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.

 

Global Warming test

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 03:35 PM
link   
All,
Idle thought: It occured to me today that if vehicle emissions and other stuff generates green-house gasses, then theoretically the average temperature around large cities would be more than in rural areas. Seems logical enough, what do you think?

~P




posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Depends where you are in the region. I live in Brooklyn, New York, and some of my realtives live Biddeford, Maine a really small town, and my aunt called today and she says the weather there is sunny and beautiful, and warm. Here the weather is cloudy and rainy and a little chilly.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Personally, I don't buy into the global warming thing.
But, on a hot sunny day it would be hotter in downtown anytown and a little cooler near a lake or in the country. Concrete reatins eat better than trees and lakes--no mystery there.

Have you ever thought that maybe the atmosphere may be in better shape now than it was in ages past???????????



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Well yeah it would. On a very hot day it would much hotter in Manhatten that in Staten Island...



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 03:51 PM
link   
postings.... the weather in a larger city is likely to be warmer because of the concrete surfaces and NOT because of exhaust. You could turn off every factory and every engine and its unlikely you would see any change in temperature. Stone surfaces retain heat. You can produce all the CO2 you want and it wont compare to what a street, parking lot, or building will do. This is very simple. Walk on a blacktop surface with bare feet in the middle of the sun in the middle of the summer and do the same thing on the grass and see which one is hotter.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Remember, I was only referring to the "average" temps. On average, it should be warmer in a city area than an outlying area, even during the cold periods. Personally I am a little skeptical about the theory too. One flaw I can think of to this test is that you still can't say for sure that vehicle emissions are the cause. It could be due to other factors. Just thought I would bounce the idea around.

-P


Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Personally, I don't buy into the global warming thing.
But, on a hot sunny day it would be hotter in downtown anytown and a little cooler near a lake or in the country. Concrete reatins eat better than trees and lakes--no mystery there.

Have you ever thought that maybe the atmosphere may be in better shape now than it was in ages past???????????



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 04:01 PM
link   
postings... you can go far out into the country and walk a paved road and it will be much hotter on the road than out in the field. Whether there was a car around or not. The urban heat island effect has been well documented by thermal imaging.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Good comments all, maybe not as great of an idea as I thought.

-P



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by postings
Good comments all, maybe not as great of an idea as I thought.

-P


nothing wrong with it postings. Its good to come up with ideas to test things. Only time in my opinion that an idea is not great is when you choose to hide it out of fear of what people might say.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 04:32 PM
link   
The thinking behind the theory of global worming is that greenhouse gases, such as those found in the emissions of combustion (fire or burning of petroleum products), such as CO2 or CO, get trapped in the upper atmosphere, trapping heat in the earth. Micro-climates such as cities would not have a more noticeable effect. The theory has credible scientific evidence to back it up, whether you want to beleive it or not.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Susquehanna
The thinking behind the theory of global worming is that greenhouse gases, such as those found in the emissions of combustion (fire or burning of petroleum products), such as CO2 or CO, get trapped in the upper atmosphere, trapping heat in the earth. Micro-climates such as cities would not have a more noticeable effect. The theory has credible scientific evidence to back it up, whether you want to beleive it or not.


Credible scientific evidence? What credible evidence? No one knows how much it takes to change the temps by even a tenth of a degree and no one knows for sure who contributes how much to what. And no one really knows how the climate will react if the temperatures increase a tenth of a degree. There is no credible scientific evidence. Its simply people making stuff up to push an agenda. Its the same people that will tell you that caffeine causes cancer in lab rats. What they dont tell you is that it takes 100 cups of coffee a day to cause the problem. lol There is a huge difference between lab science and reality. You can produce anything you want in a lab but whether it can be reproduced in nature or not is a whole different ball game.



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 08:35 PM
link   
I've posted this link before, but here it is again:
The Prospect of Sudden Climate Change

Here's another good one from NASA:
Earth Has A Fever

And last:
Land Cover Change



posted on Jun, 5 2004 @ 08:57 PM
link   
I don't believe in global warming the theory may be true but, if you look at the Earth's average temperatures from the beginning it isn't as hot as it is now as it was a while ago. The Earth's average temperature fluctuates, right now we are just on an up swing in average temperature.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join