Don't care, but go nuclear if we must.

We gotta do something. Like, now.

Pumping CFC's and Greenhouse Gases into the air without regard CANNOT be good for the environment, however I seriously doubt that climate alterations are due to so-called "Global Warming".

Climate change is inevitable.

Man-made climate change is bullshit.

Also notice that they stopped calling it "global warming", mostly because shit started getting colder.

climate change = false

bullshit made up by liberal media and liberal intelligentsia to promote their liberal agendas

Don't really believe that we are in any danger.
I don't like the leftish solutions to this "problem."

Likely we have been in a warming trend, at least up until the last few years. Data I see on the last few years conflicts.

Not convinced it is anthropogenic: it's a system the changes and always has been.

Changes projected through this century, by the more credible of those who think AGW is happening, seem to be of tolerable magnitude, and coping with them would be cheaper than stupid panicky over-reactions like killing all the industries and living in trees and eating raw squirrels.

Nobody that I know of has ever made a case that current conditions are somehow optimal and should be where we try and hold things, or is it ten years ago, or a century ago -- in any case, we can't make a system that changes all the fucking time stop changing.

Anti-warmingests on the right are unpleasant company. Warmists on the left are even less fun to be around, plus extra hypocrisy from the leadership.

The recent revelations about attempts to suppress dissenting opinion in order to make consensus seem stronger are VERY troubling.

That's my thinking, anyway...

>>86851
>>86778
>>86763
>>86754

Smart people here.

Global warming is not an issue. It's a climate change that we need to worry about. We see climate changes 4 times a year with the seasons then we see it on a larger scale when we see ice ages. It is inevitable and part of our life on earth. Plus, who cares. I'm sure man is perfectly capable of surviving an ice age.

>>86917
LOL

Knowing that man is able to control the climate fills me with great pride. Fuck you, God.

>>87030
>Global warming is not an issue. It's a climate change that we need to worry about.
Yes, thank you, global warming is not universal for every part of the planet. For example, some models predict the UK getting colder thanks to a weakening gulf stream.

Science is science, my friends. CO2 absorbs in the IR spectrum which is practically the only way this blue ball, as a system, loses energy. CO2 levels are rising. Greenhouse effect is a mathematical certainty.

introducing large ammounts of CO2 into the atmosphere does not have a warming effect. It will, however, increase agricultural yields and assist reforestation. after a few decades or centuries, all the artificially introduced co2 in the atmosphere will have dissolved in the oceans or be absorbed by plant life.
tl;dr: co2 makes plants happy

Look, parse it anyway you want, there's been a global warming trend since we've had records. This decade has been the warmest, with 2009 tied with 2005 for the hottest.

I haven't done or seen any of the studies, but I have seen the data that shows that Earth is warming. It's available at NASA.

Now, even if we weren't warming, I'm worried about the increase of carbon in the atmosphere. Guess what, the sea is going to absorb that shit, and correct me if I'm wrong chemfags, but that's going to lead to an increase of carbonic acid in the oceans.

Many animals that are essential to the ecosystem in the ocean are rather sensitive to increases in acidity.

And also to the guy who said, humanity will survive, it, I just have to say, no fucking shit. But at what technological and cultural level. And how many?

>>86861
>>86763
Ok well I hate to be offensive but your views are bullshit. The reason that climate change is so serious is because #1 it will completely shift the balance of virtually all ecosystems on earth and #2 that it IS anthropogenic (beyond 95% chance, documented) and that there ARE methods using current technology available to stop it.

Using your own logic to make a decision about climate change is retarded because all of the data says otherwise.

inb4 all climate scientists fake data

>>87105

That second paragraph should be, "I haven't seen the data on the correlation of CO2 and temperature rise."

>>87088
You get my /an/ *headdesk* for not having a fucking clue.
10/10 if you were trolling.
Congratulations.

Climate change is very real. Apply thermodynamics to Earth-system.

/sci/, you are supposed to be the smart ones. Do your own research, use your own numbers. If you're not willing to believe the alertists, then don't believe the refuters either. Do the math yourself. Relatively simple applications of simple thermo.

