Jazzyluv:

axia777:
The term "Global Warming" is out dated. Most real scientists use the term "Global Climate Change" as the "warming" is now understood to be a misnomer. Some places will get colder and some will get warmer/hotter. Some will get dryer and some will get so much wetter. One thing they all agree on is that all the ice around the world in undeniably melting at a speed that is out pacing all previous estimates.

And there are no "solutions". it is too late. The change is all ready happening and there is no way to stop it. We can try to slow it down I guess, but that would be akin to try to slow down a car that has all ready fallen off of a cliff. All we can do now is adapt.

The ice is not melting faster than all the "experts" said, it did in 2007, but this year we had a 30%, get that, 30% increase over ice at the same time last year. The "experts" were wrong, even they can be full of shit, even they can lie and manipulate to get more funding.

All of the scientific evidence points the contrary. Are you trying to say 95+% of the worlds scientists are all lying? Do you vote Republican?

Well I have the easiest solution, every building has it's roofs painted white. White repels heat, and will deflect a lot of the sun's harmful rays. Take that Al Gore!

*slightly concerning dance, with the words "Uh huh" and "Can you feel it" dotted about while performing*

*Sigh* Another lets do our part to "STOP" global warming thread.

I wish people would listen to me, you can't STOP natures wrath. "Sorry let me try to fix it." doesn't work with forces more powerful then your mom.

We are people, not little gods running around. We might be able to slow the processes but never stop it.

Anyways China and India are producing most of it now (wow they are like 30-40% of the population) and they still haven't meet their population needs.

Instead of waisting resources on stopping Global warming, we need to access what most likely how it will effect our economies, food growth, and resources and adjust for that before hand.

But that won't solve the problem and will destroy our beautiful, beautiful earth!
D:

Zeke109:
But that won't solve the problem and will destroy our beautiful, beautiful earth!
D:

Are you serious? We are talking about the same planet that survived the meteor/comet that shot out of space at 150,000 MPH making a hole the size of the Gulf of Mexico thus wiping out 80+% of all life/species. This world has nothing to worry from us humans. It has an estimated 2.5 billion years left on it till the Sol turns into a super red giant and cooks Gaia till it looks like Mercury. So no worries. If humans make it uninhabitable we only kills us and the species that live in our own time period. Then what ever is left will just take over. Life and nature are unstoppable.

EDIT: Oh wait, looks like you were banned while I was writing this. ROFL.

guyy:

nmmoore13:
Solution: realize global warming is not man made.

Yeah, because there's tons of legitimate scientific evidence for that, and it's totally not another conspiracy theory. [/sarcasm]

It really bugs me that people keep saying there's no scientific evidence for global warming when, actually, there's an absurd amount of it, and the evidence only continues to grow as everyone continually ignores it.

The only long-term solution is to just burn way less fossil fuels, and when we do burn them, try to filter out most of the CO2 before it escapes into the atmosphere. Though nothing is really going to happen unless people stop denying it without any real evidence.

How can you really say that there is lots of evidence for something like global warming. How long have we been taking accurate measurements of global temperature?

When dealing with something with as much inertia as a planets ecology, which operates on massive time-scales, we do not have enough objective evidence to support either side of the argument.

axia777:

Jazzyluv:

axia777:
The term "Global Warming" is out dated. Most real scientists use the term "Global Climate Change" as the "warming" is now understood to be a misnomer. Some places will get colder and some will get warmer/hotter. Some will get dryer and some will get so much wetter. One thing they all agree on is that all the ice around the world in undeniably melting at a speed that is out pacing all previous estimates.

And there are no "solutions". it is too late. The change is all ready happening and there is no way to stop it. We can try to slow it down I guess, but that would be akin to try to slow down a car that has all ready fallen off of a cliff. All we can do now is adapt.

The ice is not melting faster than all the "experts" said, it did in 2007, but this year we had a 30%, get that, 30% increase over ice at the same time last year. The "experts" were wrong, even they can be full of shit, even they can lie and manipulate to get more funding.

