It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: mc_squared
On that line of thinking, if we eliminate all man made sources of CO2 (unlikely, but very remotely possible in the future), couldn't that also have a catastrophic affect? I mean, we would be cooling in a big hurry just as we warmed in a big hurry. It seems no matter what bar of soap you go to pick up, Buba will be behind you.
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: mc_squared
Ah yes, the reports. This is something that should be illegal and punishable by death. We see the same data displayed in different ways to mis-represent or push an agenda. If I go to a pro AGW site, guess what? They claim all their data is right and the others are crackpots. Then I go to an anti AGW site and see the opposite.
originally posted by: Ismail
No
1) We would only be returning to the standards that our biosphere has evolved around. Most species are incapable of adapting in one hundred years. The state of the great barrier reef is testimony to that.
2) It wouldn't happen fast, and that's part of the problem.
originally posted by: network dude
Why not? If we can affect things relatively easy by increasing the CO2, why would reducing CO2 not follow suit? (honest question)
I am just trying to understand this whole thing, and I seem to be shunned every time I bring logical thought into the discussion.
I heard all about the Co2, and how it was going to make us warm up a bunch, but the models seem to be incorrect and we only warmed a little.
originally posted by: mc_squared
I like the idea of owning and controlling my own energy, do you?
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: network dude
I am just trying to understand this whole thing, and I seem to be shunned every time I bring logical thought into the discussion.
I heard all about the Co2, and how it was going to make us warm up a bunch, but the models seem to be incorrect and we only warmed a little.
I'm not an expert either and sooo appreciate the simple logic of the layman. We ask questions and don't get answers…
Hers some more personal observations for you…
How come there aren't new record breaking temperatures being recorded all over? The claim that "overall averages" are rising should be accompanied by hot spots i.e., hot places that are consistently hotter than ever? I see the computer models too and heard the "50 to a 100 years out" theories (convenient that, we'll all be dead by then.)
How come the sea levels haven't actually risen at all?
How come every time you want to ask about all the toxic effluence from our civilized world all you get is more talk of CO2 and "climate change"? Where is all this water from melting ice going? The melt and runoff every spring from all the snow covered mountains in the world flood out vast areas all over the planet. The vast ice sheets at the poles melt and refreeze every spring and winter. Yet sea levels remain constant.
How come some "scientists" seem to be promoting an agenda and other scientists disagreeing with their results? All the time we get threads here about some agency buttering numbers or making "escalating" claims (read that exaggerations).
I think the earth is and always will be self regulating. If the local atmosphere heats up, water evaporates and produces a cooling cloud cover. Constantly moving, constantly recycling seawater to rain, snow, ice and back again, the planet keeps an over all constant average temperature. Sea levels don't rise much, (except with the tides). The Earth turns, keeping heat from the sun even. Like cooking a roast on rotisserie…
What is killing vast numbers of people right now is all the toxic runoff from all the polluting enterprises man undertakes. I don't have the increase of cancer statistics or the compilation of how many people per capita die off because of working in toxic industries or live down wind from them. Surely love to see the overall "average increases'" of that instead of "climate models".
Big industries yield big propaganda.
Now CO2 scolders have at the layman with talk of future worries.
originally posted by: ArtemisE
But we do know it's undeniable more co2 =more heat.
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: mc_squared
I like the idea of owning and controlling my own energy, do you?
Absolutely. But do you think those who profit from Oil will ever let that happen?
originally posted by: network dude
originally posted by: ArtemisE
But we do know it's undeniable more co2 =more heat.
First of all, I am sorry to hear about your mother.
I get the experiments on CO2 and the science behind it. So how do we justify those that claim CO2 follows temperature? They must have some reasoning behind their theory.
originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: mc_squared
About the solar farms. Do you have any data on the profitability of them to date? A friend of mine who works for the power company told me a bit about them. He said that the government forces them to buy power from them at a higher rate to make them appear more sustainable than they really are at this point.
I cannot find anything on the net about that aspect of it. So that is just hearsay now.
Again, I am all for it if it works and will be a real replacement for how we make energy now. I even think it if was close to the same cost, the savings will be counted with no nuclear waste to deal with and no bad things in the air from coal. I am just not sure how much bad things we make in the production process. And are there any long term issues with disposal? (like the batteries in all the Prius')
Now the idiots who built a house 5 feet from the high tide mark deserve whatever they get, but the beaches in the northern NC coast seem to be changing slightly. And again, I have no idea if this has anything at all to do with anything else. I just live here, so I see it first hand.