Quoi de neuf ?

Bienvenue sur Psychonaut.fr !

Le forum des amateurs de drogues et des explorateurs de l'esprit

Global Warming?

  • Auteur de la discussion Auteur de la discussion RealityPortal
  • Date de début Date de début

Do you believe in global warming?

  • YES! All evidence shows this clearly!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No! The more I investigate I've come to realize it's a scam!

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I have no idea...

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Nombre total d'électeurs
    0
the point of life going on is a good one. bacteria have been found in igneous (basalt) rock 7km into the earth. even if the biosphere were sterilised by nuclear war or a nearby supernove these bacteria would eventually make it to the surface and it would start all over again.
so(and remember i am an ecologist so this is not how i want it to go) in the bigger picture what we do in the 1.something million years we exist as a species makes little difference to the earth herself. in the realy big picture, well, every atom in our bodies that isnt hydrogen, was made in the fusion furnace of a star or stars that were born, burned and died. so we are so inconsequential that it blows the mind. the point, oh yeh
life, which when it comes down to it is DNA in different wrapers, will continue.

having said all that i LOVE my planet and her amazing biosphere. im totaly carbon and chemical conscious and will SHOUT LOUDLY at anyone i meet who isnt.
the dirty selfish greedy scum who have grabbed all the resources and manipulate them at the expence of those who by chance were born in the wrong country, or to the wrong parents,they should be rendered for their fat.there is a lot of perfectly good oil in an oil executive.

10 apples minus 10 apples = zero apples
10 fish minus 10 fish = ?

BTW stop eating fish. no excuses
 
I do not think global warming is an issue. It's a theory that has counter theories and no more.

While everyone debates their prefered theory the world at large does not have to take care of the planet because they only reason they are being given for doing so is global warming.

Considering that some of the things they are being asked to do in the name of concerving the planet annoy the hell out of them, even the slightest bit of doubt in global warming will sway them.

We need to give people possitive reasons to do things and not threats of impending doom because people will find any way they can to justify not doing things that they do not like: EG: Sorting plastic from paper to recycle and walking instead of driving.

I don't think it matters because if we take care of the planet for the sake of taknig care of the planet we will never need to know.
 
well global wrming is a fact. the northpole has shrunk quite a bit, and that allows Norway to explore deeply in the north for oil. so we can say we the norwegians are the main "gainers" in this, therefore we deeply believe in it and we are fomenting it and sponsoring it so that one day we will not only have a beatiful tropical weather but all the oin under the north pole ocean :twisted:
 
Dantediv86 a dit:
well global wrming is a fact. the northpole has shrunk quite a bit, and that allows Norway to explore deeply in the north for oil. so we can say we the norwegians are the main "gainers" in this, therefore we deeply believe in it and we are fomenting it and sponsoring it so that one day we will not only have a beatiful tropical weather but all the oin under the north pole ocean :twisted:

The North Pole has shrunk and grown continuously during the life of this planet.

That's the problem, everything you could try and say to convince people the end is nigh, someone will have a reasonably good response.

If you provide people with something that is good for the planet while at the same time providing people with something that is good for them you will succeed. People are biological machines programmed only to satisfy themselves.

You may think you have escaped this by trying to save the planet, but lets put it this way, if you succeeded in preventing global warming, would it make you happy?
 
HeartCore a dit:
if you succeeded in preventing global warming, would it make you happy?

If he succeeded in preventing global warming, would it make you happy?

Of course it would. That's why I said something that I thought would drive success a bit more easily with the people who are resisting.
 
i just said that global warming is a fact
not that is the first time it happens
and not even say the end is nigh
and the only reason the north pole is currently shrinking IS due to GW
i never said that THIS global warming is the only one, and THE ONE that will destroy everithing...shurely we are helping
and trust me, i wouldn't mind having a warmer climate up here at the moment
don't get me wrong if the equilibrium tips the majority of humans, and not only humans, but millions of species on this planet ARE doomed, but then again not all of us are gonna die...let's take it with a pinch of good old cynism, shall we?
 
No cynicism needed.

I just said to motivate people you need to give them a selfish reason. All else is moot.
 
This should raise some dust...

