|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Feb 27, 2002 11:46:02 GMT -5
Since we've only been keeping weather records for the last 150 years, I'm wondering if the issue of global warming hasn't been overdone. I'm not for burning down the Rain Forests or anything like that, nor do I want complete devastation of the planet. But a few degrees difference does not a problem make, and nature helps out quite a bit too.
When a volcano erupts, more pollution, ash, sulfur, and dust, and slight cooling of the Earth, does more damage all at once than man could ever dream of, unless we shoot off all our nuclear weapons. Yet the Earth repairs itself.
Also, we are somewhere within a cycle where our sun expands periodically which makes the climate warmer and more unstable anyway.
Thoughts? Is global warming a problem or are the warnings wearing thin?
|
|
|
Post by iNsAnE.cAnAdIaN on Mar 9, 2002 19:30:22 GMT -5
I havent exactly decided- I used to think it was a really big problem then I started doing some research into it. If you do a search entitled "Global Warming is a Fraud" or something to that effect you can find a lot of information against it. For example, in the areas of the highest rate of Carbon Dioxide and other pollutant emmisions the temperatures are actually REDUCING. The earth has a history of fluctuating temperatures-long before we were here the temperature of the earth and surrounding atmosphere would naturally take rises and falls. Then again, there is a lot of evidence pointing towards it, so I am split, I still have not decided, but I do suggest that we do stop polluting so much because global warming or not, we are still ruining our planet.
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on Apr 6, 2002 0:24:06 GMT -5
The thing with global warming is that what we're putting into our environment aren't naturally occuring substances. In referenec to what you said, ToxicAvenger about the volcano erupting is that that is a natural disaster. The earth can repair itself because that's a natural event. When we put pollution into our environment, those are things that the envirionment doesn't know how to break down. In small quantities, it's something that can be dealt with, but at the large amounts we put into the air, it's not healthy for us or for our planet.
I've heard a lot of comments saying basically that if the temperature of the earth rises 2 degrees, what's the big deal, it's only 2 degrees. Right? That's not the entire picture though. Yeah, 2 degrees isn't that much but the big picture is being missed. That is that it's not just 2 degrees, it's 2 degrees over every single square inch of the earth's surface. That's a lot.
Another misconception I've heard is that it's just the weather that is affected by global warming. That too isn't entirely accurate. what most people don't understand is that weather affects everything. For example, polar bears live in cold weather. We all know that. So what happens to them when the it gets so warm that their iceburgs melt (which, btw, is already happening)? That's a major setback in finding food. What do polar bears do if they can't find food? Well, they either die, or they find another source. What's starting to happen now is that they are having difficulties so they come down south more where there are populated areas. That's dangerous not only for them, but for people.
So, yeah this is great and all, but why shoudl you care? By the time you're dead, it won't be that big of a problem..right? Maybe so, but why should our planet and our children and grandchildren suffer just because we decide to be selfish? We enjoy life, being alive, being carefree...don't others deserve to enjoy it as well? Of course, this is just my opinion, but we live in such a beautiful, diverse world..it's not right that we should deprive others of it just because we didn't feel like it.
|
|
|
Post by pettyluv on Apr 6, 2002 20:17:25 GMT -5
I really think that there is no solid proof that humans are causing global warming. I agree that a climate change is in place on this planet, but I do not really think that man has had a large hand in the process.
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on Apr 8, 2002 17:43:31 GMT -5
^^^
Even if humans AREN'T causing global warming, the bigger picture is that it could still dramatically affect the way we live our lives. Maybe it's not our fault, but we still suffer the consequences of increased sun rays hitting us and giving us a higher chance of getting cancer or having our homes on the beach flooded because the iceburgs are melting and causing an increase in water levels.
Besides, it is a proven fact that our pollution has put a hole in the ozone layer. That significantly affects global warming.
|
|
|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Apr 9, 2002 11:13:34 GMT -5
I agree with the fact that it's not our fault, but we will suffer the consequenses. If we act NOW, the changing Earth won't affect us too much. But we have to stop building $750,000 houses two feet from the ocean! Then when it rises and knocks it down we're like, "Dang, whut happened?"
