April 3, 200916 yr I do find it ironic that all these lefties/socialists/marxists/communists who are anti capitalism are using a method called protest that would not be allowed in the very type of states they wish Britain to be They want Britain to be some marxist / socialist state but do they really think that if Britain became one that these type of protests indeed any protest at all would be allowed in this country ? Would these demonstrations be allowed in China, Russia, North Korea, Cuba and so on ? would they f*** Define irony - Irony is a bunch of lefties using a method of putting their point across that would not be allowed if the type of government they want came into power :rolleyes: Erm.. ignorance like that is just as bad labeling all you 'righties' as racist :rolleyes: Anyway if only a Government that genuinely does swing towards the left (i.e. not pretend to be left like Labour) could come into power then they can't do worse then what we've had for the past 30 in this country I'm sure. :lol:
April 4, 200916 yr Well, the o-zone hole's still there but getting smaller. I think the fact we've all stopped using CFCs might have contributed to it not being gone by now? :P The difference is that this is one we can actually do something about...we DID something about CFCs and look! The o-zone layer is repairing itself! ....yeahsssss but methane is far worse an ozone destroying gas then the minute amounts of cfc's we used to put out, and thats on the increase.
April 4, 200916 yr utter bollox.... we are all doomed by 2015? :lol: utter tripe. they HAVNT been proven 'right upto now' at all... where is this next ice age we were promised in the 1970's? wheres the irreversable and damaging ozone hole gone too? the ozone was supposed to have disappeared by now! man, im old enough to have witnessed many many predictions of doom from 'scientific experts' in all fields of life.... and guess what... they calmly disappear as they become obvious that they were WRONG. what happened to the mad cow disease epidemic?... thats another prediction they got WRONG too... ....yeahsssss but methane is far worse an ozone destroying gas then the minute amounts of cfc's we used to put out, and thats on the increase. Where did you get that from? Methane is a haloalkane but i don't think it depletes Ozone. Only CFCs contribute to ozone depletion i think? Anyway Methane levels have stalled in the very short term: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44597000/gif/_44597184_methane_gr466.gif Edited April 4, 200916 yr by Harve
April 4, 200916 yr Where did you get that from? Methane is a haloalkane but i don't think it depletes Ozone. Only CFCs contribute to ozone depletion i think? Anyway Methane levels have stalled in the very short term: http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44597000/gif/_44597184_methane_gr466.gif i might have my wires crossed.... if its not cfc's then its co2 that methane is worse then.. i m racking my brains to nail the fact i saw/heard about methane.. summut to do with cows? producing ten times as much greenhouse gasses as a car?.. ill have to research if i can be arsed! / find time.
April 4, 200916 yr Yeah, you're right Cows are the biggest single producer of CO2. far more than cars. In fact, People produce more CO2 than cars. Something the average Green Hippie Vegan Hypocrite doesn't tell you. If they wanna save the planet they should either 1) Stop Breathing or 2) Start eating meat. Thats the theory my flatmates came up with :heehee:
April 4, 200916 yr i might have my wires crossed.... if its not cfc's then its co2 that methane is worse then.. i m racking my brains to nail the fact i saw/heard about methane.. summut to do with cows? producing ten times as much greenhouse gasses as a car?.. ill have to research if i can be arsed! / find time. Yeah methane furthers the greenhoues effect more than CO2, and that cows produce a lot of methane, as they have done for millions of years... I doubt that cow population is increasing dramatically, although the methane emissions per cow may be rising because Holstein cows, are far, far, FAR bigger than decades ago through selective breeding, it's quite astonishing, says my grandad :P
April 4, 200916 yr Yeah methane furthers the greenhoues effect more than CO2, and that cows produce a lot of methane, as they have done for millions of years... I doubt that cow population is increasing dramatically, although the methane emissions per cow may be rising because Holstein cows, are far, far, FAR bigger than decades ago through selective breeding, it's quite astonishing, says my grandad :P actually i believe that the worlds cattle population is at an all time high as the amazon is being felled for cattle production.. i saw a youtube vid on methane/cow$h!t giving facts about it...