What Global Warming Enthusiasts Don't Want You to Know

by Mitch Battros - Earth Changes Media, June 30 2008

Below are seven areas which evidence the true cause of warming and cooling trends. Just as the 1930's "Dust Bowl" cannot be explained by blaming SUV's, de-forestation, or coal burning smoke stacks . . . today's new 1988 made up name 'global warming' cannot be blamed on stupid wasteful polluting humans. Not denying there are many stupid wasteful people in the world, but that it has very little to do with climate. As mentioned, I have no problem putting all polluters in jail, and striving for a clean sustainable environment, but it is the LIE presented to us stating it would have measurable temperature shifts.

Remember, we have one shot at using our vast resources. Do we waste it on a "red herring" such as we have with Iraq . . . or do we spend wisely on preparation for 'mass migration' due to natural climate shifts which have occurred for millions of years and will for millions to come. And also focus on sustainable living such as Permaculture. Consider . . . . . . . . . . . .

Global Warming on Mars . . . Oh Yes It's True

Data gathered by NASA's Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft suggest Mars climate may have changed significantly in the past, and may be changing quickly even now and may happen over a much shorter time scale than scientists previously thought.

And you thought there were no little green people living on Mars. On a really dark night, you can barely see the gas guzzling SUV's caught in traffic, and the shadow of smoke stacks outlined in the night sky. And when Mars was at its closet point in 60,000 years in August 2003, you could see those nasty little green men chopping down every tree in sight. Bastards!

Just kidding folks. Just using a little satire, but to make a very important point. Although I am 100% behind reducing pollution at every level, I wish to make the point that it has very little to do with "climate". I am a steward of this planet Earth just as you, and I do everything I can to keep our home in order, but it will not stop the current warming trend, nor will it stop the coming cooling trend. As I have said in at least 6 articles prior, we would experience so-called global warming (which is meant to mean "warmer globe) if there were no humans on Earth.

Julian Smith of the Geotimes a subsidiary of The American Geological Institute writes the following. On Mars, the glacial areas are enlarging so quickly that the entire upper layer of the ice cap is likely to be sublimated to gas within a martian decade or two. Because carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, the pressure and temperature of the martian atmosphere may change dramatically over periods as short as a few hundred years.

If enough carbon dioxide is present in Mars' south polar ice cap, it could potentially raise surface pressures enough to result in temperatures sufficiently warm for surface water to exist.

Observations made with the Mars Orbiter Laser Altimeter (MOLA) were described in a separate study in the same issue of Science. A paper by David Smith, Maria Zuber and Gregory Neumann presented detailed measurements of the planet's topography and gravitational field suggesting significant changes in the martian atmosphere within the space of a single martian year.

Because it is also tilted on its rotational axis, Mars has seasons like Earth. As its surface gradually becomes darker during the martian autumn and winter, carbon dioxide gas "freezes out" of the atmosphere. Dense dry-ice snow accumulates at both poles, demarcated by a "frost line" that reaches the planet's mid-latitudes by winter. In spring and summer the process reverses.

The paper described how up to two meters of dry-ice snow accumulates in winter, mostly at latitudes above 80 degrees. The authors also reported a tiny change in the martian gravity field reflecting a global-scale mass redistribution. So much carbon dioxide is exchanged between atmosphere and surface -- as much as a third of the planet's carbon dioxide over a full martian year -- that the planet, which like Earth is slightly flattened, actually becomes rounder in winter.

"This is the first precise measurement of the global-scale cycling of the most abundant atmospheric gas on Mars," says Maria Zuber, the deputy principal investigator of the laser altimeter and a scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.. "Understanding the present carbon dioxide cycle is an essential step toward understanding past climates."

Malin adds that "Mars may help us decipher how natural climate systems on Mars and the Earth respond to rapid perturbations. The observations, if they do in fact lead to climate changes on Mars, also suggest that natural climate change may completely dominate human-induced climate change. Some people have suggested 'terraforming' Mars [altering its environment to make it more habitable], but our observations suggest that Mars is already experiencing a larger change than humans may ever be able to induce."

As evidence accumulates of significant, ongoing climate change on Earth, severe fluctuations in the martian climate strike closer to home. "There is quite a bit of evidence that suggests that severe episodic, or catastrophic phenomena are much more common in nature than we have thought," Malin says. "Certainly my research both on Earth and Mars strongly points to such processes as being most crucial in shaping the landscape."

Volcanic Contribution

When volcanoes erupt, they emit gases such as carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxide. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. This means that it helps to keep the earth warm. In the past, the amount of carbon dioxide released by volcanoes helped to maintain the balance of gases in the earth's atmosphere. However, this balance is now being upset through the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. If too much carbon dioxide is produced, temperatures around the world could go up, leading to global warming.

