Map Makers Admit Mistake in Showing Ice Cap Loss in Greenland

[bb113]

So you really think (based on carbon dating, and past charts) that we are headed for a cooling period?

Is this what you people really believe? That we are in a "natural" cycle, and that all of the stuff that we have been building on this planet for 200+ years, that emit tons of green house gasses (not just CO2), are not the major contributing factor to this rapid warming we have been seeing?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-advanced.htm

From the charts it certainly looks like we are due for a cooling period. What other greenhouse gases besides CO2 are we emitting "tons" of? And yes, I think it is unproven that the CO2 is a major contributing factor, and even more unproven that there is not a cut-off after which the effect of CO2 drops off. That doesn't mean I think it isn't a good theory.

I honestly don't care whether or not CO₂ is the cause (in fact, I think others are more important), but ones who deny that the Earth is warming are denying that P != not P.

There is plenty of evidence the earth has warmed the last 100 years, I don't think anyone contests that. What is the cause, what does it mean for humanity, and could we do anything about it if we wanted to? Those are the issues.

Whether it is CO2 or not partially answers the last question.

The future is simple.

A clean renewable energy future that does not rely on archaic & dirty fuels to propel us forward.

Anyone trying to sell you anything less than that has a hidden agenda...

Right, this will happen one way or the other. The question is whether the timing should be decided by regulatory bodies or markets.

Markets will never decide to go with green energy.

What if we run out of fossil fuels. How will the markets respond?

[1715045255]

1715045255

[bb113]

Flipro:

There is simply way to much money and influence in big oil for there to be any considerable progress in the alternative fuels arena. These people have been documented to block patents, buyout alternative fuel innovations from small-time inventors, and there have even been reports of certain green energy inventors "disappearing" after telling close ones that they had finished a radically new invention.

Flipro:

You are analyzing this from a conspiracy theorist standpoint.

[FlipPro]

Flipro:

There is simply way to much money and influence in big oil for there to be any considerable progress in the alternative fuels arena. These people have been documented to block patents, buyout alternative fuel innovations from small-time inventors, and there have even been reports of certain green energy inventors "disappearing" after telling close ones that they had finished a radically new invention.

Flipro:

You are analyzing this from a conspiracy theorist standpoint.

I am stating facts, big oil does NOT want to go green.

They have hundreds of billions of dollars in reserves.

They could have invented the perfect hydrogen/water powered car by now.

Think about what you are saying, and understand it does not make any sense.

The "free market" which you cite in this scenario is OPEC (the people who own the oil and infrastructure) on one end, and on the other end we have the average consumer (who for the most part) doesn't really have a choice in the matter, and would rather not walk...

[FlipPro]

Posts up there ^^^

1. The cycles you are referencing to in that chart happened over hundreds of thousands of years.
We are seeing extreme climate change over the course of just 1 century...

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

3. It will be a very long time before fossil fuels run out.

[dree12]

So you really think (based on carbon dating, and past charts) that we are headed for a cooling period?

Is this what you people really believe? That we are in a "natural" cycle, and that all of the stuff that we have been building on this planet for 200+ years, that emit tons of green house gasses (not just CO2), are not the major contributing factor to this rapid warming we have been seeing?

http://www.skepticalscience.com/climate-sensitivity-advanced.htm

From the charts it certainly looks like we are due for a cooling period. What other greenhouse gases besides CO2 are we emitting "tons" of?

Methane.

I honestly don't care whether or not CO₂ is the cause (in fact, I think others are more important), but ones who deny that the Earth is warming are denying that P != not P.

There is plenty of evidence the earth has warmed the last 100 years, I don't think anyone contests that. What is the cause, what does it mean for humanity, and could we do anything about it if we wanted to? Those are the issues.

Whether it is CO2 or not partially answers the last question.

The future is simple.

A clean renewable energy future that does not rely on archaic & dirty fuels to propel us forward.

Anyone trying to sell you anything less than that has a hidden agenda...

Right, this will happen one way or the other. The question is whether the timing should be decided by regulatory bodies or markets.

Markets will never decide to go with green energy.

What if we run out of fossil fuels. How will the markets respond?

They will switch. This doesn't mean a regulated market won't make them switch faster.

[bb113]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

Ah I just calculated it from here. About 300 million tons of methane per year. Still, do we agree CO2 is the main issue and that it's effect is supposed to be indirectly increasing water vapor content?

