global warming

A place to discuss casual topics amongst spiritual friends.
Locked
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Post by Alex123 »

manas wrote: I know I diverged a bit, I just wanted to make the point that myself (and to my knowledge many other AGW 'sceptics' here) are actually in favour of moving towards less-polluting sources of energy. In how I try to live and organise my life, I'm actually quite 'green'. A
Right. I am myself all for greener and less polluting future. It would be wonderful if we had better and greener energy sources.
We need to develop better and cleaner technologies to avoid polluting the environment as much as possible (and in perfect world not to pollute at all).
Kim O'Hara wrote:... and there are in fact great benefits to the economy from shifting away from fossil fuels and stopping CO2 emissions.
I am all for better energy sources.
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Post by Alex123 »

Buckwheat wrote:Yes, we already waited to long to act, so we are stuck with ~0.6°C temperature rise. The longer we wait to act, the larger that number gets.
Remember, temperature rises approximately 400-1200 before CO2 rises.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Post by Kim OHara »

Alex123 wrote:
Buckwheat wrote:Yes, we already waited to long to act, so we are stuck with ~0.6°C temperature rise. The longer we wait to act, the larger that number gets.
Remember, temperature rises approximately 400-1200 before CO2 rises.
Not always.
This time is different.
We have told you so repeatedly.
You don't listen, don't seem to be willing to learn, let alone want to learn.
:toilet:

:popcorn:
Kim
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Post by Alex123 »

Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.
Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?
Kim O'Hara wrote:Not always.
The study suggests that CO2 is produced after temperature change. So CO2 is neither the cause, nor amplification of temperature.

Think about it: temperature warms up and more CO2 gets released into the air from ocean, snow, etc.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: global warming

Post by SDC »

Hey all, what's this thread about?! :tongue:

I'll tell you one thing, all the excess body heat being generated from y'all's passion for this issue may be what is making this earth hotter. Here's to global cooling :toast:

Image

^^^East coast of the US, btw
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Post by Buckwheat »

Alex123 wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.
Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?
Kim O'Hara wrote:Not always.
The study suggests that CO2 is produced after temperature change. So CO2 is neither the cause, nor amplification of temperature.

Think about it: temperature warms up and more CO2 gets released into the air from ocean, snow, etc.
The definition of "feedback" is that CO2 is both a cause and an effect of global warming. Once in the atmosphere, it is a cause. When in the ocean, global warming is the cause leading to it going into the atmosphere. So, when there is another cause of warming, CO2 rise is an effect. But when CO2 is artificially release from deep earth sources (via coal mining, oil drilling, and fracking) then the additional CO2 in the atmosphere can be a cause of global warming. Therefore, a rise in CO2 is both a cause and effect of global warming. A fall in CO2 is both a cause and effect of global cooling.

Your assertion that CO2 can not cause warming because it is an affect of warming assumes that: If A causes B, then B does not cause A. However, this assumption is not necessarily true in a multi-variable equation with feeback loops. There are several lines of evidence that CO2 in the atmosphere does cause warming. The Vostek ice cores are not necessary to prove that fact.

I provided this link before, but I think it is again relevant:
This entire link is worth reading, but I will quote the especially relevant point:
http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many JPL-designed instruments, such as AIRS. Increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Post by Buckwheat »

SDC wrote:...
Oooooooo, that pow pow looks sic!!!
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Post by Buckwheat »

Alex123 wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.
Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?
No, the initial cause changed. In the past, warming intiated by changes in Earth's orbiatal characteristics triggered a chain of events. This time, human activity (extracting hydrocarbons from deep within the earth and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere) is triggering a chain of events.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
User avatar
SDC
Posts: 9058
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:08 pm

Re: global warming

Post by SDC »

Buckwheat wrote:
SDC wrote:...
Oooooooo, that pow pow looks sic!!!
Oh yeah! My condolences on your low snow season in Cali, serious bummer. Looks like everything fell before January...crazy.
“Life is swept along, short is the life span; no shelters exist for one who has reached old age. Seeing clearly this danger in death, a seeker of peace should drop the world’s bait.” SN 1.3
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Post by Kim OHara »

Buckwheat wrote:
Alex123 wrote:
Kim O'Hara wrote:This time is different.
Laws of physics, chemistry, etc, have changed?
No, the initial cause changed. In the past, warming intiated by changes in Earth's orbiatal characteristics triggered a chain of events. This time, human activity (extracting hydrocarbons from deep within the earth and releasing CO2 into the atmosphere) is triggering a chain of events.
:twothumbsup:
Exactly what I was going to say.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Post by Kim OHara »

SDC wrote:
Buckwheat wrote:
SDC wrote:...
Oooooooo, that pow pow looks sic!!!
Oh yeah! My condolences on your low snow season in Cali, serious bummer. Looks like everything fell before January...crazy.
Crazy weather is turning out to be the most visible sign of global warming.
Expect more of it, and crazier.
Want to know why? Look for Hansen, "Climate Dice".

:namaste:
Kim
Buckwheat
Posts: 970
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2011 12:39 am
Location: California USA

Re: global warming

Post by Buckwheat »

Kim O'Hara wrote:
SDC wrote:Oh yeah! My condolences on your low snow season in Cali, serious bummer. Looks like everything fell before January...crazy.
Crazy weather is turning out to be the most visible sign of global warming.
Expect more of it, and crazier.
Want to know why? Look for Hansen, "Climate Dice".

:namaste:
Kim
I used to live in Tahoe, but it's been a few years since I was a snowboarder. That picture brings back a couple of the best days of my life clearly into mind.

I hesitate to assign our dry winter to global warming without doing more research. Despite our reputation for beautiful weather, northern California and the Sierra Nevada has always been plagued by droughts and floods... which is another reason to worry about climate weirdness... if they get even more weird, we're really going to have some difficulty out here.
Sotthī hontu nirantaraṃ - May you forever be well.
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Post by Kim OHara »

You're right in that any single weather event can't be ascribed to global warming.
But a run of weird weather is a different matter. You might like - or like to worry about :tongue: - this: http://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-b ... ch/8834541 and this - http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/ ... EL20120702 while I worry about http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/201 ... 702888.htm.

:namaste:
Kim
User avatar
Kim OHara
Posts: 5584
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 5:47 am
Location: North Queensland, Australia

Re: global warming

Post by Kim OHara »

Just thought I would let you guys know that I will be away from home for a couple of weeks - holidays :smile: - and won't be online much.
Have fun while I'm away but play nice!

:hello:
Kim
User avatar
Alex123
Posts: 4035
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:32 pm

Re: global warming

Post by Alex123 »

Kim O'Hara wrote:Crazy weather is turning out to be the most visible sign of global warming.
The weather was difficult during Ice Ages as well. This is Samsara.

I am sure that bad weather events occurred in the past as well.

For example, when it comes to Earthquakes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_earthquakes
Locked