Possible global cooling?

[W1zzard]

so the universe is NOT expanding?

the universe: yes
you/me/earth/solar system/galaxy: no

space between galaxies is expanding

 

[m4gicfour]

No, just the effect of the universe expanding on our galaxy is null

 

[TheMailMan78]

Expanding into what?

 

[trickson]

Some times I wish the sun would just explode !

 

[cadaveca]

Expanding into what?

Antimatter.

 

[TheMailMan78]

Some times I wish the sun would just explode !

Its does. Millions of times an hour.

Antimatter.

Sounds like more quantum physics babble.

 

[m4gicfour]

AND THE NEAREST GALAXY? It's on Pluto

 

[Easy Rhino]

over the course of billions of years the climate of earth has changed dramatically. none of which had anything to do with humanity. today we live in a very stable global climate environment relative to billions of years ago so to say that humans have any significant impact on that climate is pointless. if anything, since the introduction of humans to Earth, things have progressively gotten better!

 

[W1zzard]

there is no "good" or "bad" for when the planet is concerned. evolution will adapt

there is only good or bad for us, short-term. our technology provides shelter from nature. it's not like any sort of climate change will kill all humans. life will just suck (even more) for some

need to define "significant impact", for example there is absolutely no doubt that we have increased global co2 levels, or caused the ozone hole depletion

 

[Easy Rhino]

of course we have an impact on CO2 levels. but that's like saying whales have an impact on the ocean. it is a pointless argument. meanwhile power hungry individuals across the globe are using "climate change" as a platform for 1 world governance and complete control over how you live your life.

 

[TheMailMan78]

there is no "good" or "bad" for when the planet is concerned. evolution will adapt

there is only good or bad for us, short-term. our technology provides shelter from nature. it's not like any sort of climate change will kill all humans. life will just suck (even more) for some

need to define "significant impact", for example there is absolutely no doubt that we have increased global co2 levels, or caused the ozone hole depletion

co2 levels have increased but I think that has to do with a combination of things. Not so much cars but the fact that Brazil has cut down so much of the Earths filters (rainforest's) Its one thing I have never understood about the green movement. Everyone attacks the US for its consumption of fuel and its Co2 emissions but no one ever attacks Brazil for its gutting of the rainforest's and China for its unregulated coal plants.

I mean the 80's were eat up with "Save the Rain Forrest's" Now its ban Co2 emissions and drive a Volt. It wont matter if there are not enough trees left to filter out cow farts and Chicago Bears fans breathing.

of course we have an impact on CO2 levels. but that's like saying whales have an impact on the ocean. it is a pointless argument. meanwhile power hungry individuals across the globe are using "climate change" as a platform for 1 world governance and complete control over how you live your life.

Thats pretty much my point.

 

[Easy Rhino]

the amount of data used to come to the conclusion that humans are significantly negatively impacted the environment is like a grain of sand in a vast ocean. 100 years of data versus billions of years of existence.

edit: i would also like to point out that the main political proponents of carbon tax/regulation are all the worst polluters to our environment. don't trust them for 1 second. yes, im looking at you, al gore.

what's more, the whole global climate scare is tant amount to chicken little crying that the sky is falling. the said the same shit in the 70s about global cooling. and in 2000 they said our earth would be decimated by global warming ny 2010. we are still here.

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I thought we were attributing most of the previous warming and cooling cycles to animal production vs bedrock/sediment co2 absorption rates. Animals can put out asinine amounts of greenhouse gases through farts and burps, just not quite as much we do, so the process takes more time. Eventually an ice age happens, many animals die off, co2 is very slowly reabsorbed into earth.

 

[W1zzard]

Not so much cars

none of the educated people say that only cars are bad. i've seen the number +0.04°C from cars somewhere.

driving eco cars = feel good measure. they make you feel like you are doing something for the climate, so you can happily point your finger at others.

in 2000 they said our earth would be decimated by global warming ny 2010

not even al gore makes such claims ^^
while his movie is full of bs he packages it so nicely that he does not lie once in the whole movie, he's just very good at spinning information

 

[Easy Rhino]

I thought we were attributing most of the previous warming and cooling cycles to animal production vs bedrock/sediment co2 absorption rates. Animals can put out asinine amounts of greenhouse gases through farts and burps, just not quite as much we do, so the process takes more time. Eventually an ice age happens, many animals die off, co2 is very slowly reabsorbed into earth.

...and time marches on.

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

Id be more concerned when the year reaches 10000. Imagine the catastrophe in that one with all that infrastructure coding only being tested with 4 digit years XD.

 

[qubit]

Yup, I knew this whole global warming crap was a con.

The science of weather is so corrupted by big money and politics that I don't believe a word they say any more. The whole thing is a smokescreen to extract ever more taxes and introduce ever more draconian restrictions on daily life. And all in the name of the fucking 'green' movement.

 

[W1zzard]

Yup, I knew this whole global warming crap was a con.

The science of weather is so corrupted by big money and politics that I don't believe a word they say any more

ummm .. no ..

read: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf

really, please do. ipcc are the consensus of scientists without any political agenda

edit: this course has great lectures about climate change http://webcast.berkeley.edu/course_...d=2010-D-52040|2010-D-69342&semesterid=2010-D and lots of other info relevant to this forum (without any math or prerequisites)

 

[Easy Rhino]

the ipcc certainly DOES have a political agenda. in fact it was created for that very reason.

 

[W1zzard]

the ipcc certainly DOES have a political agenda. in fact it was created for that very reason.

http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtml

 

[Easy Rhino]

right, because they say they are free of political agenda makes them free of political agenda. come on...

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

Naturally there's going to be some fluff here and there, some misinformation for various motivations by various groups and individuals. This is true of just about anything that involves spending and multiple perspectives. To disregard it all because of a few people is idiotic. You're just grasping at straws because for whatever reason you don't want to believe it. Perhaps you don't like "dem liberal hippie douchebags" who support it for instance, so you can't bring yourself to ever share their views on something. As someone who dislikes most people I can understand that, but it's hardly reasonable to force yourself into ignorance because of it.

 

[qubit]

ummm .. no ..

read: http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf

really, please do. ipcc are the consensus of scientists without any political agenda

Ok, thanks for the link and I'll have a look at it.

Now, while I have to confess that I hit rant and tin foil hat mode for that post (sorry, it's my sense of humour, lol) I don't really trust what I read and hear any more, as politics and money do corrupt. Climate science per se is totally legitimate, but we're not seeing true science here.

Look, even here we have disagreement over this:

the ipcc certainly DOES have a political agenda. in fact it was created for that very reason.

See what I mean? I'm sure Easy has seen enough evidence to convince him of this.

It leaves one confused and not knowing what to believe, so I go with my gut instinct on this issue. I think that what's put out is partially correct (the weather is changing, no doubt about it) but it's heavily slanted to justify higher taxes, useless wind power, anti-car policies etc etc.

right, because they say they are free of political agenda makes them free of political agenda. come on...

YES!

Sorry, couldn't help it.

 

[Easy Rhino]

did you believe the people in the 70s who claimed we were headed for a global freeze that would devastate our planet? because these are essentially the same people now saying that global warming will happen and do the same thing...not to mention the past 10 years of warming has already been wiped out by the past two years of cooling...

 

[LAN_deRf_HA]

did you believe the people in the 70s who claimed we were headed for a global freeze that would devastate our planet? because these are essentially the same people now saying that global warming will happen and do the same thing...not to mention the past 10 years of warming has already been wiped out by the past two years of cooling...

What exactly are you saying? Why would 40 years of it not happening have any bearing on whether or not it happens? Planetary events are slow and human lives are short.