2008 - The year global warming was disproved.

[Teller]

And... the deforestation is reducing some of the filters the world used to use to clean up CO2 and convert it back into oxygen. We're getting rid of our scrubbers.

I realize that's probably a pretty small percentage of the problem, but it keeps crossing my mind. I don't know what to do about this, but Christmas trees make me sad. Can't the tree outside the home be decorated or a lamp or something? I think they are supposed to replant a tree for each they take down, but I'm not sure how well that really works. Anyway, just a tree hugging sigh.

Tree farms are continuously replanted.

So are those areas used by most paper companies (Mead and Weyerhauser, I know for sure.)

Relax. Breathe. We're gonna be OK.

[jbooma]

Now, you're getting it!

But it can. If the polar cap melts and a lot of cool water is released into the general soup. It cools down the soup. Think of what happens to your tea if you drop an ice cube in. As the ice melts the tea gets cooler, but it gets cooler because the tea was hot.

I'm probably doing a crappy job explaining this.

it gets cooler right away but has no impact on the water miles away from it :doh: if you let your melted tea sit out for a while and then get back guess what it is warmer now

there is only ONE major impact from fast melting in the artic and that is if it can cool or impact the major water flow from the artic to the atlantic

one thing people forget to think about that the warming waters in the artic could also because of active land movement, you know the tectonic plates can cause hot magma and other volcanic activity which you know could melt the ice as well, and my guess be more of a threat than any human on this planet, heck look at iceland the entire island is a major active volcanic area, why do you think they have the hot geysers

http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/polar/2008/08/20/polar-news-notes-scalding-hot-water-found-within-the-arctic-circle/

[Burgold]

Tree farms are continuously replanted.

So are those areas used by most paper companies (Mead and Weyerhauser, I know for sure.)

Relax. Breathe. We're gonna be OK.

Are you kidding? I'm doing my part. I no longer produce CO2. I have learned to stop breathing out.

[PeterMP]

Well sure, I think we're all pretty much in agreement that he's our resident authority.

However, it seems even you're admitting that we're trying to tackle a problem we haven't even defined yet.

(We're like a collective Vinny Cerrato.) :doh:

Well, what we are really talking about is the green house gas effect. In more specifically, we are talking about the effect due to increased carbon containing molecules in the atmosphere that result from the burning of fossil fuels.

It would be better if science would have started with a better term. Something like "carbon emission effects" because people often forget about gases besides CO2 and other effects due to carbon emissions like the acidification of the ocean.

[Teller]

Are you kidding? I'm doing my part. I no longer produce CO2. I have learned to stop breathing out.

I know you, Burg. That hot air's going somewhere....oh yeah....onto this board.

[jbooma]

Are you kidding? I'm doing my part. I no longer produce CO2. I have learned to stop breathing out.

what scientists have found out to combat C02 to use algae it works very well, and can store it as an energy source

it is amazing what scientists are learning every day to combat C02 emmissions

[PeterMP]

it gets cooler right away but has no impact on the water miles away from it :doh: if you let your melted tea sit out for a while and then get back guess what it is warmer now

there is only ONE major impact from fast melting in the artic and that is if it can cool or impact the major water flow from the artic to the atlantic

one thing people forget to think about that the warming waters in the artic could also because of active land movement, you know the tectonic plates can cause hot magma and other volcanic activity which you know could melt the ice as well, and my guess be more of a threat than any human on this planet, heck look at iceland the entire island is a major active volcanic area, why do you think they have the hot geysers

http://expertvoices.nsdl.org/polar/2008/08/20/polar-news-notes-scalding-hot-water-found-within-the-arctic-circle/

Well, his anology is flawed at a more basic level than that and therefore so is your response.

In his analogy, the ice cube is not part of the system initially so he is affecting the system by adding something to it. The icebergs that are melting are part of the Earth's total climate (and therefore temperature) system.

His analogy is more akin to something cold (I guess a comet) coming to Earth from space.

[Teller]

Well, what we are really talking about is the green house gas effect. In more specifically, we are talking about the effect due to increased carbon containing molecules in the atmosphere that result from the burning of fossil fuels.

It would be better if science would have started with a better term. Something like "carbon emission effects" because people often forget about gases besides CO2 and other effects due to carbon emissions like the acidification of the ocean.

So we're not talking physical temperatures here at all? Or we are, but only a little bit? Hmm....

I don't know anybody, including myself, who's opposed to leaving our children the cleanest, healthiest planet possible. But if the argument is strictly posed in terms of physical temperature, as politicians and the media seem to do, surely you can see the other side of the argument right?