April 4, 200916 yr Yeah, you're right Cows are the biggest single producer of CO2. far more than cars. In fact, People produce more CO2 than cars. Something the average Green Hippie Vegan Hypocrite doesn't tell you. If they wanna save the planet they should either 1) Stop Breathing or 2) Start eating meat. Thats the theory my flatmates came up with :heehee: I'm sorry but there are so many problems with this single post, I don't know where to begin. Cows emit CO2 by breathing, yes, but what you probably meant was that the methane produced from cows and their manure is of concern because methane remains in the atmosphere longer than CO2 (trapping heat and warming the temperature of the earth). However, it is false that methane emissions from cows is a worse problem than CO2 emissions from cars and other fossil fuel burning. In 2001 for the Kyoto Protocol, the UN calculated fossil fuel burning lead to an emission of 6.3 pg petagrams of carbon per year in the 1990s. Source: http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipc...tar/wg1/097.htm The same source found all methane emissions (natural and unnatural) to be about 0.6 pg of methane per year in the 90s. Animals ("ruminants") account for only 15%-19% of total methane emissions (most methane emission comes from plants, of course, especially rice harvesting). Source: http://www.grida.no/publications/other/ipc...tar/wg1/134.htm As for "people produce more CO2 than cars," that is of course when taken in the aggregate. It may be true that total human breath of CO2 exceeds total vehicular emission of CO2. But a human doesn't produce as much CO2 as a single vehicle with the engine running. And anyway, you can turn a car off, you can't tell someone to stop breathing. Further a vegan would hardly be wrong or a "hypocrite" to tell people to prevent climate change by giving up meat because there wouldn't be half as many cows in the world (and there weren't 100 years ago) if it weren't for live-stocks and the millions of people who eat beef every year (I am one of them... mmmm cheeseburgers :) ) Methane emission has actually declined in the US in the past decade because it is possible to contain and control. So why say "Cows cause climate change, so it doesn't exist." How about, "Cows cause climate change, so let's try to reduce methane emission and work to reduce CO2 emission through our own actions." There's room for improvement in both areas. Source: http://www.epa.gov/methane/sources.html None of the doubters here have cited any sources, it's all hearsay or sound bites from tabloids or something. The world scientific community is united and the field has said almost unanimously that climate change is happening, humans are playing a huge role in its exacerbation, and we must act to stop it. Try walking into the biology department of a respected university and making your claims - I guarantee you will be laughed out of the building.
April 5, 200916 yr None of the doubters here have cited any sources, it's all hearsay or sound bites from tabloids or something. The world scientific community is united and the field has said almost unanimously that climate change is happening, humans are playing a huge role in its exacerbation, and we must act to stop it. Try walking into the biology department of a respected university and making your claims - I guarantee you will be laughed out of the building. but the scientific community ISNT united on the reasons that the climate is warming up. several years ago dr david belamy hosted a programme illustrating that co2 in the atmosphere follows warming, it doesnt drive it. as this article illustrates, man can do bugger all about it, the climate has ALWAYS fluctuated long before mans indusrialisation and it has more to do with extra terrestrial scources, cosmic rays, then anything mankind can produce. http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Arti...bal_warming.pdf
April 5, 200916 yr but the scientific community ISNT united on the reasons that the climate is warming up. several years ago dr david belamy hosted a programme illustrating that co2 in the atmosphere follows warming, it doesnt drive it. as this article illustrates, man can do bugger all about it, the climate has ALWAYS fluctuated long before mans indusrialisation and it has more to do with extra terrestrial scources, cosmic rays, then anything mankind can produce. http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Arti...bal_warming.pdf You didn't watch An Inconvienient Truth last night then? :P (admittedly science has moved on since 2005 and things like ocean currents stopping and sea levels rising (a lot) are now almost impossible to happen in the next 100 years. But some things are right, he quoted Churchill and put it into a 21st century perspective and said that we are entering an age of consequence.) I will check out your source when i have more time, it's quite long :drama:. Out of interest, what does this David Belamy say how CO2 level increase follows warming? I guarantee that he doesn't DENY the existence of the greenhouse effect, at least not with proper evidence. I bet he also doesn't deny that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2. Even here you can see clearly see that over 1000 years the temperature has changed the most over the last few years: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Global_temperature_1ka.png Also, this is coming out of an ice age, apart from the last part, which is of course manmade, it sure doesn't look like it does it? That's because the temperature changes very slowly in comparison to now. The graph below shows very sudden increases all the time, but this is over 1000's of years, remember. Even an 70 degree angle of increase will be over 1000s of years. http://staffwww.fullcoll.edu/tmorris/an_inconvenient_truth/temp_co2_650000_future.jpg LOL! Firstly, the lowest dot represents the CO2 concentration NOW. This has already happened and denying it would be as crazy as denying the holocaust because, as i have said, has already happened. In memory of Scott :kink: Edited April 5, 200916 yr by Harve
April 5, 200916 yr I like that last graph (with Al Gore) because it shows how the world successfully lowered CO2 emissions in the 1970s during the oil shocks. It is possible to reverse the trend!
