So global warming is climate change?

[somebodyelse Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close somebodyelse]

NASA is an Air and Space reasearch center... They have no political motivation...

Climate Change: Evidence

The evidence is clear. The only people who stand to profit from denying it exists are politicians.

The current warming trend is of particular significance because most of it is very likely human-induced and proceeding at a rate that is unprecedented in the past 1,300 years.

There's more links.. Check out the "Causes" link to the side as well.

http://climate.nasa.gov/causes

[President G Member Find all posts View Profile Close President G]

No, science is not run by political parties. What I meant was depending on how you feel on the subject usually aligns with others that vote similarly to you. Again, it is a matter of acceptance or denial. See, the issue with something like climate change that is so overwhelmingly known and studied by scientists throughout the world is that it is not a matter of whether you believe it or not. That doesn't make the problem go away. It exists and you either accept or deny it. As for America consuming a fraction compared to the rest of the world, are you living in the right USA? Because per person, we consume more than any other country on the planet. I welcome you to check out that information. Just because we don't have as high a population as China doesn't mean we don't do a large portion of the damage.

Nothing that I say will change any of the deniers mind's. Nor will anything else for that matter. You can throw up all the smokescreen you want, but there are a few simple things that remain. Burning fossil fuel causes CO2 emissions at a far higher rate than the Earth deals with naturally. This traps the rays of the sunlight on Earth at a higher rate than normal, and thus heats the Earth faster than normal. My question to those of you who disagree is this: what about the concept of finding a cheaper, cleaner and renewable source of energy to prevent the slow destruction of the planet makes you so bothered?

[mcpecker Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close mcpecker]

NASA is an Air and Space reasearch center... They have no political motivation...

cant.jpg

[namsokiek Banned Find all posts View Profile Close namsokiek]

If you find a "scientist" who doubts the data then you have found someone whom you should doubt their credentials. This is someone who is in the extreme minority with that "scientific conclusion".

The data records clearly show the anomoly to those who care to look. It takes slightly more effort to calculate the single element that has changed since the last cycle.

Sceptically receiving new information is one thing. Blatant denial of overwhelming data to the contrary is another thing; a political thing.

[Rasputine Senior Member Find all posts View Profile Close Rasputine]

I think methane from cow manure causes global warming
We do not have a cow avatar,but the horse is dropping a
few!

[akaTrex Senior Member Member of the Month Jan 2016 Find all posts View Profile Close akaTrex]

As with the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event, in my mind the jury is still out.

[Pirate Retired AdministratorPEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close Pirate]

The climate is changing.
It always has.
That is why ice ages happen and why they end.

[namsokiek Banned Find all posts View Profile Close namsokiek]

I think methane from cow manure causes global warming
We do not have a cow avatar,but the horse is dropping a
few!

It is definitely a contributor. Did you know there are things call Anaerobic Bio-digesters? If you place biological matter, in this case cow manure, into a sealed (anaerobic) container, it produces methane gas without the odor. With a little work, this methane gas can be refined and burned to operate a steam-powered turbine. Anything biological can be added to the slurry (as long as you can maintain the right consistency) and it will contribute to methane production. The byproduct of the digester is perfect fertilizer, electricity, and hot water.

Some big dairy farms have invested in this technology, they sell the fertilizer to the home gardener at a premium, use the hot water to heat the milking barns during the winter, use the electricity to power their farm, and sell electricity back to the grid at the market rate.

[namsokiek Banned Find all posts View Profile Close namsokiek]

My question to those of you who disagree is this: what about the concept of finding a cheaper, cleaner and renewable source of energy to prevent the slow destruction of the planet makes you so bothered?

This is the key. There is one cheaper and cleaner source of energy, but it is not renewable.

Nuclear power can be cheaper and cleaner, but political reasoning limits the ability to be so. The power plant stuff is short lived and creates a problem with storing the "spent rods" because they are still extremely radio active. The problem is that we use this isotope and do not use the weapons isotope.

There is a difference between the plutonium used for power plants and the stuff used for weapons. They are close isotopes and that is why most countries are having kittens each time Iran talks about their plutonium refinement for power plants. However, if we are allowed to use the weapons grade plutonium as the fission material for a power plant, this extends the usable life of the rods by decades.

We have enough "spent rods" that can be modified and power the US for several centuries.

However, the proliferation of weapons grade plutonium in power plants across the globe is something most casual observers will consider too risky.

Without this, there is no other cheap, source of energy that can compete with fossil fuels.

