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.

 

Is Nuclear Energy the reason for Global Warming?

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
with out our nuclear testing I wonder what would have happened by now.


I saw a really convincing analysis of this, the temps really bend up after above ground testing stops - you can even see "knees" in the data where various countries stopped at different times.

While I don't know that it's correlated, it looks like it, and it makes sense - if "nuclear winter" is real, maybe we had "nuclear autumn" for a while, and now we don't.

We need some volcanoes or nuke testing to raise the particulate levels!




posted on Aug, 14 2007 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacevisitor

Hi Chorlton,
You are free to believe what you want, and I respect that.


Ah, so the only proof that we have achieved an energy free source, which noone would have to pay a cent to use, and it can be used to power the world, and we also have Star Trek technology, etc, all of this is hidden from everyone even though noone has been able to see it or prove it?....

Let's say we can actually gather energy from the Earth, since the Earth is a giant capacitor and it acquires energy from the Solar System, and the Solar winds as Earth moves around the Sun.

Do you think you can freely and without any money acquire this energy?

First of all, you would find that such energy fluctuates in frequency throughout the day, and it is not constant, sometimes that energy is stronger than at other times, so you would have to recalibrate your equipment constantly to use this energy, just like Tesla did.

Since i mentioned Tesla, how is it that this man died poor when he supposedly could acquire "free energy"?

Maybe it has somethig to do with the fact that he needed equipment which cost a fortune to acquire, and store that energy?...

There is no such thing as "free energy", there will never be because in order to extract, store and in most cases in order to distribute such energy you need money.

You think people would want to work for free?... How can people buy things which cost money to build without money?

Anyways, if we ever find ways to circumvent the problems of getting energy from the atmosphere, like Tesla had problems and everything wasn't peachy all the time, then we will have to still pay for that energy, since in order to extract energy you need equipment, you need people who know what they are doing, you need equipment to store that energy, and you need equipment to transport and or recieve that energy.

Hence the whole concept of "free energy" is, and will most certainly always be bogus.

Anyways, as to the claim that Nuclear energy is the cause of Global Warming...the Earth has been warming for over 300 years before the west started to use nuclear power.

[edit on 14-8-2007 by Muaddib]



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 11:21 AM
link   
Some very interesting theories abound in these two pages.

Am I correct in thinking that the thread originator believes rightly or wrongly, that the use of nuclear power/fusion contributed to global warming? Because if so, I do take issue with that.

The earth has, over the millenia, experienced several ice ages of varying lengths, as we have discovered in ice core samples taken from both poles.

As fas as I know, earth inhabitants some 10,000 years ago were not that technologically advanced enough to have built nuclear reactors and were certainly unable to create nuclear fusion.

With regards to degredation of core materiels and escaping nucletides, I would like to know what 'particles' are escaping?

I believe that Alpha particles degrade so rapidly once released, that they may only travel about an inch or two, before ceasing to exist. Similarly Beta particles have an even shorter 'life' about an inch and even less if passing through water. (Or is it the other way round?)

X-Rays are far more dangerous in that they can travel through all known man made materiels and have 'supposedly' an endless life cycle. (By that I mean they can go on for ever)

On the subject of 'Nuclear Winter', this was the arguament first put up by CND to discredit nuclear power stations and weapons.

If this theory was true, we would be in the middle of a nuclear winter or ice age now. But we aren't and never will be.

Why?

Because if all the nuclear warheads and power stations were to catastrophically explode at the same time, the resulting dust and debris clouds would measure as insignificant against a single volcano errupting.

When Mount St Helen errupting in Washington State (?) the resulting cloud of ash and the pyroclastic flows dumped more dust into the atmosphere than all the nuclear weapons ever could and yet, we did not experience a nuclear winter.

Holes in the Ozone Layer are naturally occuring. Scientists now believe that thay appear and disappear at regular intervals, and may have nothing to do with global warming. It may be something to do with the earth's magnetic field.

El Nino is also naturally occuring but the severity is effected by fresh water melting in the poles.

Throughout our short existence, we humans have had the ability to harness the earth's magical powers for the good of all mankind.
But there are those amongst us however, who are hell bent on global domination for their own selfish ends.

I fear that if we do not root them out and stop them, then perhaps Mother Earth will do so, as she has done in the past, by wiping us all out.



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 03:42 PM
link   
actually, a number of scientists say that (argueably) the biggest contributor
to global warming are the herds of grazing animals that humans kll by the millions for food & such.

cows, bovines, being the most prolific contributers of methane gas into the atmosphere....
far more contaminating/ destructive to the environment
than the meat & leather they provide...

~another reason to think of going vegan~



posted on Aug, 17 2007 @ 07:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by St Udio
actually, a number of scientists say that (argueably) the biggest contributor
to global warming are the herds of grazing animals that humans kll by the millions for food & such.

cows, bovines, being the most prolific contributers of methane gas into the atmosphere....
far more contaminating/ destructive to the environment
than the meat & leather they provide...

~another reason to think of going vegan~


But if that was true then why have methane levels been stable for 8 years?

The numbers of bovine herds and other animals we grow for meat has increased not decreased, hence methane levels should be increasing if it is true that the animals we grow for food are the main cause of methane.

Also rice fields around the world are major methane emitters, we know rice fields feed large numbers of the population on Earth and these fields have increased but again methane levels have been stable for the past 8 years, hence there are other factors which dictate how much methane and other gases are in the atmosphere.

I also wonder why there are environmentalists and people who believe that "becoming vegetarians will stop all this release of methane, and other greenhouse gases", when as a matter of fact we would have to replace the proteins we don't get from animal meat and would have to eat more beans and other protein rich food which means we, humans, would be emitting more methane, so at the end there would not be "any less emissions of methane" or any other gasses.

My advice is, eat meat if you want, being a vegetarian is not going to make you a saver of the Earth.

[edit on 17-8-2007 by Muaddib]



new topics

top topics
 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join