All of the scientific evidence points the contrary. Are you trying to say 95+% of the worlds scientists are all lying? Do you vote Republican?

You are just asking to get pwned with that...

one, i don't vote, a waste of my fucking time(a rigged system means no one wins).

two, how many scientists do you know, their is enormous debate about our effect on global warming. I find it funny how none of you are pulling your facts from articles, its coming out of your ass.

nmmoore13:
Solution: realize global warming is not man made.

That has to be the smartest thing I've read all night! Thank you my friend! There is not real evidence to show that man is causing anything, there is increased solar activity and a change in climate, not unlike other time's in our past. Just b/c things are a bit different then 100 years ago, doesn't mean it isn't perfectly natural.

guyy:

jim_doki:

guyy:

It really bugs me that people keep saying there's no scientific evidence for global warming when, actually, there's an absurd amount of it, and the evidence only continues to grow as everyone continually ignores it.

The only long-term solution is to just burn way less fossil fuels, and when we do burn them, try to filter out most of the CO2 before it escapes into the atmosphere. Though nothing is really going to happen unless people stop denying it without any real evidence.

One, nobody said that there is no scientific explaination for global warming, it's getting hotter and nobody disputes that. What he said was "It's not man made" which it's not. cows are much more responsible than we are. one solution, eat more beef.

second, the long term solution you suggest is not the only one. Like i said in the previous thread (zeke zeke zeke, we were so close) we should look at the positives of climate change. we can't stop it, so we might as well begin working on ways to make it work for us, see Crops On Mountain Tops

Well, ok, but the person right after him actually did say that global warming isn't really a problem, and plenty of people still say it's not real. Also, yes, there is evidence that it's man-made; the current ridiculous, unprecedented spike in CO2 started right around the Industrial Revolution, when we started making lots of--you guessed it--gaseous CO2. Cows? Cows do produce methane, but I've never heard that they produce enough to rival all other greenhouse gasses. And why do you think there are so many cows?

We do need to adapt to global warming, but adapting will be much easier if we can slow it down.

Hunde Des Krieg:
people that look to preserve nature exactly as it is have a fundamentally flawed piont of view.

What's so flawed about wanting to keep the world approximately the way it is, so we can interact with it in ways we understand? Not caring whether the world changes in a way we can't accurately predict seems pretty reckless.

Well, the flaw is that if the Earth itself is changing due it's normal life cycle and increased solar activity, then we shouldn't mess with it.

I believe in conservation and clean energy b/c oil is going to run out one day and I don't like to sit behind a big truck in a traffic jam, but not b/c of Al Gore voodoo mumbojumbo. I think we should create new fuels, but all these over-the-top guidelines and saying that we can't drill for more oil is asanine, insane, stupid, and foolish. It's going to take time to create a viable electric and/or hydrogen car, and then to get it to the masses, so we'll need good ole fashion crude for a decade or so...

I also object to America, on the premise that it seems to breed a species of people who delude themselves into thinking that rules do not apply to them (i.e you may not torture arbitrary people, you may not carpet-bomb small villages, you may not build crap-bucket cars with such gobshite emmissions standards that the CHINESE won't accept them, you may not make fun of the Queen, you may not pretend the Great Deppression didn't happen etc etc).

Thankfully, most of this breed of American dosen't go abroad that often, so I normally meet the nicer breed of American (i.e the smart ones) when I meet a yank. So I'm not considering wiping you from the face of the planet. Yet.

And Hunde Des Krieg is right- nature is a continuously expanding, evolving phenomeneon. Extinction in itself is not a bad thing- it's simply the wasteage of species that are unfit for survival in the environment. And the environment itself is going to change- though climactic shifts are generally fairly slow-moving, it could be just that we've not noticed this shit until now. It is still unproven!!!

