eerilly warm weather

[lunghushan]

When humans are long gone, there will still be 80% nitrogen in the atmosphere and around 20% oxygen and around 1% other gases.

Bottomline is by messing up the planet humans are only hurting themselves and other species. Something else will come back, **** roaches, giant sponges or something, and repopulate the planet, unless somehow we manage to wipe out all life on earth.

Anyways, it's not really anything to worry about. Unless humans decide to start some real reform in population control and fixing the environment, global warming is kindof a non-issue compared to everything else.

[David Jamieson]

meh. It's still green where I am, a little rain at night, but above freezing consistently.

I live in Canada! and tere's no snow where I am...but we have a couple of places like that here, the main one being in southern british columbia and it's not unheard of for Toronto, where I am, to go quite a while before there's snow.

warming, cooling ...who knows. I personally think it's mostly a big guessing game, the science of climate is not solid at all it's a hit and miss kinda thing.

besides, the actual ability to make accurate measurement has only been around for a comparably short period of time. so we "know" what the weathre patterns have been for less than a hundred years on a global scale and at best we can hazard a guess of what was going on begfore that for the previous 4 billion years

frankly, I don't think it's unnatural at all. I mean, we are of nature aren't we? What if things are going exactly how they are supposed to be going? Last I checked I wasn't an alien species or a robot, so whatever we're doing en masse is probably natural on a lot of levels. just a thought.

[lunghushan]

m
frankly, I don't think it's unnatural at all. I mean, we are of nature aren't we? What if things are going exactly how they are supposed to be going? Last I checked I wasn't an alien species or a robot, so whatever we're doing en masse is probably natural on a lot of levels. just a thought.

Somebody at work joked that humanity was just Gaia's means of staving off the killer asteroid ... who knows.

[Li Kao]

How's this for a funny twist? Some reports are now saying that "cattle emissions" aka cow ****s are more responsible for changes in the greenhouse gasses than humans or their cars. There has even been rumblings about imposing a "methane tax" on farmers ...
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/cover121106.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatecha...905360,00.html
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a4_176.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/3005740.stm

Has anyone ever seen the Penn & Teller show B.S.? They did an episode on "Environmental Hysteria". While these guys definitely have their own agenda, I thought this was a pretty entertaining watch, even though they focus on the fringe element. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...&q=penn+teller Some might find this episode offensive or smug, but I get a laugh out of some of their gags, like the people signing the petition to ban dihydrogen monoxide (aka water!).

I live in Arizona right now where there are 2 seasons -- hot and warm -- so it's hard for me to judge the weather. Right now, it's warm like it always has been. My parents in Michigan tell me that the winter has been unusually warm, but my brother in Denver is singing a different tune.

Fuzzly, I just put up those links as an example that there are different opinions and ideas about global warming than the views presented in Al Gore's movie. I'm not saying I buy into them or what they present is the ultimate truth. I guess the point I was trying to make is that you have lots and lots of data out there, but depending on who is making the theory and what they are trying to prove can affect how that data is interpreted.

Then again, maybe Maynard is right and we are headed for doomsday -- in that case, I'll be sitting in my patio chair in Arizona with a bag of popcorn watching it all unfold -- make sure all of you California folks swim over and wave (after the entire state becomes one with the Pacific )

Some selected lines from Ænema, one of my all-time favorite songs:

Some say the end is near
Some say we'll see armageddon soon
I certainly hope we will
I sure could use a vacation from this
Bullsh it three ring circus sideshow...
I've a suggestion to keep you all occupied
Learn to swim
Mom's gonna fix it all soon
Mom's comin' round to put it back the way it ought to be
Learn to swim, I'll see you down in Arizona bay

[David Jamieson]

Well, the end is nigh. people die every second of everyday of every week of every month of every year.

It's a never ending cycle of "the end".

all this stuff about this or that real, fabricated, actual or fantastical is a mere distraction from the inevitable that we all face.

that is to say, death. The great equalizer. Even this whole planet will die eventually, whether we were ever on it or not. That's how things are.

Isn't it funny how easy we are to stir up with some little "fact" or some other latest outrage.

as long as I can get a hot meal, a cold beer and the occasional blowjob, i really, truly and honestly don't really mind that much about all the strife in teh world.

when it get's to my house, then I'll do what I need to. until then, meh! cheers!

Living in canada I really really really don't care about global warming. Heartless ain't I? Well, if you're a cow eyed idiot who will believe the hype du jour then yes I am.

[lunghushan]

Living in canada I really really really don't care about global warming. Heartless ain't I? Well, if you're a cow eyed idiot who will believe the hype du jour then yes I am.

Well, what's the worse thing that can happen to a person? They suffer terribly and die.

Well, you'll die whatever happens, so the only question then is will you suffer terribly?

Compare a lifetime of the suffering of an average person to the suffering done by someone dying relatively quickly, say, of starvation, or hunger, and the average person probably has more suffering in a long life, if they are ill, or just various aches and pains of growing old.

So bottom line is global warming, environmental catastrophe -- you're screwed no matter how you look at it anyway, so why worry about it?

[David Jamieson]

exactly.

so Al can go fillibuster himself in a small room.

[lunghushan]

exactly.

so Al can go fillibuster himself in a small room.

IMHO that's where Al belongs ... can't stand the guy. We need to get some more photogenic politicians. All these crusty old women and stupid old guys are annoying.

