Global Warming

[Leonard]

Most of our temperature recording stations are in or near urban centers. Any urban center--because of the heavily compacted soils, the concrete, and the asphalt--become 'heat sinks.' Temperatures recorded there WILL be warmer than temperatures in more rural areas (the vast bulk of the earth's land surface). And (SURPRISE! SURPRISE!) as the cities get larger, they become even more of a heat sink, and their temperature continues to rise.

Satellite readings of global temperature have failed to note ANY significant heating of the earth. Now we have only been able to take such satellite readings for about 45 years, of course, so we don't really have enough data to try to make intelligent projections, nontheless, scientists are always willing to approach a new topic with an open mouth!

[apothanein kerdos]

Most of our temperature recording stations are in or near urban centers. Any urban center--because of the heavily compacted soils, the concrete, and the asphalt--become 'heat sinks.' Temperatures recorded there WILL be warmer than temperatures in more rural areas (the vast bulk of the earth's land surface). And (SURPRISE! SURPRISE!) as the cities get larger, they become even more of a heat sink, and their temperature continues to rise.

Satellite readings of global temperature have failed to note ANY significant heating of the earth. Now we have only been able to take such satellite readings for about 45 years, of course, so we don't really have enough data to try to make intelligent projections, nontheless, scientists are always willing to approach a new topic with an open mouth!

Part of it is actually drilling into the ice caps and examining the record there. Does it show a record of melting, is there plant life stuffed in there, etc. We can gauge what the temp was by looking at the ice caps, and even studying historical readings. We can look to what people wore, what they endured, etc by looking at some of the writings of the last 3,000 years. SO, when we look to all of that, yes, we are getting warmer. The question is, is it natural or is it caused by men?

[Smalcald]

I agree apothinian.

What bugs me is using Christianity as a masquerade for a particularly political point of view that has nothing to do with Christianity one way or the other. The fact is the scientific community, and specifically those scientists dealing with this issue almost unanimously agree that global warming is happening and that we are contributing to it through the burning of fossil fuels. Why are we so afraid of that answer? Why the knee jerk reaction against this data. From a scientific standpoint it is basically a settled issue.

Just because many environmentalist are people I don't like, and hold philosophical views which I don't agree with, does not mean the science surrounding global warming is cooked up or wrong. I guess it is another massive conspiracy to hurt our energy hogging ways. What we do about global warming is a different issue from identifying it.

I don't know how anyone who has children could not care about this issue? I don't get it. Certainly I understand someone who works for the energy industry or makes their money through the military industrial industry where we spend billions on making sure we have energy, how they would be against thinking about this issue, but beyond that I don't understand it. What are we afraid of? Just because we recognize global warming does not mean we have to go sign Koyoto or other international agreements, which I think are very flawed. We could take the lead on this issue, in fact it could be a incredible business opportunity for us to provide the world with cleaner fuel, things like bio based fuels for example, something we could do better than any other country.

One thing we could start doing is demanding other countries follow our strict environmental regulations in the production of things that we import. For example US farmers who raise apples cannot use many pesticides and herbicides directly on those apples, so they have come up with other ingenious and expensive ways around this, but we allow foreign countries to pretty much import to us apples sprayed with every kind of crap known to man, in addition these apples are sold to the large juice corporations, who do not buy US grown apples as they are to expensive due to the environmental regs, so they just buy some from say eastern Europe or Russia. Take a look at a bottle of juice next time you go the grocery store, look at the different countries those apples are from. There are many many examples like that. So why do we allow that? Well the big corporations want cheap imports for their production, and they sway us.

As far as oil goes though, the bottom line is until the price of oil accurately reflects the true cost of oil; we will over-consume this resource.

[apothanein kerdos]

The solution isn't even anti-energy. The solution, an alternative form of energy, could potentially make more money for more people. Farmers would especially enjoy the impact of an alternative form of energy if they are the suppliers of it. By finding alternatives and getting away from oil, we get to leave the middle east, create more jobs, and produce cleaner energy.