April 6, 200916 yr You didn't watch An Inconvienient Truth last night then? :P (admittedly science has moved on since 2005 and things like ocean currents stopping and sea levels rising (a lot) are now almost impossible to happen in the next 100 years. But some things are right, he quoted Churchill and put it into a 21st century perspective and said that we are entering an age of consequence.) I will check out your source when i have more time, it's quite long :drama:. Out of interest, what does this David Belamy say how CO2 level increase follows warming? I guarantee that he doesn't DENY the existence of the greenhouse effect, at least not with proper evidence. I bet he also doesn't deny that humans are emitting large amounts of CO2. Even here you can see clearly see that over 1000 years the temperature has changed the most over the last few years: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Global_temperature_1ka.png Also, this is coming out of an ice age, apart from the last part, which is of course manmade, it sure doesn't look like it does it? That's because the temperature changes very slowly in comparison to now. The graph below shows very sudden increases all the time, but this is over 1000's of years, remember. Even an 70 degree angle of increase will be over 1000s of years. http://staffwww.fullcoll.edu/tmorris/an_inconvenient_truth/temp_co2_650000_future.jpg LOL! Firstly, the lowest dot represents the CO2 concentration NOW. This has already happened and denying it would be as crazy as denying the holocaust because, as i have said, has already happened. In memory of Scott :kink: the trouble is with 'the inconveiniant truth' is that the doom mongers only chose which statistics to pick rather then the whole picture. dr david bellamy is a well respected conservationist and was a regular on tv in the 70's 80's promoting conservation issues. there was a counter programme a couple of years ago, 'the great green lie' or something like that. on this show they showed the scientists who had evidence to counter the doom mongers claims. eg, the doom mongers dont count the fact that the worlds oceans can absorb co2 through algal blooms when co2 increases in the atmosphere. core samples of sediments and ice cores when matched up show that co2 FOLLOWS warming, it doesnt create it! and the greatest times of global warming is directly linked to cosmic rays from the sun... just up there is the scource of all our life support systems, all our heat and light comes from that nuclear furnace, just 1 slight blip in its combustion can cause devistating effects on earth.
April 6, 200916 yr oh and ps..... that graph aint right, we KNOW that in roman times the temp here was 2c HIGHER then now, it was still 1c higher in edward 1st reign (c1300) then there was the mini ice age c1400-c1850 .... the REAL inconveiniant truth is that the planets atmosphere has ALWAYS fluctuated, and we have little clue as to how and when outside scources effect it, let alone the real effect the seas have.
April 6, 200916 yr Our atmosphere is about as predictable as a volcano. The CFC's and Ozone hole was mans fault, but thats on its way to fixing itself.
April 6, 200916 yr Global Warming is inevitable, the Sun will always get hotter, and at the result of that the ice caps will obviously melt. Obviously, things like CO2 + that doesn't help, but there are many other factors involved which have nothing to do with man.
