- 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: 2014 May = warmest on record.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:51 am to SpidermanTUba
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:51 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
I fail to see what could be more important than the planet we live on
Let's see
My God, my family and my friends all come ahead of the planet.
1
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:51 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
Is that level too low, too high, or about right?
For what?
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:51 am to SpidermanTUba
I'm not arguing Catholic History with you in a global warming thread. All I'm telling you is that this show has had a very negative view on religion way to negative IMO and it twisted historical events to have it slanted for their agenda.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:52 am to JOJO Hammer
quote:
The do as I say not as I do approach. Nice, way to take the lead.
Child, you are seriously confused. I didn't tell you to do anything.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:54 am to doubleb
quote:
I fail to see what could be more important than the planet we live on
I can, NSA spying, 2A under constant attack, IRS emails, ISIS, etc. What planet do you live on?
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:56 am to SpidermanTUba
quote:
SpidermanTUba
Do you really believe that this strategy will resonate with your constituency? Also, are you paid by the post?
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:56 am to SpidermanTUba
btw this cosmos show started off showing venus and how bad it is because of it's greenhouse affect. Now a smart person who has studied at-least some astronomy understands that because venus is closer to the sun it is impossible for it to have water all of it burns off because of the suns intense temperature, on the other hand the earth which is far enough away for water to stay on the earth and not evaporate to where there is none left allows the water to collect the co2 and have just enough to make it livable. It is amazing how being so much closer to the sun has such a major impact on a planets climate. But he fails to mention this, again using these scare tactics trying to make it look like our great earth may become like venus one day.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:57 am to SpidermanTUba
I think we should start killing all non-productive people until carbon levels start falling. They produce carbon by breathing as well as energy and pollution.aybe the earths booming population is partly to blame.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:57 am to udtiger
quote:
Industrial Revolution begins in, what, 1750s?
How many major volcanic eruptions have occurred since then (releasing a shitton of CO2)?
Here's just the 1800s
Here's the 1900s
Our contribution has been 100X the amount of those volcanoes. This comes from the simple math of how much CO2 is produced by volcanoes vs fossil fuels.
Further - if the increase were due to volcanoes, the Co2 graph just wouldn't look like this:
Instead of seeing a smooth progression upwards (minus annual variation) - we would expect to see a sharp jump with each volcano. I don't see that. Do you? Can you point to a single feature of the above plot that can be tied to a particular volcanic eruption?
quote:
How many forest fires caused by lightning strikes?
Co2 from burning trees does not have the same C13/C12 ratio as Co2 from fossil fuels. Furthermore, when those trees grow back, the suck up the same amount of Co2 they emitted.
quote:
How many more humans, livestock, domesticated animals exhaling CO2 versus 1750 and before?
Again, Co2 from these sources has a different isotopic signature. Furthermore, the Co2 a cow exhales is taken out of the atmosphere when food is grown to feed to the next cow.
quote:
For a scientist, you sure are fricking stupid.
That's nice.
This post was edited on 6/19/14 at 12:02 pm
Posted on 6/19/14 at 11:59 am to chadau79
another thing about cosmos it says that the sun has no impact on our climate.
did he forget the Maunder Minimum?
did he forget the Maunder Minimum?
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:00 pm to OMLandshark
quote:so... surety of others? Fair enough, but that isn't a scientific argument. If they were misleading you--how would you know?
The fact that 97.1% of them believe it
For example, most priests absolutely convinced that God exists. Do you believe in God based on that? But then again... most athiests are absolutely convinced that God doesn't exist... so... how to choose?
quote:Looking at the climate as a single variable system is kind of a broad oversimplification. Clearly more heat = more clouds which increases albedo. Enough to replace that of the poles? Likely, as the cloud increase will occur in the tropics where there is more sunlight. Albedo increases at the poles, are in areas of minimum sunlight...
the fact that humans have been adding excess CO2 to the atmosphere, and the melting ice caps, which (in the North at least) leads to less sunlight being reflected back out into space.
quote:Indeed. They are approaching a whopping 24%. BUT, there is more expense to erecting a solar system than just teh panels. You need wire, steel to hold the up, substations, control systems, and (for large scale) lots of land. All are very mature industries and aren't going to get any cheaper. Balance-of-system is a real cost with very little opportunity for cost reduction.