The sulphur dioxide produced by volcanoes causes the problem of acid rain. When it mixes with water vapour in the air, it forms a weak acid which then falls to the ground in rain, snow or dust.

The eruption of Mount Pinatubo in June, 1990 may produce more effect on so-called global warming than a decade of human pollutants. Airborne debris from Pinatubo has interfered with Earth's natural climate as a result of the plumes of ash, carbons, and metals blow into our stratosphere. Pinatubo's lingering effects will subside after almost a decade of significant influence.

Since 1980, scientists have monitored geologic unrest in Long Valley Caldera and at adjacent Mammoth Mountain, California. After a persistent swarm of earthquakes beneath Mammoth Mountain in 1989, earth scientists discovered that large volumes of carbon dioxide (CO2) gas were seeping from beneath this volcano. This gas is killing trees on the mountain and also can be a danger to people. The USGS continues to study the CO2 emissions to help protect the public from this invisible potential hazard.

Geologists have detected CO2 emissions, like those at Mammoth Mountain, on the flanks of other volcanoes, including Kilauea in Hawaii and Mount Etna in Sicily. Measuring the rate of such gas emissions on the flanks of volcanoes or within calderas is difficult and labor intensive. Readings must be made at many locations using small gas-collection instruments placed on the soil.

A preliminary estimate of the current rate of CO2 gas emission at Mammoth Mountain is 1,300 tons per day. Similar rates of CO2 emission have been measured from the craters of Mt. St. Helens (Washington) and Kilauea (Hawaii) volcanoes during periods of low-level eruptive activity. Past eruptions at Mammoth Mountain, such as the phreatic (steam-blast) eruptions that occurred about 600 years ago on the volcano's north flank, may have been accompanied by CO2 emissions. Scientists think that the current episode of high CO2 emission is the first large-scale release of the gas on the mountain for at least 250 years, because the oldest trees in the active tree-kill areas are about that age.

Under Sea Volcanoes

A dramatic discovery was made at the first site visited. The unmanned submersible ROPOS and its cameras were 1,800 feet deep on the rim of a crater near the top of a volcano when huge yellow clouds of sulfur-rich effluent enveloped the submersible.

NOAA scientist Dave Butterfield, chemist in charge of water sampling, determined that the fluid was very corrosive, with a high concentration of sulfuric acid. The ROPOS operator on the research vessel sent a signal down the long tether line, commanding ROPOS to reverse engines.

At another site, a spectacular, highly concentrated flow of carbon dioxide-rich fluid was discovered. The science team was astonished to see large bubbles floating up from the seafloor around this site when it was disturbed. After discussion, the consensus opinion was that the bubbles were predominantly liquid carbon dioxide. This is a key discovery not simply for the novelty of the phenomenon.

"We found a natural laboratory where the effects of carbon dioxide on marine organisms can be studied," said Steve Hammond, chief scientist for NOAA's Office of Ocean Exploration. The liquid form of carbon dioxide is present due to the great depth, and resulting pressure at the site. At 5,263 feet (approximately one mile), the pressure from the water column is equal to 160 atmospheres.

Solar Cycles

Scientific data clearly shows a symbiotic causal connection between the Sun's solar cycles and Earth's extreme temperature changes. A team led by University of Maine scientists has reported finding a link between changes in solar activity and the Earth's climate. In a paper due to be published in an upcoming volume of the Annals of Glaciology, Paul Mayewski, director of UMaine's Climate Change Institute, and 11 colleagues from China, Australia and UMaine describe evidence from ice cores pointing to an association between the waxing and waning of zonal wind strength around Antarctica and a chemical signal of changes in the Sun's output.

At the heart of the paper, Solar Forcing of the Polar Atmosphere, are calcium, nitrate and sodium data from ice cores collected in four Antarctic locations and comparisons of those data to South Pole ice core isotope data for beryllium-10, an indicator of solar activity. The authors also point to data from Greenland and the Canadian Yukon that suggest similar relationships between solar activity and the atmosphere in the northern hemisphere. They focus on years since 1400 when the Earth entered a roughly 500-year period known as the Little Ice Age.

The ten warmest years since 1880 have been (in temperature order): 1990; 1991; 1988 and 1981 (tied); 1987; 1983 and 1980 (tied); 1989; 1973; 1986 and 1977 (tied). Is it a coincidence that the past six years are among the 10 hottest years ever recorded? Not likely. This list corresponds with high solar activity such as solar flares, CME's (coronal mass ejections, coronal holes all produce severe geomagnetic storms.