>>87134

holy shit that gif was awesome.

>>87149

In addition to that, people need to learn some basic statistics.

climate fluctuation has always happened and always will, the media is making this a WAY bigger deal than it is. that being said, we are having an effect on it and i think we should go nuclear and move towards electric cars. will global warming kill off our species and destroy the planet? no. is it bad and should we try and cut back on our contribution to it? yes

>>87117 Warmists on the left are even less fun to be around...

SeewhutImean?

>>87088
This is completely incorrect; learn to biology. In C3 plants CO2 concentration is already saturated in the atmosphere, and in C4 plants they are already at or nearing saturation levels as well. This means that additional warming will not cause any increase in production of food. However, the CO2 will cause more pest damage to crops, if that is somehow a good thing. Crop yields will see a net negative effect.

>>87088
Carbonate Ion concentraiton will decrease, and pH will increase with the increase of CO2 being sequestered into the oceans. This will be and is catastrophics for coral reefs. really depressing stuff.

>>87197

I thought that's what would happen with the increase of CO2, I didn't know that info about plants. What's the difference between C3 and C4?

>>87149 Relatively simple

Relatively simple attempts to understand hugely complex systems seem like... you know... bad.

>>87197
I like you.
You read your ecology book.

>>87218

not that poster, but oil, natural gas, coal etc. are basically stored solar energy. they are potential energy in their current state.

when you burn them, you release that potential energy and increase the energy of the system. so, you have more energy in the system than you would have normally. and a lot of this energy bleeds off as heat.

>>87214
Highlights (without going in depth):
***C3 aren't as water efficient as C4 which aren't as water efficient as CAM.
***The trade off is that CAM can't uptake CO2 during the day.

...actually, this would take a while. Use the wiki.

>>87083

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/12532

>>87219
Thanks. Also another thing; I hate the fact that people are allowed to have an "opinion" on scientific data. WHATS UR ORPINON ON EVULUSHOON? WHATS UR OPINUN ON GLOBAL WARMIN? The data and processes speak for themselves; any controversy is merely politicized. Also I am a researcher at a bioscience institute and get to work with plant biologists and climate scientists on a regular basis. shit is so science.

>>87105

Woops, meant to reply to

>>87287

>>87295 I hate the fact that people are allowed to have an "opinion" on scientific data.

If you mean that literally, you are one scary motherfucker.

From everything I've read and researched I can tell there is a need to limit or even stop excessive use of fossil fuels/oil/gas/etc.

What many good but ignorant people do not realize is the scam behind "Global Warming".
No one remembers "Global Cooling" in the 60s and 70s. Every couple generations a new scare is pushed on the public ultimately by media and public figure heads. You've got to look at this new data with skeptisism. Ever since 'An Inconvinent Truth' and all the doomsday movies like 'A Day After Tomorrow' were released a lot of people jumped on the Al Gore train. Maybe everyone here wasn't influenced by the different media forms of propaganda but the general public was. A lot of people don't have time to check both sides of the climate argument so they take what's easily available.
So ask why are these certain messages relayed to the public in such a manor. Theres big buisness in "saving the earth".

Now I'm not saying climate change and slight man-made warming aren't real, but it all needs to be examined with skeptisism. The Earth goes through natural cycles. (We've actually been cooling for a few hundred years) The slight warming could be caused by the 200 years of burning fossil fuels. Do we need to find alternatives and new solutions to clean energy? YES, but I think most would be shocked to know that the technology for electric cars was around in the 80s but it was supported by big industry! The U.S. government set up major oil lines in the middle east since the U.S. invasion of Iraq! but the message about stop using these resources is being pushed. What's really going on? Who's making the money?

this global warming bullshit is hubris, we dont have the power to change the global climate, even if we wanted to.

>>87328
Well I of course don't mean like "if you dont think x, i will not talk to you" but for applications like climate modelling and evolutionary processes, to me it is akin to people not believing in a round earth or wireless telephones. Sorry for strong words but anything about climate change and my mind goes ziiiipzipzip

Have you heard some of the "solutions" for climate change.

There has been talk about sending millions of tiny mirrors into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight into space.

