An eye opening about Climate change that need to be shared with you. It's FUN

[boumalo]

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

As you can see in the graphs above and in the wiki article this man-made global warming stuff seems to be BS. During the most thriving periods of life the global average temperature and the CO2 levels were much higher than today. We are at the end of a cold period, and now Earth warming up. Period.

That is the point of a lot of scientists including the Greenpeace ex-chief in the video forwarded in this thread, maybe human activity is warming the Earth a little bit faster but maybe it's good and nobody really knows what will happen; the so called climatologists that alarm people to the warming occurring have wrong for decades about their short term predictions

[1715212760]

1715212760

[1715212760]

1715212760

[1715212760]

1715212760

[1715212760]

1715212760

[Schleicher]

So you think a higher sea level is ok? Like 200 meters higher?

[Spendulus]

So you think a higher sea level is ok? Like 200 meters higher?

Wow....200 meters?

Hate to break this bad news, but 200 meters higher would ruin the best surf zones.

In the long run, though, we have an ice age coming.  We know it; we know the cycles; we know the percent of time the Earth has been in ice ages versus the percent of time it is temperate.

So this is the Big Problem.  And as you are aware, ice will make the sea level irrelevant. 

But maybe we are lucky and we have a few thousand years before this cyclical event returns the planet to ice.  So what are you asserting, that during that time period we may see a 200 meter sea level rise, and have societies severely impacted by it?

[Schleicher]

But maybe we are lucky and we have a few thousand years before this cyclical event returns the planet to ice.  So what are you asserting, that during that time period we may see a 200 meter sea level rise, and have societies severely impacted by it?

No, probably not 200 meters. That would require burning all the coal and oil.
If it will be a problem depends on the speed of the change. It's not easy to relocate billions of people.

[RodeoX]

When it has happened in the past it generally wipes out most life on Earth. No reason to think it will be different this time. Silly humans, always thinking the rules do not apply to them. Time to get schooled by mother nature.

[Spendulus]

When it has happened in the past it generally wipes out most life on Earth. No reason to think it will be different this time. Silly humans, always thinking the rules do not apply to them. Time to get schooled by mother nature.

Avoiding hubris is good.

But what's worse? 

To believe governments when they say that if you give them your tax dollars and more, and more, they will roll back the oceans?

[boumalo]

So you think a higher sea level is ok? Like 200 meters higher?

Wow....200 meters?

Hate to break this bad news, but 200 meters higher would ruin the best surf zones.

In the long run, though, we have an ice age coming.  We know it; we know the cycles; we know the percent of time the Earth has been in ice ages versus the percent of time it is temperate.

So this is the Big Problem.  And as you are aware, ice will make the sea level irrelevant. 

But maybe we are lucky and we have a few thousand years before this cyclical event returns the planet to ice.  So what are you asserting, that during that time period we may see a 200 meter sea level rise, and have societies severely impacted by it?

How many degrees do you need for the ocean level to go up 200m? Not 2!! And it is very speculative to say it will go up 200m because you would need all the ice of the North and South Pole to melt and stay in the oceans

But maybe we are lucky and we have a few thousand years before this cyclical event returns the planet to ice.  So what are you asserting, that during that time period we may see a 200 meter sea level rise, and have societies severely impacted by it?

No, probably not 200 meters. That would require burning all the coal and oil.
If it will be a problem depends on the speed of the change. It's not easy to relocate billions of people.

No need to relocate billions of people and we are still in the Ice Age

When it has happened in the past it generally wipes out most life on Earth. No reason to think it will be different this time. Silly humans, always thinking the rules do not apply to them. Time to get schooled by mother nature.

Silly humans that think humans are bad for Earth and that they can predict the future

[boumalo]

…

When it has happened in the past it generally wipes out most life on Earth. No reason to think it will be different this time. Silly humans, always thinking the rules do not apply to them. Time to get schooled by mother nature.

Silly humans that think humans are bad for Earth and that they can predict the future

"…most life on Earth." (Emphasis mine.)

That poster was speaking to the organic lifeforms of earth, not the planet itself.

OK but higher levels of CO2 is not proved to wipe out most life on Earth quite the contrary since plants need CO2

[Snail2]

When it has happened in the past it generally wipes out most life on Earth. No reason to think it will be different this time. Silly humans, always thinking the rules do not apply to them. Time to get schooled by mother nature.

Where did you heard this silliness? The most thriving periods of life on earth with the biggest variety of plant and animal species were those warm periods. According to the geologic records the average temperature was 10-15 degrees higher than today and the atmospheric CO2 content sometimes was as high as 4000 ppm. At the end of the Pliocene the CO2 level was the same as today the temperature as well, and that was the start of a cold period what was the coldest time since the Permian and caused the still ongoing quaternary extinction event what wiped out most of the megafauna from the Earth. (The man made Holocene extinction is an addition to that.) Some 20000 years ago this three million years long cold period have ended and now Earth warming up.

