Like they say in the documentaries on this subject, the climate is a very complex system... we are basically experimenting with it. The fear is that the warming up will reach a point of no return where it will just continue to warm no matter what we do. It is believed the planet Mars once had a watery surface and a more temperate climate.
Do you think the Greenhouse affect is man-made or a natural cycle?
by free2beme 22 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
Abaddon
FreeWilly
Dont worry, this is fun...
~My point was not about the trees in themselves (although I'd like the research on that), but about the CO2 liberated by the portion burnt, and the CO2 released by the forests of millions of years ago that make out cars go.
~I don't know what the turnover rate of the Earth's atmosphere is; a very large amount of time, each element different? I do know ppm CO2 has increased by over 30% since 1800. Then it was 280. I just find myself asking why THIS increase in temperature is NOT linked to rising CO2, as that's what the historical records of those metrics say.
I mean, it COULD be some cycle we don't yet know. It might just be a massive coincidence we increase ppm CO2 by 30% at just exactly the same time this unknown cycle kicked in. You know what it's like... you wait for a bus and then two come along at once...
Massive coincidences do sometimes happen, but maybe it is more likely the ppm CO2 and temperature are just as coupled as they normally are (which is what the data would lead you to expect). I think there's enough evidence to indicate limiting CO2 emissions is a good idea. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it is probably a duck.
If it turns out it was a massive coincidence, we still get the benefit of cleaner, more efficient technology. If we ignore it and it all does turn out to be connected, we'll have wasted valuable time. However, as one of the minority of Dutch residents who live in an area well above any possible ocean rise in my life time (and where I'd live if I went home to England would just get some new beaches a bit higher up, and Paignton would disappear, no loss there), I'm alright Jack ;-)
~Land use has lead to a drop in CO2->O2 conversion and a large increase in CH4 emissions (cow farts).
~Best fit trumps short-term variables.
~If human were not here, glaciers would melt. As the spiking CO2 is likely to be the driving force behind accelerated warming (from geological to generational time scales... ppm has risen monotonically each year since the 50's, no variation or jitter or 'best fit line'. It's going up), one can conclude it's probable they'd have melted later without us.
~Temperatures have risen by around 0.6 C since 1900. The rapid rise in temperature and CO2 in that period are likely to be the main part of this increase, as overall warming trends are over thousands of years in small increments.
~Before they developed the laws of orbital mechanics they had pretty little clockwork models of the solar system that were complete fantasy, but that actually WORKED in the sense of duplicating what was visable from Earth.
People still knew where the planets would be in fifty years, regardless of comprehensible or accurate law.
We might have models that duplicate things badley. You know as well as I this has largely been an issue of compexity of task. It takes sooooooooooooo long to run models the evolution rate is low.
Despite the fact we don't know the 'law' yet, I think we have a very good idea of where the climate will be in 50 years.
You may be interested to learn you can now take part in a collaborative computing project being co-ordinated by the BBC (http://bbc.cpdn.org/). Using the BOINC screen-saver software, that uses you computer when it's on and you're not using it, you can process data along with hundreds of thousands of other, effectively forming massively dispersed super computers.
You can search for artificial signals from distant star systems, or run software that tests massive numbers of climate models to determine which best duplicates know variables since 1920 on the principle this should then work on out to 2080 with various predictions of CO2 and CH4 input and know values of Orbit, Rotation and Solar Cycles. If it 'adds up' the sums from 1920 it should 'add up' the sums after today.
Each computer runs a single model until complete, a spinning globe, your very own Earth with natralistic orbital views or loads of other display options. It's a very cool screensave too. It's like a Tamiguchi (sp?) except all you have to do to make it live is leave your computer on. It'll take months to run on most copmuters.
I'm waiting for the hacked version where you'll be able to turn up the sun or stop all the rain to see what happens. I think it should be called YHWH
-
upside/down
As for upside/downs comments...as per usual trying to be controversial...I realise you think you're really clever & all for your point on humankind being a naturally occuring part of the ecosystem, but what we're talking about here is preserving the earth in some fit form to sustain your children & your children's children, to be able to enjoy the same benefits your (ignorant anthropocentric) generation has enjoyed.
1.)Trying to be controversial...uh..I could have swore this thread was a question... that was my answer.
2.)Clever to state the obvious? Are yousaying mankind isn't a naturally part of the ecosystem? You're entitled to your opinion...
3.)Preserving the Earth... with the same benefits... Nature I'm sure will have a say in the matter...one constant here...things change.
4.)oh yeah...and FOAD!
Find something to do other than belittle my viewpoint and be condescending with those that don't agree with the status quo...I'll bet you were a good Dub weren't you... skirt 2 inches above the (tape measure in hand just to make sure)?... You can kiss my arse.
u/d(of the don't take sh*t from no one especially XXJW's class)