Keep in mind that this is a "solution" to a problem that arose from a fairly recent theory that hasn't been proven beyond reasonable doubt, whose most convincing arguments come from mathematical projections, which rely on variables.

Also keep in mind that WE input those variables, and that we only no a tiny fraction of the variables that dictate global climate.

BTW: Talk about hydrogen cars being "green" is retarded.

We use more electricity (coming mainly from coal) to produce hydrogen in a useable from, than the energy hydrogen releases.

>>87287

I prefer scientific data:
CO2 levels:
http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/

An explanation of the absorption spectra I was talking about:
http://chriscolose.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/physics-of-the-greenhouse-effect-pt-1/

"Tell a lie long and loud enough, the people will believe it"
~Adolf Hitler

well i believe that global warming is nothing more than nature at work, the worlds done it more than once, its been around for billions of years, so its not hard to imagine that happening
and they say the major danger is the polar ice caps melting, well my teacher was jsut talking about that, and he was saying how the condensed ice caps actually push the water down, and if it melts, then the oceanic water levels would actually drop
climate change = YES!

>>87413
a blog with some nice pictures isnt scientific proof.

>>87488
It's the math and physics that I was getting at, but if you want to stare, dazed and confused, at the pictures, be my guest.

>>87480

That's a common argument I keep seeing: "the climate has changed before and it's been worse."

Well no shit. Here's your fucking banana sticker. The world's existed without humanity and it will exist without us again, but I'd like to delay that time as long as possible.

And what has people most concerned is not the actual climate change, but the rate of change. It's changing at a pace that's far too fast for the environment to adapt to. Whether it's a man-made warming or not, this is an issue that should genuinely worry people.

>>87394

Carbon tax is close to being essentially mandatory in UN countries.

Which grants a HUGE favour to "alternative energy" sources, which are also being endorsed by the government.

And an interesting thing to know is that Al Gore owns a huge amount of stock in "green" businesses. He also was one of the people who set up the idea for a carbon tax.

>>87408
nigga whut?

do you have any idea how many of these we have?

Do you have any idea how much it would fuck up the climate if we were to use all of them? or even half?

Krakatoa's 1883 eruption changed the global climate for years. It was 300 megatons.

that's 3 Tsar Bomba at maximum output.

a mere 20 Bravo test, like the Bikini Atoll. There are 12 warheads on a single MIRV. We have thousands.

add centuries of radiation, levelling mountains which changes topography.

yeah. If we wanted to, we could do so on purpose. There wouldn't be a single glacier left on the planet.

We can do so on accident to, merely by disregarding other consequences.

>>87412
Yes, there are many interesting ideas around. Here is some trivia; If i remember correctly from a popular science i recently read, something like 40% of the warming that co2 would cause is mitigated by sulfur emissions from the shipping industry. So in that effect pollution is actually doing us a favor!

>>87439
See Global Cooling

>>87480
good trolling 8/10

Humans are significantly altering the global climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC assessments have been too conservative in recognizing the importance of these human climate forcings as they alter regional and global climate. These assessments have also not communicated the inability of the models to accurately forecast the spread of possibilities of future climate. The forecasts, therefore, do not provide any skill in quantifying the impact of different mitigation strategies on the actual climate response
that would occur.

>>87584
So you think, because he believes climate change is a problem and that these are going to be essential changes, he should instead only buy stock in coal mines?

he's putting his money where his mouth is. and he doesn't even GET that money. it's for a charitable trust.

god, you're a retard.

>>87584

Al Gore is basically a cheerleader. I don't know why people keep trotting him out, because he has fuck all to do with the actual science of global warming. The publicity yes, the science no.

And yes, I've read the same info, that he's into those companies. It kind of pisses me off, because it gives asshats like you a way to denigrate the science without actually doing science.

>>87394 No one remembers "Global Cooling" in the 60s and 70s.

Some of us do.

Also, notice he spadework being done to switch over to Global Cooling again if recent cooling trends continue:
Example: http://www.abc15.com/content/news/blogs/story/Global-Cooling-Some-say-were-heading-for-an-ice/WkV_tg
P5OkGGwPin6C42XQ.cspx

There are many good and honest and sincere people working on Global Warming, some posting in this thread, and I exclude them from the following...

