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.

 

New Study Explodes Human-Global Warming Story

page: 18
31
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 10:11 AM
link   
As I keep saying: does the sun build cities, burn forests, fly aircraft? If so, then the sun may well be the cause of all climate change. If not, we have to look for another cause for at least some of it




posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 10:15 AM
link   
It will be interesting to see what develops from the world tax collector's meeting uh, I mean climate change conference in Bali.

As I have previously stated, The article posted by the OP does not seem to
accurately reflect the findings in the paper by Douglass et al. Nevertheless, I have many reservations about the trivial (IMHO) man made CO2 portion of global warming, climate change (or whatever the current buzz word is) affecting the planetary temperature to any large degree. Clearly, the bulk of atmospheric CO2 is naturally occurring and indeed is necessary for life to exist on the planet. Everyone agrees that some warming is happening but the absolute cause is undetermined. Many cycles of nature have occurred over the millennia, and our knowledge of atmospheric science is not as great as many imagine. So far our tinkering with air pollution has given us automobile catalytic converters which convert carbon monoxide from internal combustion engine exhaust to carbon dioxide thereby letting the "carbon" be absorbed into the atmosphere much more efficiently. We added MTBE to our gasoline to reduce air pollution and polluted our water supplies. We have much to learn, and will never be able to compete with the power of nature.

There is no consensus of scientists on this subject, more like a 60/40 split, regardless of the misinformation out there. I have been and remain, a skeptic.


[edit on 12/12/2007 by TheAvenger]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 10:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
As I keep saying: does the sun build cities, burn forests, fly aircraft? If so, then the sun may well be the cause of all climate change. If not, we have to look for another cause for at least some of it


It's just human faith.


[edit on 12-12-2007 by pepsi78]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 10:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
It's just human faith.


To just watch a video of the sun rotating with a few flares, and then take that as evidence that flares are the predominate cause of current warming would be faith - that is, belief without evidence.

solar flare index here

It appears there is no great change in solar flare index, except downwards since mid 80s cycle maxima to next maxima?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by pepsi78
It's just human faith.


To just watch a video of the sun rotating with a few flares, and then take that as evidence that flares are the predominate cause of current warming would be faith - that is, belief without evidence.

solar flare index here

It appears there is no great change in solar flare index, except downwards since mid 80s cycle maxima to next maxima?


Acording to the well known discovery documentary, and to astonomists , and the scientific comunity that deals with studys from other space, it's their personal conclusion that the sun will constantly increase output until it either go's supernova or it implodes on it's self.
Why is so hard to understand that the sun will constantly increase output as it grows older?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78Why is so hard to understand that the sun will constantly increase output as it grows older?


On scales of millions of years, probably true.

But it doesn't really appear to be the case at this moment, no? If it's not the case at the moment, it's explanatory power is zilch for current warming.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by pepsi78Why is so hard to understand that the sun will constantly increase output as it grows older?


On scales of millions of years, probably true.

But it doesn't really appear to be the case at this moment, no? If it's not the case at the moment, it's explanatory power is zilch for current warming.

Yes it does , if distant planets from the sun such as nepture are warming up , the moons of neptune are warming up, pluto has recororded a shif also , mars is warming up.
The only planets not worming up are the gass gigants.

It's really noticeble that ultra violet rays comming from the sun are more dangeros than before, the risk of skin cancer , this risk grew over the decade simply because the sun emits a bit more than it did before on a constant level.

But go ahead blame it on CO2 it's only 003% from all the gass out there.





[edit on 12-12-2007 by pepsi78]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by pepsi78
Yes it does , if distant planets from the sun such as nepture are warming up , the moons of neptune are warming up, pluto has recororded a shif also , mars is warming up.
The only planets not worming up are the gass gigants.


Uranus is cooling. How about venus? mercury?

You have completely ignored the fact that solar activity does not appear to be doing what you need it to.


It's really noticeble that ultra violet rays comming from the sun are more dangeros than before, the risk of skin cancer , this risk grew over the decade simply because the sun emits a bit more than it did before on a constant level.


Nothing to do with ozone depletion?


But go ahead blame it on CO2 it's only 003% from all the gass out there.


.038% to be more exact.

Such a bad argument. The size or quantity of something is not really the best approach to assess it's impact or significance. Even more amazing is to blame warming on something which is doing the wrong thing, at least CO2 levels are rising.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
As I keep saying: does the sun build cities, burn forests, fly aircraft? If so, then the sun may well be the cause of all climate change. If not, we have to look for another cause for at least some of it


How many forest fires are started by lightning strikes? I do believe lightning is a natural occuring event.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:24 PM
link   
This makes sense. As the sun breathes (gets hotter and colder), the surrounding planets get hotter and colder. It is pretty obvious that the Martian polar caps are shrinking. This must mean that we migrate (much like geese) from outer planets (Mars) during hot solar periods and the inner planets (Earth) during the colder periods.