April 6, 200916 yr Author Yeah, you're right Cows are the biggest single producer of CO2. far more than cars. In fact, People produce more CO2 than cars. Something the average Green Hippie Vegan Hypocrite doesn't tell you. If they wanna save the planet they should either 1) Stop Breathing or 2) Start eating meat. Thats the theory my flatmates came up with :heehee: But who's breeding these vast amounts of cows....? The MEAT industry, the likes of McDonalds, Burger King, etc...... :lol: :lol: If we all became vegetarians, no demand for meat, no demand for meat, no reason to breed millions of cows...... Your argument can easily be inverted mate..... Whether you choose to believe in climate change or not, the facts are, the planet is STILL adversely affected by man and the choices man makes in so many other ways.... The most obvious one being the fact that we are totally over-populating the planet as a species and as a result are affecting the balance of nature (other species only take what they actually need, whereas we take far more than we require to survive), the balance of what resources are available and we have been pushing other species out (by making them extinct) which are/were actually pretty damn VITAL to to ecosphere.... eg, we made wolves extinct in UK and now we have problems with having to control other species whose populations would have been kept in check by these vital predators in the food chain.... No one is keeping OUR numbers in check, and if you ask me, it's man who is the biggest problem on the planet because of how we drain the Earth's resources, overpopulate and totally destroy the balance of nature..... We are a virus slowly killing our host body..... I dont need some bloody "experts" to tell me what is blatantly obvious - MAN is the biggest problem, and the greatest threat to the Earth....
April 6, 200916 yr Our atmosphere is about as predictable as a volcano. The CFC's and Ozone hole was mans fault, but thats on its way to fixing itself. not so, the ozone hole has varied for many years and long before man even knew of its existance But who's breeding these vast amounts of cows....? The MEAT industry, the likes of McDonalds, Burger King, etc...... :lol: :lol: If we all became vegetarians, no demand for meat, no demand for meat, no reason to breed millions of cows...... Your argument can easily be inverted mate..... Whether you choose to believe in climate change or not, the facts are, the planet is STILL adversely affected by man and the choices man makes in so many other ways.... The most obvious one being the fact that we are totally over-populating the planet as a species and as a result are affecting the balance of nature (other species only take what they actually need, whereas we take far more than we require to survive), the balance of what resources are available and we have been pushing other species out (by making them extinct) which are/were actually pretty damn VITAL to to ecosphere.... eg, we made wolves extinct in UK and now we have problems with having to control other species whose populations would have been kept in check by these vital predators in the food chain.... No one is keeping OUR numbers in check, and if you ask me, it's man who is the biggest problem on the planet because of how we drain the Earth's resources, overpopulate and totally destroy the balance of nature..... We are a virus slowly killing our host body..... I dont need some bloody "experts" to tell me what is blatantly obvious - MAN is the biggest problem, and the greatest threat to the Earth.... cant disagree with your sentiments there m8.... mmgw or not, we ought to respect 'our mother' much more then we do.