[FlipPro]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

Ah I just calculated it from here. About 300 million tons of methane per year. Still, do we agree CO2 is the main issue and that it's effect is supposed to be indirectly increasing water vapor content?

Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...

General population growth is one of them...

Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...

We have an effect on this planet, and ignoring it for any longer is simply not an option...

The solution that is implied on this forum and is regurgitated day after day is "let the free market handle it".

The free market didn't handle ,

Slavery
Child Labor
Voter Discrimination
Gender Discrimination
Pollution Standards
and a list of millions of things that were NOT HANDLED BY THE FREE MARKET.

You know why?

Because it wasn't beneficial for the free market to do these things at the time.

Do you now see why the analysis of "letting the free market" handle green energy innovation is a ludicrous one?

I know this comes as a SHOCK to anyone in this forum (since it's closer here to a conspiracy community than an investment community) but the government is run BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. It's just that it's up to the people to take ownership, vote for people who represent the same common interest, and hold them accountable when the next election comes around...

[bb113]

And the point is that renewable sources are better than fossil fuels for a number of reasons, global warming notwithstanding. People will be motivated to develop them either way, at some point the renewable technologies will be cheaper than fossil fuels.

And by the way I agree with the Oil Company conspiracy, but I don't pretend to call it any more factual than the "regulated our way towards a one-world government" conspiracy. Both seem reasonable to me.

[bb113]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

Ah I just calculated it from here. About 300 million tons of methane per year. Still, do we agree CO2 is the main issue and that it's effect is supposed to be indirectly increasing water vapor content?

Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...

General population growth is one of them...

Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...

Why?

[dree12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

Ah I just calculated it from here. About 300 million tons of methane per year. Still, do we agree CO2 is the main issue and that it's effect is supposed to be indirectly increasing water vapor content?

Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...

General population growth is one of them...

Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...

Why?

Hypothetically, you are in an enclosed room with a substance which is producing fumes which may or may not be poisonous. Do you leave the room, or closely examine the substance?

[FlipPro]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

Ah I just calculated it from here. About 300 million tons of methane per year. Still, do we agree CO2 is the main issue and that it's effect is supposed to be indirectly increasing water vapor content?

Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...

General population growth is one of them...

Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...

Why?

Because we haven't found any planets nearby that can harbor our pathetic species...

[ZodiacDragon84]

so those Islands recently sinking all over world that have been around since before the industrial revolution is just BS made up by the media?

EDIT: Link
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2097119,00.html

[Bind]

Absolutely I am viewing this on a conspiracy basis. I study history. Go take a look at the history of the people and entities promoting those agendas.

I am probably a bit older than most of you. Here is what I remember.

In 1972 (at least I think it was 1972), UN and globalist backed interests had "scientists" warn the earth was cooling at an excellerated rate, and if we didnt do something fast we were in imminent danger of extinction.

next, it was the rain forrests being destroyed, not making enough oxygen ... yea more human extinction danger claims.

next, it was the ozone layer depletion because of cfc's from spray aerosol cans and freon, threatening again the extinction of the human race.

next, it was the depletion of the rain forests, but instead of the oxygen scarcity, it was their lack of using up and converting Co2, causing excessive Co2. This was the first hint of a Co2 issue. Of course, the human race was threatened.

next, it was global warming made by man, cars, factories, burning fossil fuels, causing massive excesses Co2 that was threatening extinction of the human race.

Next, its biodiversity ... Then it will be our nature is in danger so we will need to have smart growth zones of stacked and packed people, the loss of personal property to save nature, so the animal and plants can thrive, else there is an imminent threat of our extinction.

Then it will be nature as the new God. Nature will be more important that man because we cant survive without it. the same extinction threat scenarios.

What my post meant is that man-made Co2 is not causing the earth to heat up as are the claims.

I do not believe we are in any cycles. The earth is constantly changing. Ups and down in temp and co2 going along with it, but co2 lags temp, so co2 could not possibly be causing global warming. I do not believe man is casuing any warming of the earth or cooling of the earth.

The earth is what it is and will do what it wants to do with or without mans help. Same with the sun and its affects on the earth. Man wont change anything about either. If tens of thousands of nuclear bomb tests didnt kill the earth, using a light bulb, driving a car, smoking a cig, running a coal stove, running a pig farm, and farting wont either.