However, one must remember that the biodiversity of an environment is representative of that environment's stability. So massed extinction is not a good 'un. As for the rest: Michael Crichton is right when he says: 'We can't destroy the planet... we can only destroy ourselves.'

DC_Josh:
Two words.

Barack Obama.

One word.

No.

Well first of all, the main reason of global warming is the sun itself.
Secondly why are you so sure that we weren't just going through another ice age up untill recently and the earth is going back to it's normal temprature?
think about it, have you ever seen a picture or a glyph of a greek/mayan/egeptyan person with heavy clothes on?
i konw i don't.

Hoxton:
Secondly why are you so sure that we weren't just going through another ice age up untill recently and the earth is going back to it's normal temprature?

I like that idea.

Father2u:

Hoxton:
Secondly why are you so sure that we weren't just going through another ice age up untill recently and the earth is going back to it's normal temprature?

I like that idea.

well isn't it a possible theory?

Jazzyluv:

axia777:

Jazzyluv:

axia777:
The term "Global Warming" is out dated. Most real scientists use the term "Global Climate Change" as the "warming" is now understood to be a misnomer. Some places will get colder and some will get warmer/hotter. Some will get dryer and some will get so much wetter. One thing they all agree on is that all the ice around the world in undeniably melting at a speed that is out pacing all previous estimates.

And there are no "solutions". it is too late. The change is all ready happening and there is no way to stop it. We can try to slow it down I guess, but that would be akin to try to slow down a car that has all ready fallen off of a cliff. All we can do now is adapt.

The ice is not melting faster than all the "experts" said, it did in 2007, but this year we had a 30%, get that, 30% increase over ice at the same time last year. The "experts" were wrong, even they can be full of shit, even they can lie and manipulate to get more funding.

All of the scientific evidence points the contrary. Are you trying to say 95+% of the worlds scientists are all lying? Do you vote Republican?

You are just asking to get pwned with that...

one, i don't vote, a waste of my fucking time(a rigged system means no one wins).

two, how many scientists do you know, their is enormous debate about our effect on global warming. I find it funny how none of you are pulling your facts from articles, its coming out of your ass.

Do you know how many articles I have read on Slashdot, Arstechnia, and similar web sites explaining how bad the ice melt is getting?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/04/17/greenland-lake-disappears-under-the-ice

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080917-polar-ice-loss-heralds-a-change-in-the-weather.html

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/05/artic_ice_melti.html

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/03/huge-chunk-of-a.html

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/05/09/iceberg.satellite/index.html

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/09/05/sea-levels-to-rise-more-than-predicted

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/05/14/ice-core-goes-deep-giving-us-800000-years-of-climate

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/04/17/greenland-lake-disappears-under-the-ice

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2007/02/23/7199

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2006/10/11/5575

Those are just a few. Do some research. Read some real scientific articles. Because the "debate" is over in the "real scientific" community. AS IN THOSE NOT FUNDED BY REPUBLICAN THINK TANKS OR MASSIVE OIL CORPORATIONS. But you ignorance is willful, just like the rest of people who do not think that human kind not is a major factor in the process of current global climate change. Sure, it may not be "all" human kinds fault. There may be dozens of contributing factors. But to completely exonerate humans from the past two centuries(since the Industrial Revolution) is just foolish as it is ignorant.

Also, if you don't vote you change nothing. So expect more of the same. You also have no right to bitch if you don't vote.

Father2u:

DC_Josh:
Two words.

Barack Obama.

One word.

No.

Who would you vote for? Ron Paul? Who never even had a chance of winning? Or would you be like the other sheep and vote Republican? As if the Republicans, who have had a majority of the power in this nation for the past eight years, have not done enough damage?

Fondant:
I also object to America, on the premise that it seems to breed a species of people who delude themselves into thinking that rules do not apply to them (i.e you may not torture arbitrary people, you may not carpet-bomb small villages, you may not build crap-bucket cars with such gobshite emissions standards that the CHINESE won't accept them, you may not make fun of the Queen, you may not pretend the Great Depression didn't happen etc etc).

