1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Global Warming

Discussion in 'Science and Religion' started by Muffled, Oct 13, 2007.

  1. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    Great. How many, and are they indicative of global temperatures?
    Mount Washington does not tell us what the global temperature mean is.
    My point was that 1, CO2 absorbs a narrow band of infrared.
    Your response is that its band is bigger than that of visible light. So what? Visible light is not very wide to begin with, and is a poor metric to judge size with. Furthermore, the sun does not emit very much of the band that CO2 absorbs. Very little of it, in fact. CO2 is not the primary driver of temperature change
    Well, if any of the examples from an Inconvenient Truth had actual scientific support for it, I would have many compelling reasons. But the world of politics is often ...detached... from reality.
    Mildly ironic
    Now where exactly did I say I was against that? But that is not the solution to global warming. If you believe people who say that switching to fluorescent light bulbs or hybrids will prevent global warming by an appreciable amount, I have a bridge to sell you. The only solution to the global warming scenario is to return to 1840 level populations, or develop some new source of energy that can be produced cheaply.
    The "solutions" offered now are a waste of time and resources that can be applied better elsewhere.
    I am not against environmental action, where did you get this impression?
    Its amusing to see how you made the leap from This person is does not believe in global warming, to This person is against the environment.
     
  2. bradleykavin

    bradleykavin Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2006
    Messages:
    68
    Ratings:
    +4
    yes, and hurricane katrina was due to god catching a mild cold and sneezing into the atmosphere, creating a large warm and cold front colliding and thus creating a hurricane. and when its hot outside during the day, that means gods mad
     
  3. Reverend Rick

    Reverend Rick Frubal Whore
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Messages:
    20,941
    Ratings:
    +3,196
    And after hurricane Katrina, we were told to expect one of the worst years for hurricanes ever and that Katrina was positive proof of global warming.

    The last two years have been the mildest years we have seen in a long time. Does that prove anything as well?

    I don't believe anything I have mentioned proves anything. It is Hillarious that every time something happens that supports the theory of global warming the kool-aid drinkers put the spot light on it. If anything happens that is contrary to their theories, they act like it never even happened.

    Where are all these coastal storms that where predicted to hit the U.S.A. in the last two years?

    When is arrogant man going to quit trying to predict something he is wrong about more times than not?

    Will someone please tell me, is it going to be a white Christmas in Kentucky this year?
     
  4. painted wolf

    painted wolf Grey Muzzle

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2004
    Messages:
    15,370
    Ratings:
    +1,652
    There is more to the world than the East Coast of the USA.

    Pacific storms have been quite bad this year. Bangledesh just got hit by a monster category 5 Cyclone. (cyclone=hurricane)

    wa:do
     
  5. Terrywoodenpic

    Terrywoodenpic Oldest Heretic

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2005
    Messages:
    15,156
    Ratings:
    +2,925
    Religion:
    Anglican...heretic
    The only predictions I have seen That no scientists dispute.
    is that the Ice caps are melting
    That sea levels will rise
    That temperatures will rise
    That weather will be disturbed and unpredictable and not follow the established patterns.
    that Rainfall patterns will change
    That drought will come to areas with normal rainfall expectations.
    An floods to other areas.
    That the Gulf stream will cease it northern and westward drift and the driving escalator will cease.

    Even if we do not know every detail of the causes...
    Any one of these events is very serious
    all together equals disaster.
     
  6. Reverend Rick

    Reverend Rick Frubal Whore
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Messages:
    20,941
    Ratings:
    +3,196
    You mean the north ice cap is melting. The southern ice cap is growing.
    The northern ice cap is over water. Ice shrinks when it melts.
    How much hotter will it get?
    When has weather ever been predictable?
    That happens every year anyway.
    Nothing new.
    Care to predict when all this is going to happen and where?
     
  7. Majikthise

    Majikthise Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    For some reason, the old story of Chicken Little comes to mind.
     