We need to get some younger folks in there. I vote for Jessica Simpson.

[Radhnoti]

Wow, I agree with DJ.

Re:Re: The articles. Those weren't fringe claims, it was the then prevailing scientific opinion. In some cases the SAME scientists had simply switched the word cooling with warming. There were scientists THEN saying, "That's pretty weak, you're not accounting for all the facts." and there are scientists NOW saying, "That's pretty weak, you're not accounting for all the facts." So...science has been wrong before, and will certainly be wrong again...but we need to take global warming (uh, sorry "climate change") as an absolute certainty. And wallow in the guilt of what we've done to the planet, even though almost everyone agrees that nothing can or will be done about it. Oh, yeah. We also need to spend lots of taxpayers dollars analyzing every little way we MAY be responsible so we can be sure to wring our hands hard enough.
Global warming, in my opinion, is political fearmongering on a global scale. It's, "Do it for the children!" to the nth degree, minus the necessity of those pesky bothersome "results" evil people who want the planet to die ask for just to be mean.
If it WAS humanities fault could we shut down all the U.S. factories? How about India and China? Everyone going to start riding bikes? It's just mental, spiritual and monetary self flagellation.

[golden arhat]

Al would have made a far better president than bush
in fact he should have been president
but the supreme court saw to him
may be info on global warming is varied and unreliable
but id rather have him ruling america than the current fundamentalist nutjobs

[unkokusai]

may be info on global warming is varied and unreliable
but id rather have him ruling america than the current fundamentalist nutjobs

Too bad you've got not one **** thing to say about it! hahahaha

[lunghushan]

Al would have made a far better president than bush
in fact he should have been president
but the supreme court saw to him
may be info on global warming is varied and unreliable
but id rather have him ruling america than the current fundamentalist nutjobs

Presidents don't run the country. The executive branch is supposed to enforce the laws (execute) like a CEO. Congress makes the laws, Supreme Court decides constitutionality -- it's called checks and balances.

The fact that Bush has as much so-called 'power' as he has (and he doesn't really, he's still a figurehead put into power by the people who support him), is just because a lot of people decided to get rid of much of those checks and balances (or basically ignore them).

The people really running the country are committees like the New America foundation and special interests (corporations). They manipulate the public so well through media that the actual public has no say at all.

SO ... Back to my original point, which is who would you rather look at? A bunch of old men and old women? Or get somebody younger in there and more photogenic?

I think we should get some younger and better looking figureheads in there, like Jessica Simpson.

[Fuzzly]

Li Kao, once again those articles don't make much sense. One article says that cows cause more damage than humans, then another says that the main reason cows are harmful (methane) is second to C02.

Some of the claims are really disturbing, one article claims that the amount of methane has been increasing at one percent a year. That doesn't make any sense, because humans have been throwing a lot more (a lot) into the atmosphere for a long period of time and we've raised the % of C02 by a tenth of a percent.


Then another article says that methane levels have been rising, and cow population have "thought" to been rising, and then makes a half-arsed attempt to correlate them.


And like I mentioned above, one of the articles says methane comes second to CO2.


Just because there are other arguments does not mean that all arguments are created equal. I can say that Newton's laws of physics don't apply to anything, and you can say that they do. It's not just about saying something, it's about being able to lend proof to your argument.

[lunghushan]

Li Kao, once again those articles don't make much sense. One article says that cows cause more damage than humans, then another says that the main reason cows are harmful (methane) is second to C02.

Some of the claims are really disturbing, one article claims that the amount of methane has been increasing at one percent a year. That doesn't make any sense, because humans have been throwing a lot more (a lot) into the atmosphere for a long period of time and we've raised the % of C02 by a tenth of a percent.


Then another article says that methane levels have been rising, and cow population have "thought" to been rising, and then makes a half-arsed attempt to correlate them.

It's also interesting when you consider that bison, for example, which would be assumed to have the same digestive tract as cows, roamed the Great Plains in huge numbers. Are there more cows now than there used to be bison?

But seriously, cows produce a LOT of methane. Somebody said upwards of 150 liters a day. If we could only tap cows butts we could probably solve our fuel crisis.

[Li Kao]

Fuzzly, the links I gave were admittedly summary articles of a study done by the Food and Agricultural Organization, a branch of the United Nations. There is a summary of their report here http://www.fao.org/ag/magazine/0612sp1.htm but I would suggest reading the 408pg report to get a baseline idea regarding the potential problems that the worlds nearly 1.5 billion cattle industry could/is potentially causing. The report, titled Livestock's Long Shadow, can be downloaded in its entirely at this link: http://www.virtualcentre.org/en/libr...d/A0701E00.pdf It's a pretty comprehensive write-up, with hundreds of referenced studies and reports done world-wide. The meat of the material regarding climate change is from Section 3, pgs. 102-148, though is addressed in other parts as well. If you're interested in the science behind these studies, look to that report as well as the references given.

Not sure why I'm still posting on this thread -- it's honestly not something I really concern myself with -- I suppose I just like a good discussion and healthy exchange of ideas. I'm certainly not an authority on this subject in the least -- I do have a minor in chemistry and so I understand a bit of the science, but my major and profession is in the medical sector and so I have an entirely different focus. Studying health, wellness, and the human body is my passion. I too want to make the world a better place, but I do it one patient at a time.