I'm with you Smalcald....it just doesn't make sense why people have such a knee-jerk reaction to this.

[alanraj]

oKAY kEITH...gOT tHAT!!!!

[Leonard]

PLEASE!!!

Hundreds of scientists (whose incomes are NOT dependent on 'global warming panic') have signed a statement stating definitively that 'global warming' is a lot of hooey. ("Hooey" I think was the technical term used. The man on the street however probably says "a prevarication based on a desire to mulcht the public exchequer to the greatest possible extent....")

[Marnie]

PLEASE!!!

Hundreds of scientists (whose incomes are NOT dependent on 'global warming panic') have signed a statement stating definitively that 'global warming' is a lot of hooey. ("Hooey" I think was the technical term used. The man on the street however probably says "a prevarication based on a desire to mulcht the public exchequer to the greatest possible extent....")

That's right. And that's not a load of hooey, either.

[apothanein kerdos]

PLEASE!!!

Hundreds of scientists (whose incomes are NOT dependent on 'global warming panic') have signed a statement stating definitively that 'global warming' is a lot of hooey. ("Hooey" I think was the technical term used. The man on the street however probably says "a prevarication based on a desire to mulcht the public exchequer to the greatest possible extent....")

Proof? Everyone keeps making this claim that "Hundreds, even thousands, of scientists deny global warming!"

It's about time some proof was supplied.

The reason I say that is look at images of the North Pole compared to now...it's decreased significantly. We're losing our glaciers, we can point to evidence in warming from that alone. We can point to the sea levels beginning to rise....I mean....there's some pretty solid evidence out there. The debate, as I said, isn't over if it's occuring, but instead it's over what is causing it.

[Khristeeanos]

PLEASE!!!

Hundreds of scientists (whose incomes are NOT dependent on 'global warming panic') have signed a statement stating definitively that 'global warming' is a lot of hooey. ("Hooey" I think was the technical term used. The man on the street however probably says "a prevarication based on a desire to mulcht the public exchequer to the greatest possible extent....")

Proof? Everyone keeps making this claim that "Hundreds, even thousands, of scientists deny global warming!"

It's about time some proof was supplied.

The reason I say that is look at images of the North Pole compared to now...it's decreased significantly. We're losing our glaciers, we can point to evidence in warming from that alone. We can point to the sea levels beginning to rise....I mean....there's some pretty solid evidence out there. The debate, as I said, isn't over if it's occuring, but instead it's over what is causing it.

If you look at the south pole maps from hundreds of years ago, there was no ice there at all.

[apothanein kerdos]

PLEASE!!!

Hundreds of scientists (whose incomes are NOT dependent on 'global warming panic') have signed a statement stating definitively that 'global warming' is a lot of hooey. ("Hooey" I think was the technical term used. The man on the street however probably says "a prevarication based on a desire to mulcht the public exchequer to the greatest possible extent....")

Proof? Everyone keeps making this claim that "Hundreds, even thousands, of scientists deny global warming!"

It's about time some proof was supplied.

The reason I say that is look at images of the North Pole compared to now...it's decreased significantly. We're losing our glaciers, we can point to evidence in warming from that alone. We can point to the sea levels beginning to rise....I mean....there's some pretty solid evidence out there. The debate, as I said, isn't over if it's occuring, but instead it's over what is causing it.

If you look at the south pole maps from hundreds of years ago, there was no ice there at all.

You're kidding, right? Roald Amundsan, the first man to reach the south pole, docked his ship near the Ross Ice Shelf....this was in 1911. Fabian von Bellingshausen and Mikhail Petrovich Lazarev lead an expedition in the 1820's and ran into ice fields 20 miles off the coast of Antartica.

As for "maps from hundreds of years ago" it doesn't matter. No one had ever discovered Antartica, much less the South Pole. It was believed it was a lush land and this belief existed until the late 1700's...it was destroyed when people realized it was nothing more than a giant block of ice with land under it. Are you suggesting that, within just 100 years, it developed ice shelves miles thick?