Forums | MacLife

They said it was warmer during the middle ages? I have seen a few documentries that suggested it was a lot cooler during that time. They looked at the growth of trees and found it quite stunted for many years in the dark ages, enough to make them think that it may actually have been darker than usual and hence a lot cooler. I havn't heard anything which would suggest it was warmer.

A lot of this has to be put into perspective. For example, they say 90% of greenhouse gasses come from the ocean. I'm not completely sure what they're talking about, but lets say thats where 90% of the CO2 in our atmosphere has come from. Well thats fine, maybe is does, I dont know. But just because we didn't do all of it does not mean we have no effect. I am not in a position to say how much of an extra effect that 10% has, but something is causeing the average temperature of the Earth to increase at a rate of a few degrees over the past 50 years or something like that. The Earth is getting warmer, this is not deniable. Are we having an effect? It would seem to make sense, considering how much stuff we are ejecting into the atmosphere and how many forests we burn.

Its also interesting, how so many people were denying global warming, saying it wasn't happening, there is nothing wrong, we need more research. Now that people are finally accpeting the proof that has been around for quite a while, those same people who denied its existance are now saying its just a natural thing that we dont have any effect on. Well, if it is natural, then by cutting down these forests and burning our fossil fuels we sure arn't making things better are we? It would be a good idea for humans to keep the temperature of the Earth where it is, we live very well in these temperatures, we dont want  ice caps melting and deserts expanding. So even if it is natural we should be doing our best to slow this down, and cutting back on fossil fuels, even if its not the main cause, would certainly not hurt.

The Little Ice Age

Incidentially, the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is of the opinion that we are potentially on the verge of another Little Ice Age due to, paradoxically, Global Warming.  One VERY interesting link.

To address the issue of greenhouse gases, the problem is the fact that normally, the amount of carbon dioxide in the environment is stable, and that same amount remains in the ever-famous carbon-dioxide cycle. What we have done by harvesting oil and other products from underneath the ground, is to introduce carbon into the cycle that before was out of circulation. That 90% you speak of is a natural part of the cycle. The other 10% or so (I guess) is excess carbon dioxide.

Most of the carbon dioxide in our atmosphere comes from volcanic processes. The oceans actually absorb carbon dioxide. Everything I've seen (which isn't that much) suggests that the temperature has been rising by a about a degree every century for the past four hundred years or so.

In the distant past it was considerably warmer, but we climbing out of an ice age right now.

I was under the impression that it was created largely by all the plankton in the ocean.

Anyone got a link showing the answer?

Wait....I'm not a historian or anything... but who the hell kept track of accurate temprature patterns in the middle ages? And wouldnt that only apply to a portion of the planet? 

Global Warming

As the above posts seem to point to, the concept of global warming is a crock.

So, putting aside the fact that the earth is getting warmer and the ice caps are melting faster and faster, we must assume that there is a huge conspiracy of scientists who doctor all of their work (it would have to be the lifes work for some meteorologists who study this sort of thing) to show that the earth is getting warmer when it really is not. Why would they do this?

The fact is the world seems to be getting warmer with the best measurements we have at our disposal right now. It hasn't matched the computer models on what was expected but frankly, the models are flawed (we'll get better at them as the decades go by).
What is in dispute is how much is caused by man and to what extent man can change the warming trend or reverse it. Even the long term harm or gain is in dispute.

And what's producing all those oceanic greenhouse gases? And nice generalization about the perception of global warming over the years. Hey, it's about the same age as Moore's Law, so they must both be crocks! And the Theory of Relativity's a bit older, but since it's relatively new (ha-ha), it must also be a load of poop! In fact, every scientific discovery of the last few decades must be bull!

Logical, no?

Come on schnicky - you are smart enough to know that both the examples you gave can be verified through experimentation and peer review, which global warming has not undergone - and I'm guessing you are old enough to remember that the same people who started the global warming scare were pumping a man made ice age scare before that.

I remember the media was shrieking about the next ice age for a brief period in the 70s. But guess what -- a major danger of global warming is that periods of warming are often followed by periods of drastic cooling. Ice ages, it seems, can descend in as little as ten years.

The scientific community has been studying (and documenting) this phenomenon for years. Hardly anyone still denies global warming is taking place. You're one of the last of a dying race, my friend.

Global Warming

As the above posts seem to point to, the concept of global warming is a crock.

Are you suggesting that for the last 10,000 years, the Earth has been about the same temperature?

It's been recorded throughout our history that the world certainly is getting warmer. Thousands of years ago cattle used to graze in now what's the Sahara. We can actually see glacial recession.

To say that actualy global warming isn't happening is just pure ignorance. If you are talking about global warming as a result of mankind's influece, that is still highly debatable.

I remember the media was shrieking about the next ice age for a brief period in the 70s. But guess what -- a major danger of global warming is that periods of warming are often followed by periods of drastic cooling. Ice ages, it seems, can descend in as little as ten years.

The scientific community has been studying (and documenting) this phenomenon for years. Hardly anyone still denies global warming is taking place. You're one of the last of a dying race, my friend.

No one is saying that it isn't getting slightly warmer.
What we deny is that man is the cause of the warming - but rather, it is a natural process.
We aren't so prideful as to think that man has that much influence over what the earth has been doing since we were amoeba's.

So if mankind is not contributing to global warming, we should continue to burn coal without regard to pollution, and allow American industry to pollute however much they can?

I am skeptical of Man's influence on global warming. 

However, we do pollute too much.  Aren't most (all?) major American rivers too polluted to fish from?  How about respiratory diseases on a significant increase?  Or the Asian Brown Cloud?  Or just common sense that says, "hey, we should really hit up that anti-pollution R & D."

I almost want to call global warming an unfortunate strawman of the left's own creation.

--JakeTheTall

There's no doubt that LOGICALLY many human activities contribute to greenhouse gases.  But, as in toxicology, the dose makes the poison.  The question is, does human activity impact global warming in a way that is significant or even measurable at all, one way or the other?  So far the answer is "no."  (Improvements in technology itself, or measurement technology could change this.) Not only does human activity not measurably increase the amount of warming we experience, it can't measurably decrease it, either.  That's the real problem with the Kyoto protocol: it was very costly, yet offered no hope for significantly reducing warming.

It might have been Reagan, but for some reason I thought it was James Watts.