There are some cynical political types who make a fuckton of money out of Global Warming, and who will have to have another crisis standing by if public opinion continues t turn away from AGW (deservedly or not) -- if they do not, they'll lose too much money and power.

>>87599
We'd have MORE fucking glaciers than we know what to do with. Nuclear Winter ring a bell?

>>87624
>Humans are significantly altering the global climate, but in a variety of diverse ways beyond the radiative effect of carbon dioxide. The IPCC assessments have been too conservative in recognizing the importance of these human climate forcings as they alter regional and global climate. These assessments have also not communicated the inability of the models to accurately forecast the spread of possibilities of future climate. The forecasts, therefore, do not provide any skill in quantifying the impact of different mitigation strategies on the actual climate response
that would occur.

>>87584
Is the carbon emission tax only for the large fossil-fuel burning energy, manufacturing, etc. plants/corporations?
Because that itself would be a good way to generate income for "green" technology.
I remember when the carbon tax was first proposed and it got a lot of people worried that heavier taxes were going to be imposed on the small buisnesses and middle-class working familes. Which is a completely legitimate reason to get upset or against this tax.

>>87568

>It's changing at a pace that's far too fast for the environment to adapt to

One day, a long long time ago, a giant rock hit Earth, wiping out the predominant life form at the time, seriously altering the composition of the atmosphere, as well as screwing with the climate fore a long long time after that.

The environment doesn't "adapt" to the factors that effect it; the environment is determined by those factors.

Makes sunsets more beautiful.

>>87696
My nerd recall is weak. Which show made a joke about balancing global warming with nuclear winter. Was it Futurama?

ITT: everybody neglects the fact that the vast majority of the Greenhouse Effect is caused by water vapor

>>87649
Man but see I have read an interesting argument to use evil corporations to our advantage. Climate change will be dealt with on a significant level once a big multinational sees it more profitable to stop climate change rather than let it progress. Then natural competition would cause others to follow, etc. All of these targets by governments, ex 30% by 2050 and whathaveyou will not do jack shit in the long run.

>>87790

and you don't think that asteroid would have an impact on our current way of life? i'm not debating whether or not the earth will be fine eventually, whatever humans do, because it will. i care about what happens in the next several decades and centuries.

>>87806
True (proven empirically in the days after 9/11).

>This is because it absorbs in the IR.

...Which is the most important fact everyone should get out of this thread.

>>87633
Not the guy you cited, but...

I do think that it was legitimate to wonder if the scientists employed by tobacco companies were objective, given the industry that paid them.

Given Al Gore's (politician, not saint) facility with the lie, it is reasonable to question his objectivity given how much money he makes from the industry he's creating through promoting this crisis.

>>87295
To be fair, data can be poorly developed and/or ambiguous.

>>87797
I seem to recall that this was so...

>>87773
Your families and small businesses presumably use energy and buy goods from these big energy/manufacturing companies, so the'll pay the tax anyway.

>>87892

it's why experiments have to be reproducible. scientist A comes up with some data that confirms his theory. scientist B and scientist C check it out, oops, turns out that scientist A had anomalous data or he only accounted for a slice of the picture and his theory turns out to be wrong, because scientist B and C repeated his experiment.

if you're going to browse a /sci/ board, you should have at least a cursory knowledge of the scientific method and how it's currently practiced.

I guess I'm concerned, though I believe this climate change was going to happen with or without the involvement of humans

>>87773

The main problem with something like a carbon tax is that it essentially fucks over one of the biggest industries on the planet.

Imagine if the government proposed a huge tax on cell phones for fear that they cause brain tumors, and decided to give out a shit ton of grants/privileges to businesses that produce walkie-talkies.

Shit would indeed ensue.

>>87899

so, your point has validity if you're referring to one study, but in those cases you have numerous data points over numerous years, that all corroborate the same thing

>>87930
>eliminates 86% of /sci/ population

>>87940
>derp

After looking into the issue i see that Anthropgentic Climate Change caused by increased CO2 from fossil fuels is happening and althought tree hugging hippes make it out to be bigger than it is if we dont start looking for a solution the consequences could be tremendous for me the solution is simple go to alternate sources of energy like solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal or nuclear. CO2 does absorb the IR radiation.