Largest Ozone Depletion Caused by the Sun

Dr. Paal Brekke took a few minutes to discuss a most recent event. It was just two weeks ago when a consortium of scientist from the University of Colorado made a stunning announcement. According to Research Associate Cora Randall of CU-Boulder's Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, nitrogen oxide and nitrogen dioxide gases in the upper stratosphere climbed to the highest levels in at least two decades in spring 2004. The increases led to ozone reductions of up to 60 percent roughly 25 miles in altitude above Earth's high northern latitudes, said Randall. This decline was completely unexpected, and was caused as a result of chemical reactions triggered by energetic particles from the Sun.

Dr. Brekke's response on so-called global warming: "The original 'hockey stick' which all this global warming was based as brought forward by James Hansen and Michael Mann, is bad data. Whole climate time periods were left out. They erased entire centuries of climate related to the Medieval mini-Ice age. It is now safe to say this so-called "hockey stick" is broken". We quickly agreed that the "climate always changes", and has done so for the life of this planet, with or without humans.

Dr. Brekke does acknowledge it is very difficult to distinguish what percentage is caused by the Sun and what percentage is cause by humans. A general premise would suggest as according to Dr. Brekke it may be 70% caused by the Sun and 30% caused by humans. But this was a general statement made to give an example of confusing hypostasis. But that is Dr. Brekke's assumption, as for myself and not having the monolith such as NASA breathing down my neck, I easily step forward and say . . . all current research suggest something closer to 3% to 12% of the current warming trend is human induced. By far the majority of what we see unfolding today and in the near future is 88% to 97% solar induced. There is one area Dr. Brekke and myself more closely agree . . . the IPCC is a "joke" filled with self-centered, self-seeking, agenda driven, cloaked lobbyist who have no vested interest in science. No, what drives this team of fascist zealots is simply MONEY.

The Precession (Earth's Tilt)

A new study reported in the March 24 issue of Nature finds that these glacial cycles are paced by variations in the tilt of Earth's axis, and that glaciations end when Earth's tilt is large. With more than 30 explanations proposed for these glacial cycles, researchers at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) looked at the various possibilities to determine a more precise explanation. Some hypotheses suggested changes in Earth's orbit, others that glacial cycles are caused by random climate variability. The researchers found that the most plausible cause was that variations in the tilt of the Earth's axis control the timing of glaciations, acting as a planetary pacemaker of sorts.

The Earth's Core ? Magnetic Pole Reversal

Dr. Peter Olson, Geophysicist from John Hopkins University is about to disclose what he believes to be the pre-cursor to a full pole shift reversal. "It has already begun" says Dr. Olson. There is a current event happening near Brazil and Argentina called the "South Atlantic Anomaly". This event indicates a "magnetic pole reversal has already occurred between the Earth's core and mantle in the area near Brazil and Argentina. There are current studies indicating solar radiation has increased to a point causing serious concern for pilots. High altitude flights may be cancelled and some speculation that this region may be closed to flights altogether.

In my telephone discussion with Dr. Olson earlier today had me sitting straight up with eyes wide open as he disclosed the Earth's magnetic field is weakening and solar radiation could become a very real and serious factor. He also explained there is something happening between the Earth's core and mantle that is affecting plate tectonics (Earthquakes), deep mantle plumes (Volcanoes), and the geomagnetic field (Equation).
 
yeah all this is allright

and earth managed to make enough oxigen through plants

too bad we deforestate hundreds of hectares every year and the oxygen we consume by burning fossil fuels (and the plants we cut down) and reintroducing CO2 that had been trapped under the earth for millennia in a few years adds up to the natural facts you just eloquently presented. the problem is not just that the hectares we cut down had the ability to pump the CO2 out of the atmosphere and now without those hectares the CO2 is accumulating at faster rates than could naturally happen in our time.
personally i really don't mind human extinction, after the dinosaurs did, i guess we won't happen to have a choice really, but why do i have to choke my kids?
 
Dantediv86 a dit:
yeah all this is allright

and earth managed to make enough oxigen through plants

too bad we deforestate hundreds of hectares every year and the oxygen we consume by burning fossil fuels (and the plants we cut down) and reintroducing CO2 that had been trapped under the earth for millennia in a few years adds up to the natural facts you just eloquently presented. the problem is not just that the hectares we cut down had the ability to pump the CO2 out of the atmosphere and now without those hectares the CO2 is accumulating at faster rates than could naturally happen in our time.
personally i really don't mind human extinction, after the dinosaurs did, i guess we won't happen to have a choice really, but why do i have to choke my kids?