April 6, 200916 yr :mellow: I can't believe how many people are denying global warming. the trouble is with 'the inconveiniant truth' is that the doom mongers only chose which statistics to pick rather then the whole picture. dr david bellamy is a well respected conservationist and was a regular on tv in the 70's 80's promoting conservation issues. there was a counter programme a couple of years ago, 'the great green lie' or something like that. on this show they showed the scientists who had evidence to counter the doom mongers claims. eg, the doom mongers dont count the fact that the worlds oceans can absorb co2 through algal blooms when co2 increases in the atmosphere. core samples of sediments and ice cores when matched up show that co2 FOLLOWS warming, it doesnt create it! and the greatest times of global warming is directly linked to cosmic rays from the sun... just up there is the scource of all our life support systems, all our heat and light comes from that nuclear furnace, just 1 slight blip in its combustion can cause devistating effects on earth. But the solar variation cycle is over a decade, whilst global warming is , and varies by a less than 0.1%, so it isn't going to have much effect at all. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm...-cycle-data.png Admittedly, there is some correlation between solar variation and temperature, but it does seem that CO2 is having a greater effect yes? http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7...sunspot-co2.svg Sorry the forum is being retarded and won't let me display the image "You are not allowed to use that image extension on this board. A valid format is: http://www.domain.com/picture.gif, an invalid format is: http://www.domain.com/picture.one.gif" :huh: all the extensions have one dot after the final slash. :unsure: oh and ps..... that graph aint right, we KNOW that in roman times the temp here was 2c HIGHER then now, it was still 1c higher in edward 1st reign (c1300) then there was the mini ice age c1400-c1850 .... the REAL inconveiniant truth is that the planets atmosphere has ALWAYS fluctuated, and we have little clue as to how and when outside scources effect it, let alone the real effect the seas have. Oh it certainly is. The growing of grapes in Newcastle etc. is through short term variation, admittedly what we are going through is very much short term change but with long term consequences. And even if in Roman times temperatures were 2c higher (were they, how would they record that? Where did you get that info from? :blink:), that would not show up on the graph properly because the timescales are too big, hence the blue line shows that the temperature last increased a lot between 20,000 and 30,000 years ago, and the recent warming is over just 150 years and not enough to even register on the graph. He was obviously making a point with the CO2 which is why it is an almost vertical line, it actually shouldn't even be there yet. Global Warming is inevitable, the Sun will always get hotter, and at the result of that the ice caps will obviously melt. Obviously, things like CO2 + that doesn't help, but there are many other factors involved which have nothing to do with man. ....which are less significant than manmade global warming. But who's breeding these vast amounts of cows....? The MEAT industry, the likes of McDonalds, Burger King, etc...... :lol: :lol: If we all became vegetarians, no demand for meat, no demand for meat, no reason to breed millions of cows...... Your argument can easily be inverted mate..... Whether you choose to believe in climate change or not, the facts are, the planet is STILL adversely affected by man and the choices man makes in so many other ways.... The most obvious one being the fact that we are totally over-populating the planet as a species and as a result are affecting the balance of nature (other species only take what they actually need, whereas we take far more than we require to survive), the balance of what resources are available and we have been pushing other species out (by making them extinct) which are/were actually pretty damn VITAL to to ecosphere.... eg, we made wolves extinct in UK and now we have problems with having to control other species whose populations would have been kept in check by these vital predators in the food chain.... No one is keeping OUR numbers in check, and if you ask me, it's man who is the biggest problem on the planet because of how we drain the Earth's resources, overpopulate and totally destroy the balance of nature..... We are a virus slowly killing our host body..... I dont need some bloody "experts" to tell me what is blatantly obvious - MAN is the biggest problem, and the greatest threat to the Earth.... I think that the earth will recover relatively shortly, but human's will not :P. Not trying to sound too dramatic or anything :P, but at the end of the day it is ultimately US we are putting in danger. The earth has been through worse -_-
April 6, 200916 yr Author I think that the earth will recover relatively shortly, but human's will not :P. Not trying to sound too dramatic or anything :P, but at the end of the day it is ultimately US we are putting in danger. The earth has been through worse -_- well, obviously we will be putting ourselves in danger if we use up all the resources that we have come to rely upon.... Oil and gas will simply NOT last forever, certainly not at the excessive rates of consumption; so alternatives need to be found, it's imperitive, it's also imperitive that these alternative sources are also sustainable, people dismiss wind power or solar, but really, what other options are there....? Nuclear power...? Far too dangerous at this point in our development, and no one has effectively come up with a way to dispose of radioactive waste.... I think in another few hundred years we could possibly find a way to deal with nuclear waste and use nuclear power more safely, but this is far in our future.... People criticise the environmentalists, but really, they, and the likes of Al Gore, are really just about the only ones actually asking the right questions, the way our world leaders seem to be "dealing" with this very real crisis is to bury their heads in the sand and pretend the problem doesn't exist.... Which is simply NO kind of way to deal with things... These "summits" just dont seem to actually result in anything.....
Create an account or sign in to comment