[jpyaks3]

Could you point me in the direction of just one of those people?

The OP would be an example of this, since one part of the world is colder during the winter and there are record snowfalls in some places then it global warming must be a myth.

[PeterMP]

what scientists have found out to combat C02 to use algae it works very well, and can store it as an energy source

it is amazing what scientists are learning every day to combat C02 emmissions

Store what?

Where?

[Teller]

The OP would be an example of this, since one part of the world is colder during the winter and there are record snowfalls in some places then it global warming must be a myth.

"First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare."

Try again.

[PeterMP]

So we're not talking physical temperatures here at all? Or we are, but only a little bit? Hmm....

I don't know anybody, including myself, who's opposed to leaving our children the cleanest, healthiest planet possible. But if the argument is strictly posed in terms of physical temperature, as politicians and the media seem to do, surely you can see the other side of the argument right?

We're talking about physical temperatures as long as the other things affecting temperatures remain essentially constant (this would include fluctuating in a pattern, randomly (or in a manner that has the result as being random), or in a pattern with some (appearant) randomness when considered over long periods of time).

As I stated before, there is always the possibility that the energy due to increased carbon containing molecules is going somewhere else, but I've yet to see anybody even suggest that as a possibility.

[Burgold]

I suspect that's part of the problem. It's like my tea/ice cube example. In my fumbling attempt to explain things I muddied things up. Worse, if I sound reasonable and people carry my flawed explanation forward... then we have more confusion as the explanation gets further off with each retelling. That's why it's such a problem that most of us our receiving our definitions from politicians (or the press). It's the old cliche... a little knowledge is dangerous. The difficult part is that we do deserve to be briefed... it's just that our filters seem too often to have agendas.

[Johnny Punani]

...said the guy walking around with a big brown patty on his head.

Look, if you're going to argue that isolated incidents and anecdotal evidence outweigh overall trends in data, I'm not the one who needs an umbrella.

No, I'll argue the ridiculous comment you made about global economic collapse as the reason behind cooling global temps.

[Springfield]

So this goes back to my old adage...

"If it wasn't global warming, it would be global cooling."

As all of us know, earth isn't constant so you can't reasonably expect our temperature to remain the same all the time. The trend of mean temperature will either be going up (warming) or down (cooling). I think it's a rather obvious assumption.

So, my question to all...

Which would you rather have, global warming or global cooling?

I for one, would rather have global warming.

[jbooma]

Well, his anology is flawed at a more basic level than that and therefore so is your response.

In his analogy, the ice cube is not part of the system initially so he is affecting the system by adding something to it. The icebergs that are melting are part of the Earth's total climate (and therefore temperature) system.

His analogy is more akin to something cold (I guess a comet) coming to Earth from space.

If the ice is melting at such and alarming rate why haven't we seen a huge rise in water yet?? The question is with the volcanic activity from the plates turning water into steam and some places and with water melting are we just offsetting one another??? Look I am not a scientist but what proof do we have the waters are rising by just looking at the water on the shores, and then aren't the waves then impacted by the magnetic pull from the moon???

There are so many variables to all of this so it is hard to fully understand any of this.

[jbooma]

Store what?

Where?

"To produce fuel from CO2, the flue gases are fed into a series of transparent “bioreactors”, which are 2 metres high and filled with green microalgae suspended in nutrient-rich water. The algae use the CO2, along with sunlight and water, to produce sugars by photosynthesis, which are then metabolised into fatty oils and protein. As the algae grow and multiply, portions of the soup are continually withdrawn from each reactor and dried into cakes of concentrated algae. These are repeatedly washed with solvents to extract the oil. The algal oil can then be converted into biodiesel through a routine process called transesterification, in which it is processed using ethanol and a catalyst. Enzymes are then used to convert starches from the remaining biomass into sugars, which are fermented by yeasts to produce ethanol."

[PeterMP]

If the ice is melting at such and alarming rate why haven't we seen a huge rise in water yet?? The question is with the volcanic activity from the plates turning water into steam and some places and with water melting are we just offsetting one another??? Look I am not a scientist but what proof do we have the waters are rising by just looking at the water on the shores, and then aren't the waves then impacted by the magnetic pull from the moon???

There are so many variables to all of this so it is hard to fully understand any of this.

1. It depends on what your definition of "huge" is.

2. The moon's affects on tides and waves is well understood.

3. NONSENSE.

Again, the basic science is over 100 years ago and is the underlying phenomenea behind infrared spectroscopy, which anybody taking a sophmore level college chemistry class (and in some cases not even that level) have been taught.