Either way, I'm sure that there's a joke about Uranus in here somewhere?


Is Uranus getting colder?
Yes.
Put on warmer underwear!



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin

It appears there is no great change in solar flare index, except downwards since mid 80s cycle maxima to next maxima?



Do we know what the true lag time is for such affects?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
[

On scales of millions of years, probably true.

But it doesn't really appear to be the case at this moment, no? If it's not the case at the moment, it's explanatory power is zilch for current warming.


How do you say it doesn't appear to be the case and then go on to tell him the explanatory power is zilch? Have we completely and absoultely removed the sun from the equation? If not, then it does have some plausability that it could cause "global warming".



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by traderonwallst
Do we know what the true lag time is for such affects?


There is probably a little inertia in the system (a few years), but not to this extent. We can compare solar irradiance and temps on earth, and they are quite closely related on the whole.



But this clearly breaks down in the 1970s.


How do you say it doesn't appear to be the case and then go on to tell him the explanatory power is zilch? Have we completely and absoultely removed the sun from the equation? If not, then it does have some plausability that it could cause "global warming".


It without doubt can cause "global warming". But we would need solar activity to be showing the requird trend. If it is constant, and now possibly falling, how can it explain warming? We hit a peak in the 1940s, and haven't hit those levels since. More recent analyses suggest solar activity has been falling since the mid 1980s.

It would need to be spewing more radiation, not less or the same, no?

[edit on 12-12-2007 by melatonin]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 


LOL

The fact is that this just falls into the mindset these days that everything that goes wrong is someone else's fault.And someone else must be responsible for us being uncomfortable. Except there is no one to sue in this one.

GW is the Earths fault. It is the Suns fault. It is the government making it up for money. It has to be someone or something other then our own responsibility.......



I am still waiting and answer to my question that if the warming is a result of solar activity, then why isn't EVERY planet heating up, including our own moon?



[edit on 12-12-2007 by nixie_nox]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectre0o0
 


Are you referring to the same government? That the government would be worried about our peril? They have a nice stocked underground bunker. No worries there. This is the same government that regulates the pet food industry, allows the poisons, hormones, and pesticides into the food. Allowed Vioxx on the market. And puts flouride and chlorine into the drinking water supply. And you think they wouldn't allow it to happen because it is bad for us? Oh, and all the lead based toys.....oh, and they won't make cigarrettes illegal, just tax the hell out of them. The list goes on my friend.


There is a point to consider that just because the government and anybody else for that matter, makes money off of it, doens't mean it is not happening. They are just benefiting from it.

It may be a case of "well we can no longer deny it, so how can we profit from it." so making a profit off of it doesn't negate its existence.


If you want to be a glass half full person, it could be that the government is taking the opportunity to force a technological revolution of sorts. That technology is reaching its apex and this forces inventors to march to a different tune. Who knows what technology this could bring. Necessity is the mother of invention.

[edit on 12-12-2007 by nixie_nox]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Those that still believe in the global warming scam should watch this:




posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Double post. Sry.

[edit on 12-12-2007 by Terrapop]



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:03 PM
link   
There is no a single subject in all of civilized man's history that has met 100% agreement. Even 90% agreement among the masses about anything is far fetched.

I do think that a majority of us do agree that the Earth's weather patterns are completely screwed up. Hundred year old records are easily smashed on a daily basis around the globe at an alarming rate. Climate change is real but calling it Global Warming gives the wrong impression. It diffently should be called the Climate Change Syndrome.

Whether carbon dioxide is a major factor or not does not mean we should continue to burn highly toxic substances and release it into the air at will. Furthermore, oil revenues help to fund the terrorists of the world.

Unfortunately, the far right wing has turned this into a political football. Don’t' get me a wrong, I am a strong conservative, but right wing radio are blinded by corporate greed and they are afraid they will have to give up their SUVs and multiple mansions. The idea of change and making the tough choices that are among us are too much for some to bear. Political rhetoric and hiding in your homes will not change the facts. You do not have to wait until 2100 for the waters to rise. It's happening now.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by templar knight
 


An excellent point! Apparently something similar to today happened with the oceans "conveyor belt" 250 Million years ago.

That means we've only seen data for 150/250,000,000 = 0.00006% of that time - I believe they call this "statistically insignificant".



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by melatonin
 



But this clearly breaks down in the 1970s.

Hmm...... The Industrial Revolution started 150 years ago (the alleged cause for global warming). We've actually be cleaning up industry for decades. It is cleaner now than ever. Why the 70s for this rise to start??? Why not 150 years ago??? Why the 70s? In terms of the Earth, 30 years is pico seconds in human terms. There is another cause, and it is not humans or CO2.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 15  16  17    19  20  21 >>

log in

join