[burtybasset Retired Moderator Member of the Month May 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close burtybasset]

Nuclear fission I believe creates the nasty waste by-products that nobody knows what to do about, nuclear fusion (naturally occurring in our sun) is a more energetic reaction with no nasty waste by-products or at less dangerous ones. But there is always the danger of something going wrong, as it has in the past with Chernobyl and Fukushima, maybe if they built reactors under large bodies of water it would be possible to limit this danger.

The US is not the only country doing anything about climate change/global warming, here in the UK we will be fined by EU if we don't meet certain emissions levels by 2020 I believe, that's if we are still a part of it then.

Also energy efficient lighting is being pushed - they have stopped making incandescent lamps (the original vacuum filament Edison screw bulbs), I believe they have stopped making high pressure sodium and metal halide (HID) lamps for street lighting and are being replaced with LED and compact fluorescent lighting.

Renewable energies for homes and businesses are on the increase since the government started offering feed in tariffs (FIT), which basically means for every Kilowatt of energy you generate and feed into the grid they will pay you for, but more than this they pay you for it even if you use this power yourself.

They call these alternative energies, but they are really primary energy sources, they haven't yet reached their full potential. Coming from someone who had solar thermal panels on his roof I can assure you that during the spring, summer and autumn months I saved money on my gas bill, in winter I still saved but my hot water wasn't boiling hot like it was in summer it was just warm.

I think we should all do our bit, but I don't particularly like jumping through hoops to get these technologies in place and working for the consumer, probably the most consistent and reliable source would be water turbine. But over here you have to apply to a few different governing bodies to get permission, to make sure you don't harm fish or affect the flow of the water further downstream and what not. Just too much politics to get anything done!

[BigRooster Senior Member Member of the Month Apr 2018PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close BigRooster]

I think methane from cow manure causes global warming
We do not have a cow avatar,but the horse is dropping a
few!

So what do we do? In the words of comedian Ron White. I'm eating the cows.

[burtybasset Retired Moderator Member of the Month May 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close burtybasset]

I think we are immune to global warming over here in the UK (and Ireland) anyway, since rain is the natural cleanser of environmental CO2, we get plenty of that! So if you are worried about it come over here, you will be perfectly safe

[kickinthemebs Senior Member Member of the Month Feb 2014 Find all posts View Profile Close kickinthemebs]

You will have to endure the constant rain though

I think we are immune to global warming over here in the UK (and Ireland) anyway, since rain is the natural cleanser of environmental CO2, we get plenty of that! So if you are worried about it come over here, you will be perfectly safe

[burtybasset Retired Moderator Member of the Month May 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close burtybasset]

No, science is not run by political parties.

Ermm? Dunno about that, I'm pretty sure most research centres are government funded, how else would they have he funds to conduct their research? Depending on which political party holds the reign of government at the time, they may influence scientific research or at least the findings we are told about.

I remember a few years ago that cannabis was in the news, for years it had no scientific research done because it was illegal, but then they did some research and it turned out it came from the devils garden, it caused cancers at a greater rate than tobacco and all kinds of crap you don't want.

But now a further few years down the line, they are making all kinds of medications with it, research is being done into it's neuro-protective properties and anti-cancer properties how can this be when yesterday it was so evil?

P.S. Check your states laws before rolling a fat one!

[CUSP82 Administrator Admin of the Month Dec 2014PEGym Hero Find all posts View Profile Close CUSP82]

CO2 emissions?Did someone mention that one? Why are we mad at CO2? Oh because we're humans and we like O2. Plants on the other hand like CO2. There are some smart people , some call them scientists, then believe a rise in CO2 would be beneficial for the planet. There research shows that a rise it CO2 would increase plant life and therefore give us a greater ability to feed people. Sure it has to be within reason and maybe we're still finding out what 'within reason" means.


Do we actually know for certain if the increase in CO2 levels is not cyclical with this planet? Well we couldn't measure stuff like that in the past so how do we know that it's not something natural to the planet? One major way is looking at trapped air in polar ice. They take ice samples with trapped air, at ground level, at analyze it and then extrapolate their findings to tell us what went on in the upper atmosphere at that time. It's one of the best methods we have but how accurate is it? The extrapolation part always seems to bother me. When medicine only had xrays and you came in with a head injury well an xray could tell you if your skull was fractured and that's about it. So your brain was bleeding who cares ; the only tool they had said your head wasn't broken so your fine. Maybe studies in polar ice are like xrays?

When they analyze that air in the ice are they really sure that no microorganism was trapped in there, you know one of those things that eat CO2 and spit out O2? Things like that live everywhere so are we sure the sample hasn't been contaminated? Some smart people suggest that is a possibility but since it's one of the best tools we have ( because we don't know any better) we'll go with it. Maybe we need to learn more before we mess up what we're already messin with?