The Earth receives more energy from the sun than it captures and much of this is reflected back into space. Green house gases absorb some of that energy (on the trip from the sun and then again on the way out into space), therefore the total amount of energy being reflected into space is decreased. As a result of absorbing this energy, the molecules MUST do something (energy can be neither created nor destroyed). A common "response" is to stretch, vibrate or bend. All are forms of kinetic energy. Temperature is a measure of kinetic energy. More green house gases mean more absorbance of energy, which means more bending, stretching, and vibrating, which means more kinetic energy in the atmosphere, which most likely means increased temperatures.

It is VERY BASIC chemistry.

[The Sisko]

No, I'll argue the ridiculous comment you made about global economic collapse as the reason behind cooling global temps.

That wasn't my point at all. Rather I was saying that the folks trumpeting a single data point as an indicator that the overall trend showing global warming is wrong are taking a silly position. This position regarding the single data point looks even sillier when taking into account that one of the primary variables in question has decreased markedly over the past year or so.

Now, do I understand that the decrease in fossil fuel usage is too recent to affect global warming yet? Yes. Nonetheless, I stand by the contention that coming to a conclusion this soon, particularly after a large change in the behavior in question is just silly. If they'd waited a few years and noted that either A) global cooling data in fact shows a trend and/or there was no temperature change after the large reduction in fossil fuel use I'd certainly say they have a point.

Smart ass.

[PeterMP]

stuff

But that doesn't do you any good if it isn't cost effecient with respect to fossil fuels, and it might have been at $4.00 a gallon gasoline, but it isn't at $2.00, and it isn't going to happen (w/o government intervention) at these prices so CO2 gas levels are going to keep going up.

[No_Pressure]

When I heard more advanced explanations of global warming in a class last year, it was explained as a process that will cause years of cooling with an overall upward temperature trend until it either becomes too hot to sustain life on earth in it's current state, or we cause another ice age. The idea is that one temperature extreme causes another.

I don't believe in all of it, I think there are temperature cycles that span centuries that we have very little control over or effect on.

[DeanCollins]

Based on ice-core research scientists have extrapolated that this is the coolest inter-glacial period in several million years. When dinosaurs roamed the earth, there were no ice caps; climate changes, that's the nature of things. .

When dinosaurs roamed the earth, there were no humans. And shortly after that, there wasn't much of anything alive. And your point is?

[HighOnHendrix]

And... the deforestation is reducing some of the filters the world used to use to clean up CO2 and convert it back into oxygen. We're getting rid of our scrubbers.

I realize that's probably a pretty small percentage of the problem, but it keeps crossing my mind. I don't know what to do about this, but Christmas trees make me sad. Can't the tree outside the home be decorated or a lamp or something? I think they are supposed to replant a tree for each they take down, but I'm not sure how well that really works. Anyway, just a tree hugging sigh.

Tree farms are continuously replanted.

So are those areas used by most paper companies (Mead and Weyerhauser, I know for sure.)

Relax. Breathe. We're gonna be OK.

I forget the exact figure, but I read in a textbook once that like 90-some percent of the photosynthesis that takes place on earth happens in the oceans. Once again, we are exaggerating the effect of what we can see, because we are around trees every day.

I don't know how many exactly, but they have to re-plant several for every one that is cut down. The screwed up thing about the whole "don't cut down the trees" thing that we've done here in the U.S. is that we still consume just as much lumber as ever, while cutting down less and less trees; instead we let Canada and other countries cut down their trees and export them to us. So we're just raping other countries instead of our own. And then we also all get to ***** about all the jobs that were lost because we can't cut down very many of our own trees. Classic.

[Seabee1973]

Global warming is a new religion and AL Gore is the preacher.

[jbooma]

But that doesn't do you any good if it isn't cost effecient with respect to fossil fuels, and it might have been at $4.00 a gallon gasoline, but it isn't at $2.00, and it isn't going to happen (w/o government intervention) at these prices so CO2 gas levels are going to keep going up.

The C02 thing I brought up is what they are doing in factories not with cars :doh:

My point is pretty much everything gives up C02 so instead of trying to fight it with unrealistic alternatives we need to figure ways to be able to handle it now. My other point about the Moon was the waves are due to the magnetic pull to the moon, but there is also studies that show the moon is starting to slow down, which could have a huge impact on the planet in the years to come. When the earth was forming one of the main reasons why it was such a dangerous place was due to the extremely rapid rotation with the moon.

The fact is we think we know but we don't one volcanoe eruption can get everyone to stop forgetting about global warming and be more worried about global cooling and a coming ice age due to the impact it has.