gigantic factories in China or India, but collectively they are a good contender.

Listen, we're not helping, but are we that big of a contribution? I'm not sure anymore; I just think that maybe we should take a step back, and look through a new perspective. It's become such a popular opinion, no one wants to challenge it anymore. We still have so many other problems: pollution, the coral reefs, the rainforests, endangered species, limited resources etc. So we just immediately assume that once a new problem comes up, it's humanity's fault. Maybe for once we're not totally to blame? My point is there's so much information that's not out there for the general public.

Anyway, my argument here isn't to convince you (there's no way anyone would just listen to some guy over the internet about a very complex issue and believe them) all I'm saying is there's a lot of holes in the global warming argument, it doesn't mean it's not true (just like the theory of evolution) it just means we don't know enough yet.

PS They do explain in the video I linked about how CO2 and heat are correlated, just not in the way we've been led to believe (for the life of me right now I can't remember it though).

 

[Deleted member 36435]

jesus christ i dont even know where to begin with how much wrong i just read
please, do yourself a favor and actually research these topics. you're spouting off some of the most common myths regarding climate change out there, that are almost all wrong.

like you know how diddlying dumb it is to say that "the earth won't end. life as we know it will, but the floating rock in space will still exist, don't worry" right?

human caused climate change is a fact. there is nothing to be gained by looking at it from the perspective of "maybe its not us this time." because we've already done so. yea, it's scary but it's time to stop sticking our heads in the sand and actually deal with it.

 

[Xickin]

Okay, not going to sink myself to your level just because you don't want to consider another perspective. I'm not spewing nonsense, these are researched questions done by top scientists in these exact fields. Maybe you're the one that should do some more research and be able to actually form a constructive argument.

As I said before, my part of the discussion was not to convince anyone, I'm not even convinced. It's just MORE. Obviously you want to cling to your "safe" ideas that no one else will challenge, btw that's how people become "sheep". A lot of people thought the Earth was flat, and that anyone that believed otherwise was an idiot. If that's the case, then sure, I'm an idiot.

And that "diddlying dumb" thing I said, is just my view of how arrogantly we perceive ourselves as a species. It was not a part of my argument, I was just speaking my mind.

And a FACT is something that cannot be argued. It's the Global Warming ARGUMENT. For God's sake get a dictionary. 2+2=4 is a fact.

Goodbye, I'm not checking this chat again, because i thought this was Intelligent "discussion", meaning to exchange ideas, as opposed to "debate" which is what you're obviously trying to do, and very poorly I might add. So next time you just wanna insult someone because you can't come up with a proper retort, don't, just don't; it only shows your ignorance and intolerance.

 

[Deleted member 36435]

haha alright buddy. watching one documentary doesn't make you an expert, but good luck in your future endeavors. everything you've said has been based off of pure conjecture when there are mountains of evidence saying the exact opposite.

http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science_and_impacts/science/human-contribution-to-gw-faq.html
https://www.edf.org/climate/human-activity-is-causing-global-warming
https://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/science/causes.html
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full
science.sciencemag.org/content/292/5515/270.short (you need an account for this full text)

so, please, should you check this topic (you probably will), provide at least one scientific source that backs your claim.

here's one more, that's a brief overview for each topic: https://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php

edit: i should also make it clear, i am not saying it's IMPOSSIBLE that humans didn't cause climate change, but our current understanding (which is pretty vast) of climate change has all fingers pointing at us. but, everything you've brought up has been brought up and has been debunked before. there is no new reasoning or thinking being presented, just the same old same old. there is nothing supporting it, it has the same validity as saying a magical sky fairy is controlling the temperature and we can't do dick about it.

 

[BlackOsprey]

Really not in the mood to get into a "are humans responsible for climate change" argument... So, how about the rainforests? Pretty sure that's a problem that can be attributed to humanity without too much controversy, seeing how nothing else in nature can bulldoze an entire ecosystem. Every time I hear anything about them, it's usually about how [large number] percent is already destroyed and how they will be completely gone by 20XX.

 

[VoidGear.]

While of course climate change is not ONLY because of us, I think..it's pretty hard to deny that we're a big part of it.
Of course it would've happened anyways, but not that fast. And yes, I'm too lazy to post evidence, it's just my pov on this.

 

[Xickin]

I just want to come here and say this: do you guys remember when I presented that documentary a while back? Well I did more research on it's credibility and it looks to be false and misrepresents a lot of facts.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/03/swindled/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/mar/13/science.media
It's been gnawing at me ever since I posted on this thread. I want to point out though I was never fully convinced by this documentary and I never believed it (as I CONTINUALLY pointed out, but everyone just seemed to skip over that part; and I'm sure everyone will skip over this too), I just wanted to present some alternative ideas and discuss them with others, but there was a dispute. I wanted to apologize on my part for the dispute, but I want to point out there was no need for the patronizing and rudeness on some other user's part.
I never said humans weren't the cause, I was just reporting what the documentary said. I've been an avid climate change believer for years. This was just something new to me and I thought it was kind of exciting and I wanted to share it with the rest of you.