We're making better and better solar panels all the time.
quote:Me too. But both are not likely to very useful for transportation anytime soon.
Plus we've got wind and nuclear energy as well, which I'm a big proponent of.
This post was edited on 6/19/14 at 12:10 pm
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:01 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Emerging nations aren't presently big contributors to the problem.
But you will agree that China is about double the U.S. right now, and exceed the combined total of the U.S. and EU, correct?
And that China, India and Russia - all of whom could literally not give less of a single shite about CO2 emissions, make up 40% of the global emissions, while the U.S., EU and Japan are about 30%, correct?
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:01 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
Why would you expect me to pay for both my and your share of the cost of global warming? I'm not turning off the AC so you can burn more gas, frick that.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:02 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
another thing about cosmos it says that the sun has no impact on our climate.
No it doesn't. He says the recent temperature upswing cannot be attributed to solar activity.
quote:I'm sure he did, you should send him an email.
did he forget the Maunder Minimum?
This post was edited on 6/19/14 at 12:03 pm
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:03 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
For what?
For anything - you cited it, Spidey. You are strongly implying that 400 ppm is too much. You then cited a historical level of 280 - I'm just curious. Is 280 about right or is that too high, too low, or just about right?
If we got it to 200, would that be about right, or still too high? Or would that be too low?
Or do you know?
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:03 pm to catholictigerfan
quote:
btw this cosmos show started off showing venus and how bad it is because of it's greenhouse affect. Now a smart person who has studied at-least some astronomy understands that because venus is closer to the sun it is impossible for it to have water all of it burns off because of the suns intense temperature, on the other hand the earth which is far enough away for water to stay on the earth and not evaporate to where there is none left allows the water to collect the co2 and have just enough to make it livable. It is amazing how being so much closer to the sun has such a major impact on a planets climate. But he fails to mention this, again using these scare tactics trying to make it look like our great earth may become like venus one day.
You sure you're not thinking of Mercury? Venus is in the Goldilocks zone, and it's entirely feasible that it once had water on it. We'll likely never know since that planet has been straight to hell and back and none of the oceans or creek evidence would have survived. It's actually possible if we could reform the atmosphere and control Venus's volcanic activity that we could terraform it.
This post was edited on 6/19/14 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:03 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
But you will agree that China is about double the U.S. right now, and exceed the combined total of the U.S. and EU, correct?
LINK
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:05 pm to Ace Midnight
quote:
You are strongly implying that 400 ppm is too much.
Its too much if what you desire is the natural climate.
quote:
You then cited a historical level of 280 - I'm just curious. Is 280 about right or is that too high, too low, or just about right?
That's what it was before the industrial revolution. Sounds like an excellent goal.
quote:
If we got it to 200, would that be about right, or still too high? Or would that be too low?
Its hard to imagine how that would be possible.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:05 pm to SpidermanTUba
Okay - I'm on board with a cap and trade for California, Illinois, New York State and Massachussetts.
Let's do our trial in those states.
Let's do our trial in those states.
Posted on 6/19/14 at 12:08 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
No it doesn't. He says the recent temperature upswing cannot be attributed to solar activity.
that wasn't clear from the video
he says no, it's not the sun. Explaining the warming effects are bought on by the green house effect to me it sounds like the sun has no impact.
This show does a great job phrasing things in a way to help his view point. Global warming skeptics will point to the sun's activity, all he says is that not it's not to sun. But again I pointed out a part of earth's recent history where the suns very limited activity caused a little ice age, at-least that is what the theory is. If the sun has little impact or the upswing can't be attributed to the raise in solar activity over the past 40 or so years, why did it have such a large impact on the climate in the 17th and 18th century. I understand nothing is known for sure but it is a very interesting connection between the sun's low activity and the earth's cooling trend during those centuries.
Page 12 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News