From where I stand it's obvious - the earth has always cooled into ice ages and warmed again. The problem is, this happens VERY slowly and it is the slowness of it that gaves the plants and animals time to adapt.

Even if we are not doing damage now, should we in the future?

We are the only known planet that contains life. Not only that, we have humans here - sentience!

It's almost infinitely possible there will be another, smarter race somewhere - but until that is a certainty we should keep on going.

On of the big issues that striked me from the Dune series (Frank Herbert - if you haven't read it, flee now, do so!) is when they are talking about planning for the future. Governments here only need to survive 4 years at a time. The world is millions of years old.

We need real long term plans going millions of years into the future JUST IN CASE.

Forget the Universe. Imagine a planet. Same size as earth. The only life is on an island about 3 miles square. You have a vested interest in not dying - you populate the whole rest of the planet so that a wave can't wipe you out.

We need to do this globally - all our eggs on one planet, one big space rock and there goes all known life.
 
Loved Dune (tho i need to read all the books that came out afterwards...gee i got some catching up to do)
i think it's a very modern likeness to our situation
...
is your real name Noah by any chance? 'cause i think i know you...
 
Yeah right, and pollution also doesn't cause the alarming rates of lungcancer which previously, was a rare condition.

One bird does not make summer. One scientist with a story (I can't make more of it) does not make the cause of global warming go away.

We need to do this globally - all our eggs on one planet, one big space rock and there goes all known l

Nah not really, that's culture talking. We need (and are going to) get rid of the body. That's our only hope, get rid of the body, live virtual, act out all our stupidity and idioticies virtual, and please leave this and other planets be.

Human beings wanting to colonize other planets, seriously need some ego smashing...
 
One scientist with a story (I can't make more of it) does not make the cause of global warming go away.
Not the cause, but a cause. The point is that blaming everything on the human race and its technology is not taking the entire picture into account. Whenever parts of the truth are denied or surpressed, you can start manipulating people ("buy energy saving lamps", etc.). Hence we need to point out all the causes of our current dilemma. Sure we need to develop cleaner and more endurable energy sources, no one is denying that. The scientist quoted above certainly doesn't deny that.

Human beings wanting to colonize other planets, seriously need some ego smashing...
That's just an opinion. Perhaps we're meant to colonize other planets once we have learned how to generate clean energy and learned how to manage an eco-system rather than disturb it with our presence. What if this is actually possible and it's our destiny?
 
People won't colonize space in their current form, you can forget about that. If your opinion differs, draw me a sound scenerario
I'm not saying they will, I'm just saying it may be our destiny. And it may be in our current biological form, but aided with different technologies. Who could have imagined a couple of hundred years ago that we could one day fly through the sky in our current form, or dive to the bottom of the ocean? I'm not a futurist, but I can imagine our constantly evolving technologies are going to allow us to explore other realms beyond this Earthly atmosphere.

The fact of the matter is, our style is unsustainable
Agreed. But our style is not fixed. We're no longer using the type of gasoline we used a couple of decades ago, and alternatives to gasoline are developed all over the world. Solar energy, wind energy, zero-point energy...

Most scientist that have any say in this, agree that we are causing it.
Most scientists say psychedelics and cannabis are useless. There was a time when most scientists claimed cigarettes were safe and good for your teeth. Most scientists will say fluoride is good for you. It's irrelevant what most scientists say.
 
what is relevant is that if it's a fact htat scientist are talking about, then it's right. otherwhise they are just flawed "scientists" at the service of businness instead of science...oh and as someone would say "suck Satan's cock!"
 
saving bulbs are a great thing for everybody since they are (much) cheaper to maintain, produce (much) less heat while providing more light.
They contain a shitload of mercury, and thus they are just another hazard to the environment, as well as one's health if one breaks down and you're standing nearby or have to clean it up yourself. But this is kind of irrelevant because the idea of saving energy through more efficient means is of course ok. I'm sure they'll invent better ones eventually.

Suggesting polution is not causing global warming
You're turning the argument around here. Everyone agrees polution is a contributing factor to global warming. I do, the author of the article posted above does. But to what extent, that is the big question.
 
Retour
Haut