There's a huge debate on the global warming cycle . Some scientists believe it's because the sun goes through cycles of heating and cooling and they can show the ratio of sun spots is proportionate with heating and warming .The scientists that Al Gore used in his ,inconvenient truth ,have all backed away and said he misquoted them , just because a couple of polar bears drowned does not mean global warming was the cause.I think it's time to take his nobel prize away. I'm sick of hearing how the UN wants to have a carbon tax on the leading carbon producers of which the US is number one at this time. I personally think things are going to heat up around here since they have observed some powerful solar flares .
Is Global Warming ......Over?
by metatron 27 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
barry
Here in south eastern Australia we have just had our coldest summer for a long time and just a week ago tasmania had snow in the middle of our summer.
To correct some thinking here global warming should bring more rain not drought. Ive noticed the experts will use drought or higher rainfall to prove global warming. Quite dishonest if you ask me.
-
uninformed
Just a few weeks ago I was being accused of being stupid for not believing in Global Warming.
GW is a hoax being used by tax and spend liberals to levy another tax on us, the carbon footprint. It is all a bunch of crap.
Brant
-
Satanus
Where's abaddon?? He'ld get you ducks back into line ;) This just shows that al gore is already saving the planet. You nonbelievers had better stop talking like this ;)
S -
MissingLink
Don't you know it's not PC to deny global warming!
-
zagor
I really wish I could agree with you, but all indication are in different direction. In fact there’s about 10 orders of magnitude more evidence for human activity causing Global Warming than there is circumstantial evidence in many court cases in US that send people to death row and yet most of the time we do not question penal system.
Why is it that we find it so hard to accept that we are hurting this planet?? Or is the real reason more psychological than justified?
I think it is the case particularly among ex-jws to reject any suggestion that can bring them closer to doomsday scenarios they were hearing about while inside the cult. What they are forgetting is that such cults only thrive on REAL events and are using them as 'validating proof' for their campaigns. That of course doesn’t invalidate events it only talks about weirdos who are using opportunity of global confusion for their own benefit. Kinda like looting you see when there’s a break up of government in some country on brink of civil war.
I’ve done enormous amount of research on the subject, if you don’t believe try me. And more to the point have connections to the people doing real measuring on several places around the world including Antarctica, which is not too far from here.. I’ve spoken to both economists and environmental scientists and while there are always small variations the global consensus is that we are pretty screwed to put it bluntly. In fact, a great number of them said that we have crossed the point of no return back in 2003 others say more 2005 but does it really matter?? We urgently need alternative sources of energy and the only source capable to satisfy that need is solar energy. Yup forget nuclear. By 2050 we would need something in order of 10 – 15 Terawatts of energy to keep economy and thereby civilization stable. If you consider that average nuclear station produces at most 1 Gigawatt of energy that would mean we need to build about 2 nuclear power stations a week for the next 50 years. And since their expected lifetime is about 30 or so years that would mean we would need to keep building them indefinitely. Not to mention that fuel needed is not very abundant on this planet and by extracting it on that scale we would soon run out of that too.
Or alternatively we can close the borders keep all the resources and energy to us and hope people on the outside will take it on the face value.
The only other option that seems even remotely plausible is to go back to the Moon and mine Helium 3 which is non-radioactive and gives off enormous amount of energy. Of course to do that we will need truly international cooperation or we are screwed again.What we did to this planet is abuse unprecedented in human history and to add insult to injury we are trying to blame nature for it. If this planet was sombody’s wife and person doing stuff to it we are doing to Earth was her ‘loving husband’ he’d be probably locked up for 10 lifetimes and given American penal system probably even sent to death row. That is how serious situation really is. So we better start doing some hard thinking in reducing our carbon footprint and pressing upon our representatives to invest money into resources that will ensure our kids survival on this planet.
-
5go
Yep, you can deny it all you want but doing something about it kills two birds with one stone. Which is rare. We need to cut the emissions of a energy source we are running out of anyway. So bitch and moan all you want but change is coming like it, or not. One way, or another we are going to stop using fossil fuels. We can do now while we can, or later when we are forced too.
-
Uzzah
Regardless of the cause, most experts do agree that we are seeing more extreme weather in both scale and frequency.
Rather than petty arguing people need to start bracing themselves for such extremes and severe weather. Have you prepared your family in case of prolonged severe weather or possible blackouts resulting from such? Are communities investing in the infrastructure they need to endure and respond?
As a second comment, any steps towards conservationalism to me is a positive step. I think the resistance is coming from it being forced. But we do really need to do a beeter job taking care of our home globally.
-
nvrgnbk
I never understood miscellaneous local weather reports to be substantial proof for or against GW.
I thought it was about the amount of solar energy being absorbed into the oceans compared to the amount being given back into space, thus creating a theoretical "energy imbalance".
-
BurnTheShips
Yep, you can deny it all you want but doing something about it kills two birds with one stone. Which is rare. We need to cut the emissions of a energy source we are running out of anyway. So bitch and moan all you want but change is coming like it, or not. One way, or another we are going to stop using fossil fuels. We can do now while we can, or later when we are forced too
Wow, I am actually agreeing with 5GO.
HOWEVER, although I think we need to start going to alternative sources of energy for transportation fuels, to do it on shaky grounds such as Glowball Worming risks delegitimizing the whole enterprise. We DON'T NEED Glowball Worming as a rationale to cut back on petroleum usage. Petroleum dependence makes us in the non-OPEC West dependent on the most unsavory regimes, and is a security threat. There are societies that are not capable of building a cellphone that are wealthy because they have oil beneath their sands. We fund their theocracies, and their terrorists, and we have no choice right now. Europe is beholden to Russian pipelines. Putin has a real pressure point he can and does use to get his way. The US must maintain a large military in part to enforce access to this absolutely necessary resource. This is an "oil tax" on our citizenry that does not show up in the pump price. Our trade balances are in the negative to a large extent because of oil importation. This weakens our currencies, and our economies. The resource will not last forever. We need to move on while there is still enough petroleum liquid to power the transition. When oil gets too expensive it will be much more difficult. Even if we had a viable replacement right now for petroleum fueled internal combustion vehicles it would take at least 20 years to get everything changed over. Just look at how long the transition took from horse power to automobiles. Horses reached their peak population in the US some 30 years after the automobile became a viable alternative for consumer transportation. An oil tanker can't turn on a dime. Neither can the West.
Burn