Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Green Business' started by Cornish Steve, Mar 4, 2008.
I would have thought MI6 would be well aware of it. After all I believe they will have planned it.
if you feel we are doomed then there seems no point changing anything
In a sense there is no point to anything.
Agree with that!
The point that you believe that mere humans can control the world climate amazes me.:redface:
Its not a matter of quote "carry out your business as normal, consuming none renewables like they are going out of fashion", as everyone around the world should be doing what they can realistically do to reduce usage of these rare fuels. But, taxing the hell out of a couple of countries when others are just burning the candle at both ends is foolhardy and will not make any difference, it must be tackled globally and as that will likely never happen we are back to square one.
I'm not disagreeing with you on that. Every country should be working at finding an alternative.
If we make it till the oil runs out, that will really be the end as everyone fights for what is left.
To say that mere humans cannot change the planets climate is madness. We can, and we have. Urban smog, asthma, COPD, etc.
Humans are releasing 15 gigatonnes of co2 every year. It was steady until around 250 years ago.
CO2 has been proven to trap heat, and is raising the overall temperature of the planet.
The temperature of the oceans is the major issue and is climbing at a rate never before seen.
We even manage to heat the oceans 2000 meters below the surface.
To believe otherwise is, well, wrong.
You didn't answer the questions.
In fact I believe that the statement about ice cores is incorrect. Doesn't Al Gore travel around with a chart that shows different levels of CO2 trapped in ice cores? How is it that his chart shows variations and you say that the levels were "quite steady"?
And doesn't Mr Gore's chart indeed show a correlation between global temperatures and CO2 levels in the ice cores? But some people point out that the CO2 levels actually lag behind temperature, and don't precede it.
And that is, apparently, based on 1,000 years of data. Sounds impressive, but it's truly insignificant in the lifetime of the earth - about 4.5 billion years - I make that 0.00002%. So how can you say that this level of CO2 has never been released before? The climate has certainly been a lot warmer than it is now, and a lot colder at other times. Those changes took place with little or no contribution from fossil fuels.
And then where does human activity stand in the table of production of CO2? Not very high, I think that you will find
The whole question is nowhere near as black and white as you are making out.
Smog and asthma are not the worlds climate, smog was an effect of pollution and asthma is a medical diagnosis.
250 years ago the worlds population was around 610m in 2012 it is around 7bn, your argument is not a fair comparison, it is completely natural that CO2 emission would increase with increasing population.
Probably because records don't go back far enough.
Proof please, IMHO that is poppycock as at that depth, the temperature is more likely controlled by the earths core, unless of course we are controlling that as well
So says you......
how many volcanoes are erupting at anyone time above ground and below the sea?
how much co2 is coming from underneath the ice and from where ice once was?
it seems obvious to me that we are getting warmer but why does it have to mean we are doing it. tomorrow it could get very cold and stay that way for a very very long time.
The simple reason is that by blaming us mere mortals for all the worlds problems keeps us (well some of us) scared and willing to listen to so-called experts and obey them. It is also a fantastic way of controlling wealth and of raising funds by taxation for no reason.
I am truly astounded by you people. Your kidding yourselves. It is black and white. Clear as day, and after research paper after research paper had shown that us mere mortals produce gigatonnes of co2 every year.
CO2 levels where a lot higher in the past. Then plants evolved and over millions of years, the co2 was stored until a very short term release of it all.
That is why plants grow faster with increased co2 levels. They have retained this ability.
All the 'point me to the facts' people should do some research.
Type climate change caused by humans into Google, and the results are a mix of viewpoints. You need to make your own mind up.
Some people just don't like what they hear.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Difference is, if I'm wrong, it's a good thing.
Wow. Who can argue with intellectual incisiveness of that order?
So true. Glad you have seen the light.
Trouble is, i don't trust 90% of these papers.
Then surely if plants are reacting faster, we should soon reach a happy balance again, plant more plants
Err, i HAVE made my own mind up thank you.
Maybe some people just don't like what you're peddling???
Climategate investigation closed - statute limit looms, cops impotent
So the police weren't getting warmer, then?
Something new on wattsupwiththat.com
"A reanalysis of U.S. surface station temperatures has been performed using the recently WMO-approved Siting Classification System devised by METEO-Frances Michel Leroy. The new siting classification more accurately characterizes the quality of the location in terms of monitoring long-term spatially representative surface temperature trends. The new analysis demonstrates that reported 1979-2008 U.S. temperature trends are spuriously doubled, with 92% of that over-estimation resulting from erroneous NOAA adjustments of well-sited stations upward. The paper is the first to use the updated siting system which addresses USHCN siting issues and data adjustments."
See more here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/29/press-release-2/