- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Climate Change Argument
Posted on 3/30/17 at 3:46 pm to mylsuhat
Posted on 3/30/17 at 3:46 pm to mylsuhat
quote:
How much climate change funding are you bound to lose when they cut that bullshite out?
$0
Besides, in my research I don't give a shite WHY the climate is changing. I look at the ecosystem impacts on how things change WITH the climate.
People like to propose the stupid question of what the thermostat of the earth should be set at, knowing that there is no right answer.
However, the physiology of plants and animals is often temperature dependent. Sure, some can adapt but at what cost?
How will monocultures of damn near clonal crops that we use to grow our food be impacted?
People need to move beyond the human fault and political aspect of climate change. They need to think about what we are dependent upon under current conditions, and what we must do when things change.
1
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:04 pm to Bmath
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/10/21 at 7:26 pm
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:05 pm to TSS4LSU
Breitbart, Trump tweets, and FOX News are your only valid resources.
Godspeed.
ETA: and the TD poli board. I've learned so much about the topic there.
Godspeed.
ETA: and the TD poli board. I've learned so much about the topic there.
This post was edited on 3/30/17 at 4:07 pm
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:07 pm to Bmath
The biggest issue is that it is a very, very complex issue that 90% of the people who argue for or against it don't understand. It's not something that you can listen to a podcast or read an article to understand. There are hundreds of factors that go along with it.
Most people haven't put in the time to understand it.
The main concern around the entire argument is CO2. Whether CO2 is causing an increase in temperatures or not.
For example this Article stats “…no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2.”
It does not state that CO2 does not raise temperatures. In context it is saying, yes the CO2 has risen since Industrial Revolution, yes the earth’s temperatures have risen, but No there is no COMPELING reason to say CO2 has caused (key word) the rise.
The cause is what is at the heart of the entire debate. What has influenced what? Is it natural? Is man’s influence 5% or 55%. This is not an easy answer.
By looking at Ice Caps you can go back and see how much CO2 was in the atmosphere at a point in time. Ice Caps trap it as essentially a dry ice form. So when some of the artic cap melts it actually doesn’t turn to water but rather turns into water vapor and CO2.
NASA Link
As you can see there has been a tremendous jump in CO2 in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution.
So there is more CO2, but it is how much greenhouse effect is cause by CO2 at 405.25 ppm. It may not affect that much at 405.
The reason CO2 gets all the attention and debate (over other green house gases) is over its residence time in the atmosphere (how long it will stay CO2 in the atmosphere, it is has the longest residence of any greenhouse gas). The longer it stays as CO2 in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas the more effect it could possibly have on trapping heat. Naturally, it is about 5 years before it gets sucked up by a plant or dissolves in the ocean, but people argue that with the rate at which it is entering the atmosphere it could possibly slow down its residence time to as much as 500 years (very far out there estimation). This is due to deforestation (less plants to suck up the CO2) and ocean CO2 uptake.
Then there is the debate on how much ocean CO2 uptake can occur. Some say the oceans uptake is slowing down while others say there plenty more it can handle.
And this is just scraping the top of the issue. It ain't as simple as "what the thermostat of the earth should be set at", and it is something that needs to be studied.
Most people haven't put in the time to understand it.
The main concern around the entire argument is CO2. Whether CO2 is causing an increase in temperatures or not.
For example this Article stats “…no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2.”
It does not state that CO2 does not raise temperatures. In context it is saying, yes the CO2 has risen since Industrial Revolution, yes the earth’s temperatures have risen, but No there is no COMPELING reason to say CO2 has caused (key word) the rise.
The cause is what is at the heart of the entire debate. What has influenced what? Is it natural? Is man’s influence 5% or 55%. This is not an easy answer.
By looking at Ice Caps you can go back and see how much CO2 was in the atmosphere at a point in time. Ice Caps trap it as essentially a dry ice form. So when some of the artic cap melts it actually doesn’t turn to water but rather turns into water vapor and CO2.
NASA Link
As you can see there has been a tremendous jump in CO2 in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution.
So there is more CO2, but it is how much greenhouse effect is cause by CO2 at 405.25 ppm. It may not affect that much at 405.
The reason CO2 gets all the attention and debate (over other green house gases) is over its residence time in the atmosphere (how long it will stay CO2 in the atmosphere, it is has the longest residence of any greenhouse gas). The longer it stays as CO2 in the atmosphere as a greenhouse gas the more effect it could possibly have on trapping heat. Naturally, it is about 5 years before it gets sucked up by a plant or dissolves in the ocean, but people argue that with the rate at which it is entering the atmosphere it could possibly slow down its residence time to as much as 500 years (very far out there estimation). This is due to deforestation (less plants to suck up the CO2) and ocean CO2 uptake.
Then there is the debate on how much ocean CO2 uptake can occur. Some say the oceans uptake is slowing down while others say there plenty more it can handle.
And this is just scraping the top of the issue. It ain't as simple as "what the thermostat of the earth should be set at", and it is something that needs to be studied.
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:09 pm to Bmath
quote:
Trump said it was a myth propagated by the Chinese
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:09 pm to Throbinhood
the temps were rising before the introduction of our massive CO2 emmisions.
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:13 pm to Nado Jenkins83
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:14 pm to TSS4LSU
its all propaganda. really sad that these scientists are too pissy to admit when they are wrong.
Posted on 3/30/17 at 4:59 pm to TSS4LSU
well just recently it came out that about 99% of all the
"climate change RESEARCH" was gathered NOT FOLLOWING the scientific method.
AKA - its all horseshite.
Yes we put out greenhouse gases --- but 2 things - 1 - volcanoes can put out more -- and we didn't make those... and 2 - the amount of gas we produce versus the earths volume of atmosphere ---- IS frickING INFINITESIMAL.
"climate change RESEARCH" was gathered NOT FOLLOWING the scientific method.
AKA - its all horseshite.
Yes we put out greenhouse gases --- but 2 things - 1 - volcanoes can put out more -- and we didn't make those... and 2 - the amount of gas we produce versus the earths volume of atmosphere ---- IS frickING INFINITESIMAL.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News