Thankfully, most of this breed of American doesn't go abroad that often, so I normally meet the nicer breed of American (i.e the smart ones) when I meet a yank. So I'm not considering wiping you from the face of the planet. Yet.

And Hunde Des Krieg is right- nature is a continuously expanding, evolving phenomenon. Extinction in itself is not a bad thing- it's simply the wastage of species that are unfit for survival in the environment. And the environment itself is going to change- though climactic shifts are generally fairly slow-moving, it could be just that we've not noticed this shit until now. It is still unproven!!!

However, one must remember that the biodiversity of an environment is representative of that environment's stability. So massed extinction is not a good 'un. As for the rest: Michael Crichton is right when he says: 'We can't destroy the planet... we can only destroy ourselves.'

We Liberally minded Americans cannot stand these Neo-Conservative/Right Wing/Republican people either.

I have a funny story about those kind of people. I was in France in 1994. While in Paris I was sitting smoking a clove enjoying my morning of Parisian cuisine. When who come along? A huge family of fat red faced, loud, rude Americans who were obviously from the Midwest or some such place. They were demanding and crude. I was so severely embarrassed I promptly put on my hat and left. I did not want to associated with these fools in the eyes of any French natives. It was terrible. We have to live with people like that in out country every damn day.

I also wholly agree with the following statement you posted: Michael Crichton is right when he says: "We can't destroy the planet... we can only destroy ourselves."

But I reserve the right to make fun your The Queen, our own President, and just about any other political figure. If Obama makes a fool of himself, which he has done so as of yet, I will make fun of him too. I am like South Park, I will make fun of anyone equally.

Stop building with concrete, use lego blocks instead. And yes, I am serious. This is the next big civil engineering innovation that will change the world.

Put a big ice cube in the ocean every once in a while, with them getting bigger each time, thus solving the problem once and for all.

The misunderstanding probably happened the first time they were researching the effects of pollution on earth. They probably saw a correlation (Which means a POSSIBLE relation in the changes of values between X & Y) between pollution & the ozone layer/polar ice cap. But if they did, then it was probably seen on statistics that were covering relatively short time-frames.

A correlation doesn't mean something is related. It just means that something SEEMS to be related.

Do you know how many articles I have read on Slashdot, Arstechnia, and similar web sites explaining how bad the ice melt is getting?

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/04/17/greenland-lake-disappears-under-the-ice

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080917-polar-ice-loss-heralds-a-change-in-the-weather.html

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/05/artic_ice_melti.html

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/03/huge-chunk-of-a.html

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/05/09/iceberg.satellite/index.html

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/09/05/sea-levels-to-rise-more-than-predicted

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/05/14/ice-core-goes-deep-giving-us-800000-years-of-climate

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/04/17/greenland-lake-disappears-under-the-ice

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2007/02/23/7199

http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2006/10/11/5575

Lets go by this list one by one

1. http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/04/17/greenland-lake-disappears-under-the-ice

happens all the fucking time

2.http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080917-polar-ice-loss-heralds-a-change-in-the-weather.html

The record minimum set in 2007 caught many by surprise, but this year's observations are equally disconcerting. Experts expected the winter of 2007-2008 to bolster the sea ice and hold the 2008 minimum well above the record low. Instead, the 4.52 million square kilometers of ice recorded on September 12, 2008 was just 10 percent shy of the record minimum. These numbers make for good press, experts say, but the real focus should be on the overall trend towards ice-free summers in the Arctic.

Again, changes focus of the real issue, if global warming was a constant thing, then why do we have more ice this year, old article also.

3. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/05/artic_ice_melti.html

stop using old articles this is from a month ago, the one i used where we had a 30 percent increase was from last week.