As for the holes in the ozone: Why are the largest holes over the Earth's poles, but not over cities that rely on heavy industry like Los Angeles or Detroit?
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on Apr 10, 2002 18:33:10 GMT -5
^^^ I'm not sure, but I think it has to do with the axis of the earth (or something). Because the earth is on a slant the currents affect where the pollution goes..... There is a hole in the ozone over Chile I think.... Hmmm, that's a good question.
|
|
|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Apr 11, 2002 10:29:21 GMT -5
Actually I think you're onto something now that I think about it. The Earth's rotation causes a "Coreolis Effect." This is where the rotation of Earth, or even a large space station causes a type of gravity, or "pull." The gravity and rotation of the earth moves everything around. Simplisticlly, it's what sets up all the air currents, weather pattern and jet streams.
The strange part is, these huge holes in the ozone are not centered over the poles but sort off off-set.
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on Apr 13, 2002 1:06:51 GMT -5
Yeah...must be something like that.
This weekend, in Banff, there's a G-8 Summit surrounding the issue of the Kyoto Protocol. I don't know if anyone's heard of it...basically it's a bunch of world leaders getting together to discuss prevention of climate change. Well, not necessarily prevention..it's more or less about how to slow down the effects of it.
Living in Calgary, which is close to Banff, I've heard a lot of controversy around...people who are against in and whatnot. Their arguement being (from what I understand) climate change is a naturally occuring process. I don't see the point in that. Even if it is a naturally occuring process, there still are facts you can't ignore like the ozone layer, toxic emissions in our atmosphere etc. Also, this just isn't about pollution, it's about managing our energy efficiency, management practices for our ecosystems so we can look after them better. It's all interconnected.
I just don't understand how people don't care. That doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Apr 16, 2002 11:48:11 GMT -5
I've been to Banff, I love the mountains there.
There was a Kyoto Summit last year I think but the US didn't participate. The money spent on what could have been done, would have been too expensive for what the results, which wouldn't have been much, would have been. <<Also, this just isn't about pollution, it's about managing our energy efficiency, management practices for our ecosystems so we can look after them better. It's all interconnected. >>
So true. The trouble is, we can talk about saving the environment all we want and build more fuel efficient cars and all that. And we should! Don't get me wrong. But there are costs involved which make such projects too expensive. Toyota has electric cars out now. Sounds good right? But to replace the battery in this car costs about $5,000.
Put additives in gasoline/petrol? Refineries claim they can't keep up with the demand so prices go up. Now trucking companies have to pay more so they charge more for their services, so now your favorite store and grocery stores have to raise prices to cover the costs of thier goods, so now a resturant has to raise its prices because thier food costs more, so now an airline company has to charge more for airfare because the cost of fuel went up, and so did the cost of food. It's all a big mess.
We could go to nuclear power. The waste generated in the past 40 or so years would fill up a large stadium. If that sounds like alot, consider this: Forget electric cars. To keep a 100 watt light bulb burning for a year puts seven TONS of ash into the air. Now multiply that by the tens of hundreds of thousands of lightbulbs burning world-wide. Nuclear waste aint' so bad.
I'm all for fighting pollution, but when the costs get so great that what we're doing actually CAUSES the problems then we need to pull back and figure out what to do. Not just jump in because it's the right thing to do. Do the right thing, but spend the money right and do it right the first time.
You're right about the problems being interconnected. If Chicago produces too much smoke, we here in Michigan have Ozone Action Days. That's when the weather, hot and humid is such that it holds pollutants closer to the ground. The problem is, Chicago and Detroit survive on heavy industry.
Then there's the problem of the rain forests disappearing. When the rain forests are gone, no more cocoa beans i.e. chocolate. The rain forests are also a natural sink, if you will, for collecting carbon dioxide, which the forests turn back into breathable air.
