Debate HM Global Warming (No, its not a fact)

My opinion on this is that it is a mixture.​

After having taken Earth Space Honors in 8th grade (IM GOING TO HIGH SCHOOL YAY!!), and after many hours of discussing it in our class, I have decided that Global Warming is a normal process that takes hundreds of thousands of years, but with all the adding of greenhouse gasses(pollutants from cars and so on) it is increasing how fast the NATURAL PROCESS OF GLOBAL WARMING ACTUALLY HAPPENS.

For the People who don't understand the statement above ill give you a simplified version below

Earth+Natural Global Warming= 100,000years
Earth+People+Natural Global Warming=1,000years



Look at how much people are conserned about this. Even HONDA is helping slow down green house gasses. Pretty soon all cars will be like this one. HERE

 

Can i have a link to this? I would like to know what he factored into his calculations and wether or not he factored sea level rise and inflation into all of this.

 

WOW. Saying that scientific evidence is unimportant makes you the ignorant one. Seriously, that is one of the most ignorant statements ever to escape someone's mind.

 

cool, thanks

 

Crap....250 pages. Im gonna have to skim through alot of it.

__________________________

"Reducing GHGs, particularly deep reductions, will require primarily taking
costly steps to reduce CO2."

Theres the "costly"

___________________________________
​

P15 - "On the side of climate damages, our knowledge is very meager. For most
of the time span of human civilizations, global climatic patterns have stayed within a very narrow range, varying at most a few tenths of a degree Centigrade (°C) from century to century."

Thats like what i was saying before: we havent seen climate change so dramatic in the history of...well, basically recorded history. Except, of course, from volcanic activity and such, but thats a different story.

____________________________________
​

P36 - "The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide of 380 parts
per million (ppm) in 2005 far exceeds the range over the last 650,000 years (estimated to be between 180 to 300 ppm). Current calculations from climate models are that doubling the amount of CO​

2 or the equivalent in the atmosphere compared with pre-industrial levels will in equilibrium lead to an increase in the global surface temperature of 2 to 4.5 degrees C, with a best estimate of about 3 °C."

See? Humans Are not helping!

_____________________________________

Ok, i got to about page 50. Ill probably read more of it later. Thats some interesting stuff those guys are doing. ​

 

I have something to add about the sun. The sun is one of those lucky suns that get bigger over the years and explode. I saw data (I cant find it right now) that when our sun runs out of energy in about 3-5 billion years it will have swallowed all of the inner planets. Yes that means Earth. So the data on the sun getting hotter, to me, isn't real. The sun is just getting bigger.

 

Well, technically, the sun is getting bigger. But with the sun getting bigger, it is also getting hotter.

The sun consumes a very large (4 million tons) of matter (per second), which is converted through nuclear fusion into intense light and heat.

See This Site: The Life Cycle of a Sun-Like Star
Although it is a bit out of date, the principles involved are spot on and should give you a basic idea, combined with the link below:
Sun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
should give a pretty good idea of what is going on.


And you need to be proud now, im actually using links.

 

on one side global warming is overly exhagerated and people only SAY they care and continue to bring it forth. buuuuuutttt even if we r causing it to speed up a little, the COWs r realy bring it home. good job cows! you and me, cow, we r killin there sympathy meters! they must understand how much we care about the envirenment. my work here is done now that the world knows im a good person. (shed a tear)

on the other, He said there would be more natural disaster when the time was close. not implying anything.

Listen to the guy above me, hes got the right idea. ^_^

 

Who is this post directed at? Im getting confused if its me or not.
______________

So, anyways, back on track: the sun is a natural thing, which makes it unpredictable. There are years with many solar flares, and some with few.

here is what we should look at. Direct your attention to the upper path, as our star will never reach the critical mass phase that causes it to "go nova" as they say.

We need to look at this in the long term. Anamolies are ubiquitous in nature, so to counter this we need to look at the big picture.

It is estimated it will take our sun approximately 5-6 BILLION (refer to my links on my most recent post) years for our sun to become a red giant.