>>87845
Then relax, Changes projected on that time scale are not catastrophic.

Example: Se level to rise on the order of 12-18 inches by end of century. Horrors, alarums and excursions, right? Now look back over the news stories of the last century. Look for all the trouble caused by the sea rising by the same general amount in that time.

It was not even noticed outside of a few oceanographers who liked measuring sea levels.

>>87969
second to last sentence in
>>86861

>>88009

sea level rises aren't my primary concern, it's the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. this leads to an increase in oceanic acidity. this leads to the death of important oceanic ecosystems.

>>87930
I know all that, but I'm saying that it's not impossible for mixed or largely inconclusive results to exist.

Problem with Climate Change is it has been to politicized by the media meaning that people think their opinion is important in scientific research as opposed to people looking at the overwhelming evidence for Anthropogenic Global Warming they listen to Lord Mouncton and the Oregon institute because it gives them the easy escape from a real issue.

>>87696
the post is a response to "global warming is just hubris. Humans are incapable of changing the climate."

if we can cause a nuclear winter, we can change the fucking climate.

and I don't know how much it will be nuclear winter if we focus on fucking vaporizing sea ice. Might just raise ocean levels. hard to say without doing an all out environmental impact study.

>>88051

yes that is troubling, but the data, from NASA to NOAA all point to the same thing. Increases in temperature over the last 120-150 years. It would probably be longer ago than that, but there weren't accurate measurements before then.

If you also check out the Vostok ice core, you'll see how well temperature correlates with levels of CO2.

>>88111

yes, that happens, but that isn't the case here.

>>88176
Yep, I'm just playing devil's advocate. The scientific consensus is in favor of anthropogenic climate change. To what degree we've changed it is still in dispute.

>>88009
>>88114
Winner

>>88117
If that is true, that does not mean that the previous rates and amounts of sea level rise were not acceptable. It is akin to having a cup that is 75% filled by last century, witha 25% increase from previous, but if that same filling happened this century, the cup would be at capacity and overflow. This may be evil but i think that a whole city has to be wiped out or put permanently underwater before people start to salvage what is left of ecosystem balance.
We can also change climate by sitting around burning shit.

Personally I don't believe in man made climate change, but I back it up all the same.

Despite the fact that I think it is not true, I believe we should pretend it is true.

-Green Jobs
-Reduces dependence on oil
-Hopefully all the hippies and fearmongers will get off and support Nuclear power
-Positive step forward for globalization and global governance ( Creating a global carbon tax, and or introducing a world moderator to supervise and regulate the way humans live life on earth.)

It's real. Only the USA says it's false, because it's the most polluting country in the world so they have to brainwash their people to keep the economy going.

A natural cycle, but made much worse by man.

Our current population is unsustainable. Read The World Without Us.

>>88286

China pollutes more than the US.

>>88286
Actually China is. It surpassed the US this last year I believe.

>>88299
Maybe with current technology. We've increased the maximum capacity with new developments before. We can do it again. If we manage not to blow ourselves up, we'll keep on doing it as long as we have the science, brilliance, and the will to live.

>>88285


/thread

>>88339
If the developing world actually develops then birth rates will even out. Most post industrial nations have birth to death rations pretty damn near equal to one.

>>88301
>>88300
Why does that matter at all? It only gives the US a finger to point at.

>>88285
Fair enough, even though it is anthropogenic.

One of the KEY FACTORS in scientists declaring global warming manmade "beyond a reasonable doubt" (>95% confidence) is that current climate modelling falls apart when you do not include or consider particulate emissions that are given off by factories and shit over land. Other models without these considerations show various inaccuracies such as the oceans being warmer than land (water is cooler because of the large specific heat), and other shit that I would have to stay in school 3 more years to understand.

>>88301
>>88300
Fucking communists.

>>88456
Someone said something that was false on /sci/, that is why it matters.