new global warming thread, may be slightly different from other threads.

Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by gamelord, Jul 5, 2018.

  1. gamelord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    517
    My dad is a republican, he says global warming is part of an agenda, to pass laws to over-regulate businesses.

    Personally, I just want this global warming to stop. I am the rational middle grounds. I briefly recall Trump punishing people for using clean energy, this is wrong and has to stop.

    I don't care if it's an agenda. Just end this friggin hell.

    My dad's argument is that global warming may be real, but it may not neccesarily be made by man, it may just be naturally part of the earth's cycles.

    My question is this: If humanity suddenly stopped all pollution, would that actually fix global warming? Or is the damage permanent and no way to fix?

    So my solution is this. I want a planet where its not too hot, not too cold. I hate winter and I hate summer. Make it happen. Dont just end global warming but...completely turn this planet into a utopia. What are your views on weather control, ie. human controlled weather? I know My Little Pony is a fictional show but in the show it is the ponies who control the weather, likewise I believe humans can, philosophically speaking, be responsible enough to handle the power of weather on their own, provided persons such as Trump, or corrupt aristocracies et al are not at the wheel.

    If this thread is too similar to another I don't mind if you delete it, but delete it soon before there are too many replies.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,916
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. gamelord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    517
    Im inclined to doubt they could measure the carbon density from 400,000 years ago.

    In any case, the question is not whether man is responsible, but that, the warming is here now, and how do we fix it, using some kind of controlled weather technology.

    Our focus should be on, the oil cartels, and corrupt adminstrations, etc. Advisable is to give them some alternative fuel source that they can profit from, so that they do not begin putting the war on inventors of clean energy. this is provided of course that they are after the money, and not simply cultish mad men who want the sun to burn the world. There is a possibility, that they are simply cultish mad men, who want us all to die.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,916
    Yes, ice cores are still not like satellite information today.
     
    gamelord likes this.
  8. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,316
    And your doubts become evidence in your mind, by the magic of incredulity.
    You can check their methods, you know (there are three or four independent ones, all of which give similar, overlapping, and mutually supportive estimates). That's the thing about science - the methods and reasoning are published right alongside the findings.
    You can't fix it without first preventing its exacerbation - which requires identifying the responsible agents, and stopping them from continuing to make things worse.
    Nobody knows how to control the weather. Not gonna happen.
     
  9. gamelord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    517
    I told u what the responsible agents are: cartels, oilmen, and the majority of politicians who support them, priests, and the sheeple of the "matrix" who have no clue.
    in terms of the pyramid of power, it starts with cartels, oilmen, politicians, priests, sheeple, in that order.

    Im almost sure certain individuals know how to control the weather but for obvious reasons wish to keep that information unknown.

    Far as the 400,000 thing, I don't believe my doubts are evidence. I dont have evidence of anything, maybe it did, maybe it didnt.
    In any case despite how mathematically sound you think your theories are, you are living in a too small of a timespan set to verify its prediction capabilities on such a massive scale. In essence you are making an "educated guess."
     
  10. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,316
    In addition to your doubts becoming evidence for you, your certainties likewise become aspects of the real world - you reason from them, as if you had observed rather than created them.
    You offer them as evidence for your arguments. You doubt such and such, therefore you believe this other, is a common pattern in your posting.
    Like this:
    Other people have evidence from observation, and reason from it. You have doubts, and reason from them.
    The theories involved are not mathematical.

    Also, the scale of prediction that matters here, regarding AGW, is maybe a couple of hundred years.
    And the margin of error is very wide, without disturbing the basic nature of the predictions. In fact, the width of the error range is something you might want to check - because the possibilities it includes are kind of dramatic, and status quo is not one of them. One probably (at the one in a million level) cannot rapidly double the atmospheric CO2 concentration without rapidly and strongly affecting the climate, ocean chemistry, etc.
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2018
  11. gamelord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    517
    Noone's "observed" the weather 400,000 years ago.

    And FYI I doubt weather machines are real, maybe they are not real, because you know, I have never observed one for sure.

    Both of these ideas are altogether irrelevant: if weather machines are not real then they should be made real. If the weather was global warming 400,000 years ago, so be it, we still need to end global warming for the simple fact it is uncomfortable. If the weather was not global warming 400,000 years ago, so be it, still need to end global warming now.
     
  12. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,316
    They have observed the composition of the atmosphere and some proxies of the ocean, and various effects of climate regimes on the ocean and the land.
    Sounds great. Meanwhile, in your lifetime, things that are now possible need doing.
    AGW is unique - the closest parallel events of the past were large meteor strikes, perhaps some stages of enormous volcanism as happened two or three times over the past billions of years.
    AGW cannot be "ended" by screwing around with the weather.
     
  13. gamelord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    517
    But can global warming simply be ended by stopping carbon emissions? Will the Ozone heal itself naturally?

    Things that are now possible need doing? What exactly do you propose then?
     
  14. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,632
    No to the first question. If we stopped pouring carbon into the atmosphere right now (highly unlikely), what we've added since the 19th century isn't going anywhere, it's still warming the planet (the oceans and the atmosphere), so the melting will continue, storms will have more energy and so on.

    The added carbon has an effect on climate that plays out over centuries, possibly thousands of years (google the geological Carbon Cycle).

    There isn't any quick fix we know about, and it was always improbable that we would stop burning fossil fuels, because they're just too important to us. Besides, nowhere near enough of us believe (or want to believe) there's any kind of problem, now or 100 years from now.
     
  15. gamelord Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    517
    Even as a child I wanted to stop global warming. As an adult I thought it would be over by now.

    I dont cry much but I am about to cry right now. This is humanities last and final desperate stand. I'm putting my foot down and we need to save the planet. Something must be done about this, we need a hero to end these carbon emissions and save the planet. This is a global emergency.
     
  16. arfa brane call me arf Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,632
    Without wanting to appear insensitive, like the song says:

    Cryin' won't help ya, cryin' won't do ya no good.
    Said cryin' won't help ya, cryin' won't do ya no good.
    When the levee breaks, Mama you got to move.
    Oh well, oh well . . .
     
  17. TheFrogger Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    735
    ...is It possible for water to be made more dense so it does not evaporate? In this way there could be a lake feeding a waterfall that flows into a stream, that in turn feeds the lake. In this way it could be possible for the same droplet of water to simply recycle. Of course during its' stream journey, that would be the end of its' downwards travels.
     
  18. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,576
    Have you ever heard of the water cycle?
     
  19. TheFrogger Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    735
    ...but what of, "heavy water?"
     
  20. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,576
    Heavy water is more dense because it's made of hydrogen with a heavy nucleus - i.e. extra neutrons. It's very rare.
     

Share This Page