  8. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    Disputed. Sections of Antarctica are growing as are many glaciers. Rate of growth has exceeded ice loss of Antarctic Peninsula.
    Been rising for the past 6000 years. Show that the rate of rise has increased
    Entirely unknown. Its in the realm of climate prediction, something we are far from accurate in. Droughts can cause a rain-forest to grow.
    Drought is becoming less common overall. Flooding is up in the air. It is driven by rainfall
    Seen in an Inconvenient Truth. Has about as much science behind it as the rest of the movie. Relies on many unsupported assumptions
    The El Nino of 97-98 was very beneficial to us. $12 billion in profit subtracting from natural disasters
     
  9. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    There is no discernible trend in storm frequency of intensity. Drought has decreased overall. There is no evidence that global warming will cause more severe weather. Our models disagree, but then our models are not exactly accurate.
     
  10. logician

    logician Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    6,891
    Ratings:
    +379
    How many mistruths can be posted in one post? LOL
     
  11. camanintx

    camanintx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,329
    Ratings:
    +137
    Please answer these two questions:

    1. What characteristic of the atmosphere determines the severity of weather patterns?

    2. What characteristic of the atmosphere does the global mean temperature measure?
     
  12. Valjean

    Valjean Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2004
    Messages:
    20,484
    Ratings:
    +8,581
    Religion:
    Vedanta (reform)
    1. Albedo and greenhouse gas concentration.

    2. ummm... mean temperature.
     
  13. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    There is no characteristic of the atmosphere that determines severity of weather patterns. Severe weather is a very generic classification. It can be stratified into quite a few different groups, hurricanes and droughts standing out the most. Severity is based off of relative frequency.
    :confused:

    Edit: I would like to emphasize the lack of evidence for the assertion that global warming causes adverse weather patterns. Models do not constitute proof.
     
  14. camanintx

    camanintx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,329
    Ratings:
    +137
    The answer to both questions is energy. The more energy in the atmosphere, the more severe weather patterns can be. Notice I said "can be" since weather depends on many variables, but under the same conditions, more energy means stronger thunderstorms, hurricanes, tornadoes, etc. Likewise, temperature is a measure of the amount of energy in the atmosphere. The warmer the air, the more energy available to drive any storm systems. We don't need any models to prove a link between global warming and storm intensity.
     
  15. YmirGF

    YmirGF Bodhisattva

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    29,092
    Ratings:
    +14,861
    Religion:
    Beyond the Light
    Yes, 2007 will always be remembered for the horrific and unusually fierce hurricanes that battered the American Eastern Seaboard. Poor buggers. I wonder how many people understand that this argument is more about hot air than it is about accurate prediction? *Yawn*
     
  16. logician

    logician Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Messages:
    6,891
    Ratings:
    +379
    Means nothing in relation to global warming, I will note that this year the leaves have stayed on the trees the latest in memory (some still on mid November). They're usually gone by the end of October, early November.
     
  17. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    :rolleyes:
    Do you comprehend the difference between the different types of energy at all?
    I don't suppose you need evidence either?
     
  18. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    Why are so many people unable to grasp this simple concept, anecdotal evidence means nothing. So some leaves stayed on some trees this year, and the US's 2007's hurricane season has been fairly mild; big deal. Neither serves to further the argument in the slightest.
     
  19. YmirGF

    YmirGF Bodhisattva

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Messages:
    29,092
    Ratings:
    +14,861
    Religion:
    Beyond the Light
    In my locale Autumn came "early"... so go figger. I am more inclined to believe that the "global warming" boosters are doing so because they smell boatloads of profits to be made from being the first to discover new energy sources that will curiously become mandatory to use. Exactly why else do you think politicians of every stripe have suddenly begun chanting the "global warning" mantra? It's all about money... another motherlode of profits heading into the next century. I may be very cynical, but I think that the endeavors to help mankind to survive for that time period are secondary concerns. It's positively brilliant really. Scare the masses into paying more in order to survive so that the real beneficeries can line their pockets all the while making us feel good about paying more and more. It's nothing short of marketing genius, I tell ya.
     
  20. yossarian22

    yossarian22 Resident Schizophrenic

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2007
    Messages:
    2,899
    Ratings:
    +192
    To add to the points above, power plants can look forward to big fat subsidies to increase efficiency.
     
Loading...