4.http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/03/huge-chunk-of-a.html

not an issue, happens all the time, it was just a big one this time

5.http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/05/09/iceberg.satellite/index.html

talks about the same thing as above, waste of my time

6.http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/09/05/sea-levels-to-rise-more-than-predicted

old article, proven wrong later in the year with the huge amount of ice increase

7.http://arstechnica.com/journals/science.ars/2008/05/14/ice-core-goes-deep-giving-us-800000-years-of-climate

lol, i like this article, it supports me, READ IT.

The data reinforce the view that the ultimate sources of recent climate variability are the eccentricities in our planet's orbit, which cause subtle changes in the amount of sunlight reaching the earth.

Im not even gonna waste my time on the last two, old as fuck articles....

OK, you just got owned, actually read the articles you post...

you have a lotta articles.

Jazzyluv - I believe you were looking for the 'quote' function - at the moment, it is hard to distinguish what is your point and what you are merely quoting.

As for a solution to Global Warming?

I call it; Colonizing Mars.

goodman528:
Stop building with concrete, use lego blocks instead. And yes, I am serious. This is the next big civil engineering innovation that will change the world.

So instead of using readily available materials to make concrete, you use OIL to make plastic bricks?

Lukeje:

goodman528:
Stop building with concrete, use lego blocks instead. And yes, I am serious. This is the next big civil engineering innovation that will change the world.

So instead of using readily available materials to make concrete, you use OIL to make plastic bricks?

Let me clarify. Making concrete creates more than 10% of the world's green house production. So instead of making structures out of new concrete each time, we should modulise and standardise our buildings, like LEGO block. So we can re-use building materials to build much cheaper (i.e. actually affordable) houses, and the entire constraction industry will be based on recycling.

I know you are thinking: all the communist countries like USSR, China, E.Germany, etc did this to build those ugly "Stalinist blocks" (Concrete Slab construction). However, with modern western technology, it is entirely possible to make quite innovative and pretty (and still functional) structures out of a standardised set of re-usable blocks.

the one i used where we had a 30 percent increase was from last week

show it.

goodman528:

Lukeje:

goodman528:
Stop building with concrete, use lego blocks instead. And yes, I am serious. This is the next big civil engineering innovation that will change the world.

So instead of using readily available materials to make concrete, you use OIL to make plastic bricks?

Let me clarify. Making concrete creates more than 10% of the world's green house production. So instead of making structures out of new concrete each time, we should modulise and standardise our buildings, like LEGO block. So we can re-use building materials to build much cheaper (i.e. actually affordable) houses, and the entire constraction industry will be based on recycling.

I know you are thinking: all the communist countries like USSR, China, E.Germany, etc did this to build those ugly "Stalinist blocks" (Concrete Slab construction). However, with modern western technology, it is entirely possible to make quite innovative and pretty (and still functional) structures out of a standardised set of re-usable blocks.

Huh... that actually makes some sense... (but what would you make the bricks out of?)

Jazzyluv:
Do you know how many articles I have read on Slashdot, Arstechnia, and similar web sites explaining how bad the ice melt is getting?
...
[very long list of articles. But applaudable for actually putting a short sentence to explain what each is about]
...
OK, you just got owned, actually read the articles you post...

The (real or perceived) discussion on whether there is Global warming or not, and whether we are causing it or not, and whether it's scientists or green monkeys doing the debating, etc, is entirely irrelevant. Discussion implies opinions, Global warming is a fact. Any 3 year old kid knows this:

If you put something under the sun, it heats up. It doesn't matter what that thing is, whether it's your car, you neighbour's dog, or carbon dioxide. If you put 1 dog under the sun, then you have 1 hot dog; if you put 2 dogs under the sun, then you have 2 hot dogs; if you put 3 dogs under the sun, then you have 3 hot dogs... ... So, if you put 1 CO2 under the sun, then you 1 hot CO2, if you put 2 CO2 under the sun, you have 2 hot CO2 ... ... Is that really so difficult to understand that you need to read "scientific articles" from the internet with lots of stats and figures and generally dodgey conclusions?