A red giant version of our sun will happen in a long time, but its effects will happen much earlier. According to the above, itll take a billion years before the oceans evaporate away and the hydrogen leaves us for good. Thats the envoy of the end.

But now we have a problem - a red giant will actually loose surface temperature (relative to a star the size of what we have, anyways).

Of course, itll be closer to the earth so i wont matter, but the point i am trying to make is, the sun is so unpredictable and it will take so long for notable changes to occur that it will be just that - unimportant and unnoticable. At least when plotted on a graph, it would appear scattered and uncorelated.

Bottom line - Sun can cool us and sun can heat us up, but it is far too erratic to be considered a true part of global warming.

 

Ferret, we had a discussion earlier that decided that the majority would always deserve equal opportunity next to what you presume to be a well founded assumption.

No matter what your sources say, they are only assumptions. At least by your thinking, right?

 

Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis
The National Academies | News | Science Academies Call for International Action on Climate Change, Global Health
CAETS Statement on Environment and Sustainable Growth
http://www.icsu.org/Gestion/img/ICSU_DOC_DOWNLOAD/1505_DD_FILE_StatementTR_UNESCO_34GC_20-10-07.pdf

I can haz proof that ppl affects teh global warming?

Anyway, we really should be trying to stop global warming. Don't try to tell me that the average temperature is going down; One stastical anomoly does not overthrow a statistical trend, and the overall trend shows that temperatures are rising. (See below)

^ Fig. 1: =P

Anyway, like it or not, global warming is an issue (even if we are not causing it). If temperatures go up high enough, then the ice caps will begin to melt. For those of you who say that this is not a problem, this will cause a large extinction of arctic and antarctic species. If that's not enough, coastal areas (including places like New York City) will be flooded- which is not good. High temperatures (and the high humidity that results from it) also breed powerful storms (hence the name "tropical storms"- those conditions are usually found in tropics). However, hurricanes would become far more likely to develop, and could tavel much further out than they would normally go. Of course, a large change in temperature (as any sudden climate change would) would probably cause a mass extinction.

And, even if we assume that global temeratures are not rising, CO2 is accomponied several other problems of its own. A major reason that CO2 emmisions have not gone up higher is that is that it is absorbed by the ocean. However, this has begun to reduce oceanic pH levels. If the pH levels fall much further, they will begin to destroy coral reefs. Much further than that, and an aquatic mass extinction may take place, which would definately have a negative impact upon us.

Yes, you can haz moar linxxorz:
23. Acid Rain Intensifies Threat To Marine Life | Ocean | DISCOVER Magazine
Whither the Coral Reefs? | Ecosystems | DISCOVER Magazine
Special Report: Endless Summer—Living With the Greenhouse Effect | Global Warming | DISCOVER Magazine

 

Ok, here is my input on this whole scam...

First of all, my source:

From: Cycles Research Institute - Climate

Now, if you would be so kind to like at my graph

If you notice the graph has been relatively constant, it looks something like an economic graph doesn't it?



See, the cold points are the Troughs, expansion is "global warming", the peaks are the hottest points, and recessions are us falling into "ice ages" righttttt...


Anyways, that was my main point, but since we are posting I might as well throw this in:

I can't give you a source (vid from my science class at school)

But anyways, 4x the amount of C02 in the air would not affect us at all, BUT:

Ok you all know that... Ill stay basic... Plants take in CO2 and give off O2, right? Now, what limits a photosynthesis you ask? 3 things

-light
-Water
-CO2

So, if it gets more CO2, the plant will undergo photosynthesis at a higher rate. Now, what comes from photosynthesis? Glucose, the energy source for the plant. The more energy the plant has the faster it grows.

So, lets put it all together:

More CO2 will allow a plant to undergo photosynthesis at a higher rate, resulting in faster growth. Faster growth means more cells to undergo photosynthesis and "change" CO2 with O2. It is natures way of keeping a steady balance. It works the other way too, too much oxygen (less CO2) and the plants will grow slower...

I don't have a source, only experience from a video in my science class and an experiment in class, so if you want to argue about the limiting factors, go do some science