There is no threat of extinction, and there never was, until the sun goes nova and burns us up in a few billion years. The rest is simply a mechanism to control you through worry and fear, and steal your wealth, freedom, and liberty.

Its called thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. They have an agenda, create a problem/tragedy or overblow a problem/tragedy, which they have a ready-made solution to, scare the fuck out of you, then hand you the solution advancing their agenda. The psychology of which has only been around and used for thousands of years.

As to the big corps not wanting to promote green energy, who do you think gets all the EPA waivers ?

Thats right...the big corps .. those in the know and working with the insidious influences. You know, like General Electric, who pays no taxes either.

Who pays the extra money??

Thats right... we do.

Corps could care less even if some dont get any waivers. They pass the costs on to the consumer, so the market argument is irrelevent.

Everything else is an externality, again paid for by us.

It's all about taking as much from you as possible.

Their best weapon is the ideological indoctrination that makes us fight amongst each other. This divides and conquers us so they dont have to. The just-in-case scenario. Many of you have that. We should listen to them even on the small chance they may be right. After all its the human race that could be at stake! Rubbish.

[bb113]

Posts up there ^^^

1. The cycles you are referencing to in that chart happened over hundreds of thousands of years.
We are seeing extreme climate change over the course of just 1 century...

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas

3. It will be a very long time before fossil fuels run out.

What is your definition of extreme? Also most estimates I've seen regarding fossil fuels running out say it will start happening in the next 100 years.

Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...

General population growth is one of them...

Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...

Why?

Hypothetically, you are in an enclosed room with a substance which is producing fumes which may or may not be poisonous. Do you leave the room, or closely examine the substance?

I think a better one (because it captures the degree of uncertainty better) is:
Someone tells you there is a substance producing fumes which may or may not be poisonous in the room you are in RIGHT NOW! Are you going to leave the room or ask questions?

I bet it depends on who is telling you, and what their evidence is.

[ZodiacDragon84]

time to put on our tinfoil hats gentlemen

[bb113]

Because we haven't found any planets nearby that can harbor our pathetic species...

Global warming deniers always try to deny the truth by using ambiguous words.

I tried to lead the discussion towards the actual uncertainties involved in understanding global warming, and you keep trying to turn the discussion towards some vague catastrophic endgame

[dree12]

*conspiracy theory*

I live on this planet, nearer to the poles than you likely are. Here, the so-called "arctic amplification" has drastically changed my climate the past few decades. I don't need a study or government to tell me this.

Posts up there ^^^

Hell there are tons of things that are contributing to warming...

General population growth is one of them...

Our goal as humans shouldn't be "how can be find out what EXACTLY is the source of this warming", and actually start agreeing on solutions to reduce our footprint in this planet in ANY WAY WE CAN...

I think a better one (because it captures the degree of uncertainty better) is:
Someone tells you there is a substance producing fumes which may or may not be poisonous in the room you are in RIGHT NOW! Are you going to leave the room or ask questions?

I bet it depends on who is telling you, and what their evidence is.

Please don't misattribute quotes to me. About the substance, what if you can smell the fumes? Governments aren't necessary to tell you the Earth is warming - there is plenty of evidence for that.

Because we haven't found any planets nearby that can harbor our pathetic species...

Global warming deniers always try to deny the truth by using ambiguous words.

I tried to lead the discussion towards the actual uncertainties involved in understanding global warming, and you keep trying to turn the discussion towards some vague catastrophic endgame

I don't disagree with uncertainty, but this still isn't an issue we should delay.

[ZodiacDragon84]

Because we haven't found any planets nearby that can harbor our pathetic species...
[/quote]

So we can screw them up too? Why are we so interested in interstellar colonization? Cant be so we can rape the resources there too?

[FlipPro]

Because we haven't found any planets nearby that can harbor our pathetic species...

Global warming deniers always try to deny the truth by using ambiguous words.

I tried to lead the discussion towards the actual uncertainties involved in understanding global warming, and you keep trying to turn the discussion towards some vague catastrophic endgame

It's not an endgame for the planet.

Definitely an endgame for modern day humans...

The bigger our population grows and the more third world countries begin to develop, the faster the world will warm.

It's all relative, and the only way we can survive on this planet is to literally co-exist...

[FlipPro]

So we can screw them up too? Why are we so interested in interstellar colonization? Cant be so we can rape the resources there too?

OPEC wants to start deep space exploration :p.