Now, on to a new topic, what do you guys think of this technology scientists are developing to turn the Earth's salt water into fresh water? Apparently last year they created a portable machine that can use solar power to remove all salt from water. It won the 2015 Desal Prize. If we could convert salt water into fresh water then, we could theoretically provide a sustainable source of fresh water to the entire planet. But then we might see a major populace increase and that's a whole NEW problem.

 

[BlackOsprey]

But then we might see a major populace increase and that's a whole NEW problem.

*shrugs* Either we're reproducing too much, or not enough. *glances at Asia* I dunno if we really need to worry about that too much. I certainly wouldn't let it get in the way of a potential breakthrough like this.

 

[Kagayaki]

I personally think that the human population is too large. I may not have evidence, and I may be crap with science, but it is a possibility that there might not be enough resources to go around. Which brings me to another subject about the idea of making fuel from corn. It doesn't seem like a good idea to use a food supply for fuel.

Also, I'm not sure that turning salt water into fresh water is a good idea. How is it going to affect the animals in the ocean?

 

[VoidGear.]

I personally think that the human population is too large. I may not have evidence, and I may be crap with science, but it is a possibility that there might not be enough resources to go around. Which brings me to another subject about the idea of making fuel from corn. It doesn't seem like a good idea to use a food supply for fuel.

Also, I'm not sure that turning salt water into fresh water is a good idea. How is it going to affect the animals in the ocean?

I am pretty positive we'd have more than enough resources if our throw-away-attitude changed. Imagine how much stuff gets thrown away. I work in retail and the amount of paper and plastic we use or the food we have to throw away is tremendous - and that is only ONE shop.

 

[BlackOsprey]

Which brings me to another subject about the idea of making fuel from corn. It doesn't seem like a good idea to use a food supply for fuel.

Yeah, it's not a very good idea. Not only does it dig into the food supply, but the fuel it creates isn't very efficient at all.

Also, I'm not sure that turning salt water into fresh water is a good idea. How is it going to affect the animals in the ocean?

It's not like the process is going to turn the ocean itself into freshwater (and I doubt that's even possible). If you're concerned about the process depleting the oceans of water... 71% of the globe is covered in water. The oceans make up 96% of that water. I think it would be rather difficult to suck an ocean dry. (Plus there's still the water cycle to ruin any serious attempt to drain the oceans too. That water goes some​where, you know. )

 

[VoidGear.]

I think it would be rather difficult to suck an ocean dry.

"Yo mama so fat, she once sucked an ocean dry!"

 

[Chuman]

i just found this thread but its entertaining how much victor sounds like Hugh Laurie from tomorrowland and other movie villains.

on topic i'm pretty indifferent to this. i used to care but honestly, we're going to be dead long before pollution kills us all and no amount of recycling our empties is going to change this.

"but what about our kids!"

i don't know if i'll ever procreate and even if i do my hypothetical children will also be dead long before shit goes down in the atmosphere. humanity fucked itself over and until all the assholes holding it back inevitably die and let the people with their smart hats on take over can we FINALLY get on the right track.

but if these fucks screw it up again then they deserve end times.

 

[Xickin]

I think my words have been misinterpreted. My thoughts are more towards impoverished countries like certain parts of Africa. And I highly doubt we as a species really could suck the ocean dry anytime soon, the water cycle would keep it up. Now, the oceans WILL dry up one day, in like, a billion years. Also, by the year 2050 our population should be around 9 billion (There's this counter I found that does the averages).

 

[BlackOsprey]

Now, the oceans WILL dry up one day, in like, a billion years. Also, by the year 2050 our population should be around 9 billion (There's this counter I found that does the averages).

Yeah, but that's because the globe will be fried by a bloated and dying sun. It's really, really doubtful that the human race will survive that long, anyways. Most species won't.

We'll hit a population limit, lots of people will die, and the cycle will reset itself. Meh.

I remember reading a book by Dan Brown called Inferno. Some rich wackjob created a plague to cut the world's population. The twist was that the plague didn't kill. It would just render a large fraction of the human population completely infertile. How's that for a solution?

 

[Xickin]

No no no. I just added that as a tidbit as opposed to an argument.

 

[Chuman]

Yeah, but that's because the globe will be fried by a bloated and dying sun. It's really, really doubtful that the human race will survive that long, anyways. Most species won't.

We'll hit a population limit, lots of people will die, and the cycle will reset itself. Meh.

I remember reading a book by Dan Brown called Inferno. Some rich wackjob created a plague to cut the world's population. The twist was that the plague didn't kill. It would just render a large fraction of the human population completely infertile. How's that for a solution?

denying the human race a good nut. that's what i call evil.

 

[BlackOsprey]

denying the human race a good nut. that's what i call evil.

It's a bit less messy than mass genocide, war, or starvation though.