Posted on 02/10/2006 9:43:29 AM PST by CreativeRandom
I would like to hear "The Other Side" of the argument on Greenhouse gases and global warming. I've heard the normal liberal rant, and have taken a few classes on the subject as well.
So, do greenhouse gases exist because of humans? I have heard faintly that animals and bonfires cause more gas, but I'm unknowledgeable on the exacts. Also, I would appreciate numeric info on US contribution to global warming / greenhouse gas compared to other countries - France, Former Soviet Union, China, Vietnam, third world countries like Zimbabwe....
And of global warming. Is it caused by industrialization? Should we be worried? Is it a risk? Is the artic circle going to be gone by 2070 like the UK newspaper stated?
All input appreciated.
Oops, Hugh oops, crop growing in the arctic might just be limited to hydroponic gardening.
I saw a really interesting documentary on either National Geographic or History Channel a few weeks ago that said that we had only recently (w/in the past 100 years) come out of a "mini" Ice Age. "Mini" is, of course, relative, since 100 years is only a blip in terms of geologic time. Anyway, it seems that, until around 1400 or so, it was warm enough in England that they could produce their own wine but that the climate changed drastically in the late 14th/early 15th centuries. This mini Ice Age therefore lasted 600 years or so, until the late 19th century.
The opinions in the program ran the gamut. Some said that the Ice Age was triggered by sunspot activity. Others said that it was from changes in the earth's magnetic field. Yet others said that it was from unusually high levels volcanic activity during the period. It was so cold in the summer of (I think) 1816 that parts of New England had 2 feet of snow. Yes, IN THE SUMMER.
Regardless, the temperatures started rising in the late 19th/early 20th centuries, decades BEFORE everyone owned a car and more than 100 years AFTER the start of the Industrial Revolution hit Western Europe and North America and more than 50 years after trains started crossing Europe and North America.
The Left keeps telling us that the US is warmer than any time on record. But it is important to remember that a) we have only been the US for 230 years, b) 100+ of those years were during that mini Ice Age and c) that records 230+ years ago were not exactly as accurate as they are now.
So, yes, temperatures are rising, and yes, humans may have something to do with it. But it cannot be all our fault because, if you take all of history into account (and Liberals are way too self-absorbed to think about anything other than the here and now), you'll see that temperatures have fluctuated wildly over the years. Everyone except for those who deny the existence of the fossil record knows that the continents were once in different places on the globe than they are now and that places on the earth that are now landlocked used to be under water. In 5+ billion years, the earth has changed a lot.
Do a keyword search using "climate change". It will bring up most of the articles archived here.
Absolutely right.
Common sense will tell you that MAN can't possibly do that much damage. We do need to be as clean as possible, but not go overboard.
How can we compare temperatures of even just 100 years ago? I mean today we have digital thermometers that we didn't have even 25 years ago. 100 years ago. They had mercury thermometers. The difference could be as much as 5 degrees or maybe even more.
Look at what does the most damage. volcanoes.
"When greenhouses are outlawed..."
Only criminals will have greenhouses?
Welcome to Freeper. Careful because some here will call this poster a troll for insiting arguments. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
The arguments may be long and tedious. Statistical information can be found in volumes for whatever point you want to make on the argument. So here are some simple logical points and facts to ponder.
1.)According to archeologists and scientists, this planets overall climate has been as stable in the past 10,000 years that at any point they can prove in its history. The earth has gone through very dramatic global climate changes repeatedly throughout its history. We had a semi-dramatic period of global cooling in the 500 - 700AD period (dropped about 7 degrees). Conversely it is expected that the entire planet was significantly warmer while dinasours roamed.
2.)The polar ice caps have been melting since the last official "ice age ended." No can definitively decide whether they are melting faster today than they were 1,000 years ago.
3.) The earth has been and foreseebly will continue to warm up.
4.) Scientists agree that the suns radiation (intensity and that it produces) is not cosmicaly (if that's a word) constant and it is the greatest potential source of the temperature on earth.
5.) Human contribution to the temperature on earth involves science that shows humans cause chemical by-products naturally found in the environment that can demonstrate adverse affects to chemicals also found in the upper atmosphere. No scientist can measure the extent of the damage conclusively and technology can't explain completely how our atmosphere works to repair or maintain itself. Also, estimates of the human effect can't be measured against those effects found naturally on earth so we cannot accurately measure the human impact. In otherwords, we don't know how many monkey fart in South America or how often, or what damage those unknowns have on the upper atmosphere. Some may argue this point. It is all estimates.
That will get ideas started for you.
A few decades ago, the fear-mongers were screaming about how man and industrialization was causing "global cooling". Of course the motives of the politicians, scientists, and eh...rock stars that push junk science hasn't changed.
And you can also read the links below, which expose a lot of the crap errors that Crichton makes in the book.
Michael Crichton's State of Confusion
Michael Crichton's State of Confusion II: Return of the Science
See post 32.
global cooling earth day 1975
http://patriotpost.us/news/EarthDay1975.pdf
Sorry, that's wrong.
Gases: Man versus the Volcanoes
Volcanoes are NOT a significant source of greenhouse gases; as for ozone-depleting chemicals, very little ozone-reactive chemical species released by volcanoes reach the stratosphere.
Anytime you're ready, TChris (but I will be unavailable February 18-26).
"Global Warming is a myth that some people want to use to control the world."
Carefull. Global warming is real. The idea that humans are the reason for it is the argued myth. And for the record, I don't believe that we humans can have any measurable affect on the temperature of our planet. Only arrogant, sophisticated, intellectual liberals are so bold as to announce the significance of their existance in the universe. They cause global warming with all the hot air they spew about global warming.
There I said it.
"Volcanoes are NOT a significant source of greenhouse gases; as for ozone-depleting chemicals, very little ozone-reactive chemical species released by volcanoes reach the stratosphere."
I must not be reading the table right. I see the text, but don't understand the numbers.
Besides, I thought CO2 was the most damaging chemical to our precious ozone layer. Now show me the table that measures human contribution of CO2 Vs. pig farts. :o)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.