BTW that very very scary omg +200m not counting with all the water what will evaporate because of the higher temperature. Also not counting with that amount of water what will be consumed and stored by plants.

[DhaniBoy]

climate change is something that can not be avoided at this time, as a result of human behavior itself as logging on a large scale, the lack of reforestation after logging, burning of idle land, all resulting in climate change, intense heat caused by the depletion of the ozone layer caused because of the smoke that filled the air industry in the world, so that it causes the greenhouse effect, the melting of ice dikutub north and south, banjirpun happens everywhere due to rising sea levels, climate change is hopefully the case is not much cause casualties. .. 

[Spendulus]

.....Time to get schooled by mother nature.

......Some 20000 years ago this three million years long cold period have ended and now Earth warming up.

Two quotes, together.

Scary.

I'm actually really puzzling about this.  More CO2 in the air may have a nominal effect but don't we want to prevent the next ice age?  Not help it come faster?

[boumalo]

When it has happened in the past it generally wipes out most life on Earth. No reason to think it will be different this time. Silly humans, always thinking the rules do not apply to them. Time to get schooled by mother nature.

Where did you heard this silliness? The most thriving periods of life on earth with the biggest variety of plant and animal species were those warm periods. According to the geologic records the average temperature was 10-15 degrees higher than today and the atmospheric CO2 content sometimes was as high as 4000 ppm. At the end of the Pliocene the CO2 level was the same as today the temperature as well, and that was the start of a cold period what was the coldest time since the Permian and caused the still ongoing quaternary extinction event what wiped out most of the megafauna from the Earth. (The man made Holocene extinction is an addition to that.) Some 20000 years ago this three million years long cold period have ended and now Earth warming up.

BTW that very very scary omg +200m not counting with all the water what will evaporate because of the higher temperature. Also not counting with that amount of water what will be consumed and stored by plants.

AHHHH finally someone sums it up well, almost copied paste your comment to the first post, everything is said clearly!

So what's the count in this thread on Realistic like you and me and Climate Deniers like those say the Earth warming up is bad? About 50/50

[dothebeats]

What they're trying to convey is that human activities greatly affects the rate of the cyclical change of the Earth's climate. CO2 may be beneficial to all living things, yes, but doesn't CO2 contributes to the Greenhouse Effect? If more and more CO2 are trapped in our atmosphere, the possibility is that the temperature of the planet may increase and result to a much faster ice meltdown, which may cause the ocean level to rise (not that much, though).

[boumalo]

What they're trying to convey is that human activities greatly affects the rate of the cyclical change of the Earth's climate. CO2 may be beneficial to all living things, yes, but doesn't CO2 contributes to the Greenhouse Effect? If more and more CO2 are trapped in our atmosphere, the possibility is that the temperature of the planet may increase and result to a much faster ice meltdown, which may cause the ocean level to rise (not that much, though).

You are right CO2 emission may contribute to the Greenhouse Effect : "Greenhouse gases—including most diatomic gases with two different atoms (such as carbon monoxide, CO) and all gases with three or more atoms—are able to absorb and emit infrared radiation"

But "if an ideal thermally conductive blackbody were the same distance from the Sun as the Earth is, it would have a temperature of about 5.3 °C" so hopefully we have the Greenhouse effect

I don't see any evidence that a rise of a few degrees of the temperature will not be beneficial overall; a significant raise of the ocean level is not a reasonable consequence of a small rise in temperature

[Spendulus]

What they're trying to convey is that human activities greatly affects the rate of the cyclical change of the Earth's climate. CO2 may be beneficial to all living things, yes, but doesn't CO2 contributes to the Greenhouse Effect? If more and more CO2 are trapped in our atmosphere, the possibility is that the temperature of the planet may increase and result to a much faster ice meltdown, which may cause the ocean level to rise (not that much, though).

You are right CO2 emission may contribute to the Greenhouse Effect : "Greenhouse gases—including most diatomic gases with two different atoms (such as carbon monoxide, CO) and all gases with three or more atoms—are able to absorb and emit infrared radiation"

But "if an ideal thermally conductive blackbody were the same distance from the Sun as the Earth is, it would have a temperature of about 5.3 °C" so hopefully we have the Greenhouse effect

I don't see any evidence that a rise of a few degrees of the temperature will not be beneficial overall; a significant raise of the ocean level is not a reasonable consequence of a small rise in temperature

Sea level has varied widely over timeframes in terms of millions of years, i would imagine it will continue to.  Man has located many huge cities right next to the oceans, thus creating something of an economic problem if in the vicinity of those cities, sea levels were to rise on a scale faster than the rebuilding and renewing of the city infrastructure.  But that's a multi hundred year timeframe.