That's sad, that's bad. But my blase' attitude about it is this. You have developing countries that see what the United States, Canada, Europe, Japan, and other countries have and they want it. Are we going to tell them to keep their standards of living low so that we can enjoy chocolate a little longer? The developing countries want what we have and they want it now so things will get easier. I don't like it, but I can't blame them either.
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on Apr 20, 2002 23:27:43 GMT -5
I guess I never think that money is that big of a factor, even if it is unrealistic of me. My attitude tends to be that if people DO want to make a difference, they'll find a way to make it work.
Like what you said about electric cars, sure those are expensive, but those aren't the only option....even something as meager as using public transportation or carpooling can make that much of a difference if more and more people do it..especially if your city promotes it. For example, in Vancouver, they promote carpooling by having a lane specially for cars carrying more than 3 people. That allows them to avoid heavy traffic because not so many people carpool. Once people discover it's quicker to get to work by carpooling , more will do it. Okay, that isn't a big thing to do, but as far as I'm concerned, it's something, which is more than a lot of people are willing to do.
|
|
|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Apr 22, 2002 11:49:54 GMT -5
As for public transprotation, it's up to the people to decide what they want to do. Trouble is, either the lobbyist for the auto industry is funding a politician's pockets, or the gas company is doing the same. Some bus lines don't go everywhere, it's expensive to take a cab, and trains are almost non-existent except for travel. (Where I live anyway)
The trouble is, you and I see the wisdom of car-pooling and all that, but like I said before, if people just take occaisonal stabs at it, nothing is really accomplished. And when they see the pollution that keeps building up, some will think, "Why should I knock myself out for this?" And they go back to driving one-car-per-person and causing traffic jams.
I took the bus to work for awhile and I liked it. But when that job ended, it was back to driving because the bus only went downtown.
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on Apr 27, 2002 11:36:14 GMT -5
Hmmm...well now you've got me thinking again...
I do agree with what you saying. It's completely legit... I just don't agree (because that makes sense....)
My feeling is that people don't care because they don't take the time to look into it and form their own opinions; they go by what other sources of info say instead of by what they feel. I don't agree with that.
People can speak whatever opinion they want but that doesn't change the fact that something about our earth IS changing and it may not be for the better. Yeah, it's an inconvenience, but to some degree, isn't it worth it to at least know about it for OUR health and OUR benefit? Even if the majority of people don't take personal action, at least they're not ignorant. That is something I can respect.
|
|
|
Post by Toxic-Avenger on Apr 30, 2002 12:16:25 GMT -5
Maybe you agree with it but don't like it?
There's several issues and problems knotted up in all this. Ever try untangling fishing line? This is my analogy.
Gasoline is probably the most bang for the buck. 125,000 BTU's per gallon. The engines that run on it can be huge and powerful Throw it in a metal tank and you're all set.
They want to put out cars with hydrogen fuel, but storing liquid hydrogen is a pain.
Electric cars need huge expensive batteries, and the loads on them can't be very much.
Solar power is clean and free, which is precisly why you local electric company is slow to develop anything that would help a homowner use it, because it cuts them out of the deal. Plus the so much land is needed for solar collectors that it would mess up the climate even more, all that heat generated from these dark panels.
Windmills, huge and noisy. Can you imagine a lanscape covered with hundreds of windmills, and wind blows constantly on in very few places on Earth.
And there's all the lobbyists in government that would keep all the free and renwable stuff from happening because the gas and power companied while stop or slow development.
I say drill for oil in Alaska. It's nothing but a wasteland anyway where caribou visit for six days out of the year. That way, we reduce our 25% depence on foreign oil, which in effect is funding terrorism.
|
|
|
Post by theLadyMadonna on May 3, 2002 15:49:35 GMT -5
I guess in the end, it has everything to do with money, unfortunately. Like, electric cars are really expensive, so why would anyone buy them unless they're an enviro-freak with wads of cash to spend? What you say is completely true, by fact....it just makes me want to stick a rusty nail in someone's eye
|
|