The idea that is being promoted by governments, that taxpayers give them money and they will roll back the oceans, is utterly ridiculous.

[Nobitcoin]

It's so confusing all the different opinions on climate change. For me it seems that it's a natural process for the climate our planet. It's a very complicated system, with a huge amount of factors to influenciate. In reality man cannot understand all these factors. And when man cannot understand things they tend to create myths.

If man can find an excuse to make money he will try to sell you the air that we breathe

[boumalo]

It's so confusing all the different opinions on climate change. For me it seems that it's a natural process for the climate our planet. It's a very complicated system, with a huge amount of factors to influenciate. In reality man cannot understand all these factors. And when man cannot understand things they tend to create myths.

If man can find an excuse to make money he will try to sell you the air that we breathe

Or if it can help them control the people they will sell you the fact that a disgusting expensive energy such as solar panels or wind turbines is better than natural green energy such as oil or the most renewable and less dedly energy (only one major very deadly incident in 50years) : radioactivity

[Spendulus]

It's so confusing all the different opinions on climate change. For me it seems that it's a natural process for the climate our planet. It's a very complicated system, with a huge amount of factors to influenciate. In reality man cannot understand all these factors. And when man cannot understand things they tend to create myths.

If man can find an excuse to make money he will try to sell you the air that we breathe

Or if it can help them control the people they will sell you the fact that a disgusting expensive energy such as solar panels or wind turbines is better than natural green energy such as oil or the most renewable and less dedly energy (only one major very deadly incident in 50years) : radioactivity

They are not really disgusting, they just need to be carefully located.  Say on islands where there is no natural energy and all electric comes from ships bringing fuel oil or coal to the island.  Or remote areas, where it isn't practical or cheap to run a power line. 

It's disgusting to lie about solar and wind and to claim they will replace coal and gas.

We have sufficient experience with solar and wind today to know these claims are false.

[boumalo]

It's so confusing all the different opinions on climate change. For me it seems that it's a natural process for the climate our planet. It's a very complicated system, with a huge amount of factors to influenciate. In reality man cannot understand all these factors. And when man cannot understand things they tend to create myths.

If man can find an excuse to make money he will try to sell you the air that we breathe

Or if it can help them control the people they will sell you the fact that a disgusting expensive energy such as solar panels or wind turbines is better than natural green energy such as oil or the most renewable and less dedly energy (only one major very deadly incident in 50years) : radioactivity

They are not really disgusting, they just need to be carefully located.  Say on islands where there is no natural energy and all electric comes from ships bringing fuel oil or coal to the island.  Or remote areas, where it isn't practical or cheap to run a power line. 

It's disgusting to lie about solar and wind and to claim they will replace coal and gas.

We have sufficient experience with solar and wind today to know these claims are false.

Look at the fail of Germany on so called "green" energies; they lost billions for nothing and they are importing nuclear energy from Poland and use coal energy

Wind turbines and solar panels use rare earth metals, wind turbines only last for 20years and need a lot of maintenance so they need a lot of ressources to build and to maintain

[Spendulus]

It's so confusing all the different opinions on climate change. For me it seems that it's a natural process for the climate our planet. It's a very complicated system, with a huge amount of factors to influenciate. In reality man cannot understand all these factors. And when man cannot understand things they tend to create myths.

If man can find an excuse to make money he will try to sell you the air that we breathe

Or if it can help them control the people they will sell you the fact that a disgusting expensive energy such as solar panels or wind turbines is better than natural green energy such as oil or the most renewable and less dedly energy (only one major very deadly incident in 50years) : radioactivity

They are not really disgusting, they just need to be carefully located.  Say on islands where there is no natural energy and all electric comes from ships bringing fuel oil or coal to the island.  Or remote areas, where it isn't practical or cheap to run a power line. 

It's disgusting to lie about solar and wind and to claim they will replace coal and gas.

We have sufficient experience with solar and wind today to know these claims are false.

Look at the fail of Germany on so called "green" energies; they lost billions for nothing and they are importing nuclear energy from Poland and use coal energy

Wind turbines and solar panels use rare earth metals, wind turbines only last for 20years and need a lot of maintenance so they need a lot of resources to build and to maintain

Yes, I agree completely.  But STILL, you will agree with me that there are likely some places on this planet where solar and or windmill power do make perfect sense from an engineering and fiscal perspective.

The error is in indiscriminate promotion of these systems by governments in bed with greenies.