QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I read recently that the increase in the number of UFO sightings has gone up at about the same rate as the global temperature. D'ya think there's a connection? Space Aliens beaming infrared waves at our sky causing temps to rise! They are trying to melt all the ice and flood the lands. That's what happened when Noah built his ark. Soon the inhabitants of Venus will arrive in full force to claim the earth as their own, forcing us to do their bidding. They already messed up their own planet with carbon dioxide emissions, so now they need the earth. The Venusians already have their spies installed as the political leaders of the major countries, and they have secret meetings where they decide their strategies. Those citizens that disobey will be taken away in boxcars equipped with shackles and taken to the alien's secret bases which are now cleverly disguised as old military facilities.[alien]
Have fun with your trains
QUOTE: Originally posted by tomtrain You haven't heard that the Mars faction can no longer pull in "My Favorite Martian" on 'Nick at Nite' on their antennae. Their agitators say that there's no place like home, and global warming is the cause. They're pushing for inclusion in the Kyoto Treaty. It'll all be revealed in Al's forthcoming book, "I invented the Universe".
QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton Here's a thought. Global warming is caused by excessive CO2 in the atmosphere (allegedly). Where does this CO2 come from? It's a product of combustion. Take 1 atom of carbon from coal or oil combine it with 2 atoms of oxygen and you get heat which we use to do work and CO2. Where does the oxygen come from? The atmosphere I suppose. So, if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing then the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere must be decreasing as there's only a finite amount of oxygen on the planet. So at what point do we all suffocate?
QUOTE: Originally posted by EUCLID TRAVIS Tonight 60-Minutes will run a story about the reason why sharks are getting meaner. I wonder if the reason could be global warming. We'll have to wait and see.
QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal QUOTE: Originally posted by Hugh Jampton Here's a thought. Global warming is caused by excessive CO2 in the atmosphere (allegedly). Where does this CO2 come from? It's a product of combustion. Take 1 atom of carbon from coal or oil combine it with 2 atoms of oxygen and you get heat which we use to do work and CO2. Where does the oxygen come from? The atmosphere I suppose. So, if the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing then the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere must be decreasing as there's only a finite amount of oxygen on the planet. So at what point do we all suffocate? Except oxygen isn't finite. It is created by plants. Plants take in CO2 and produce O2. More CO2 in the atmosphere means more plants producing more O2.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Soo-760 The main cause of this so called "Global Warming" is Al Gore. All this hot air that he is spewing has to be doing something. And since he is promoting Global Warming, eventually it will happen. It could be in 10 years or 1000 years. If I remember from school that the ice age happens in cycles in about 10,000 years, and the last one was a few thousand years ago, doesn't that mean we are still coming out of the most recent ice age? FYI-gas consumption in the US only increased .4% while china and india increased around 15%. China wants global domination. They can't do that by military so they are trying to do it with domination of the global market. Look at oil, look at scrap metal, look at copper, and soon, look at gold. Buy now. China wants to buy a years worth of mined gold, which would leave nothing to everybody else.
QUOTE: Originally posted by dsktc From today's New York Times: "NEW SMYRNA BEACH, Fla. — When scientists consider the possible effects of global warming, there is a lot they don't know. But they can say one thing for sure: sea levels will rise."
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb Has anyone mentioned that the Chinese consume one third the amount of coal that we do per capita? That they have a program that currently is bringing 120,000 people on line for 100% renewable (solar) energy. We should clean up our own house before we point fingers at anyone else. Not to mention the most aggressive Hydro-Electric program of any nation? [?].
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith PS the Glen Canyon dam did block a canyon some considered equal in granduer to the Grand Canyon, and its still there....also the Snake, Columbia,Colorado and innumerable western rivers have huge HUGE hyrdo-electric dams all up and down the rivers bottling millions of acres of water behind them covering old towns, roads, RR's etc. The 3 Rivers project in China is just on a bigger scale, and it would never happen here because no one in our government is willing to spend the money on it unless they are getting thier palms and their supporters palms greased in return, either that or it needs a huge wealthy lobbiest group behind it....
QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb You obviously have never heard of TVA, Hoover dam, the Grand Coulie dam, etc. etc. The TVA dams displaced more people than live in the state of RI. You must of been home sick that day in school.[#oops]
QUOTE: Originally posted by dsktc From the National Academy of Sciences: Date: June 22, 2006 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 'High Confidence' That Planet Is Warmest in 400 Years; Less Confidence in Temperature Reconstructions Prior to 1600 WASHINGTON -- There is sufficient evidence from tree rings, boreholes, retreating glaciers, and other "proxies" of past surface temperatures to say with a high level of confidence that the last few decades of the 20th century were warmer than any comparable period in the last 400 years, according to a new report from the National Research Council. Less confidence can be placed in proxy-based reconstructions of surface temperatures for A.D. 900 to 1600, said the committee that wrote the report, although the available proxy evidence does indicate that many locations were warmer during the past 25 years than during any other 25-year period since 900. Very little confidence can be placed in statements about average global surface temperatures prior to A.D. 900 because the proxy data for that time frame are sparse, the committee added. Scientists rely on proxies to reconstruct paleoclimatic surface temperatures because geographically widespread records of temperatures measured with instruments date back only about 150 years. Other proxies include corals, ocean and lake sediments, ice cores, cave deposits, and documentary sources, such as historic drawings of glaciers. The globally averaged warming of about 1 degree Fahrenheit (0.6 degrees Celsius) that instruments have recorded during the last century is also reflected in proxy data for that time period, the committee noted. The report was requested by Congress after a controversy arose last year over surface temperature reconstructions published by climatologist Michael Mann and his colleagues in the late 1990s. The researchers concluded that the warming of the Northern Hemisphere in the last decades of the 20th century was unprecedented in the past thousand years. In particular, they concluded that the 1990s were the warmest decade, and 1998 the warmest year. Their graph depicting a rise in temperatures at the end of a long era became known as the "hockey stick." The Research Council committee found the Mann team's conclusion that warming in the last few decades of the 20th century was unprecedented over the last thousand years to be plausible, but it had less confidence that the warming was unprecedented prior to 1600; fewer proxies -- in fewer locations -- provide temperatures for periods before then. Because of larger uncertainties in temperature reconstructions for decades and individual years, and because not all proxies record temperatures for such short timescales, even less confidence can be placed in the Mann team's conclusions about the 1990s, and 1998 in particular. The committee noted that scientists' reconstructions of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures for the past thousand years are generally consistent. The reconstructions show relatively warm conditions centered around the year 1000, and a relatively cold period, or "Little Ice Age," from roughly 1500 to 1850. The exact timing of warm episodes in the medieval period may have varied by region, and the magnitude and geographical extent of the warmth is uncertain, the committee said. None of the reconstructions indicates that temperatures were warmer during medieval times than during the past few decades, the committee added. The scarcity of precisely dated proxy evidence for temperatures before 1600, especially in the Southern Hemisphere, is the main reason there is less confidence in global reconstructions dating back further than that. Other factors that limit confidence include the short length of the instrumental record, which is used to calibrate and validate reconstructions, and the possibility that the relationship between proxy data and local surface temperatures may have varied over time. It also is difficult to estimate a mean global temperature using data from a limited number of sites. On the other hand, confidence in large-scale reconstructions is boosted by the fact that the proxies on which they are based generally exhibit strong correlations with local environmental conditions. Confidence increases further when multiple independent lines of evidence point to the same general phenomenon, such as the Little Ice Age. Collecting additional proxy data, especially for years before 1600 and for areas where the current data are relatively sparse, would increase our understanding of temperature variations over the last 2,000 years, the report says. In addition, improving access to data on which published temperature reconstructions are based would boost confidence in the results. The report also notes that new analytical methods, or more careful use of existing methods, might help circumvent some of the current limitations associated with large-scale reconstructions. The committee pointed out that surface temperature reconstructions for periods before the Industrial Revolution -- when levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases were much lower -- are only one of multiple lines of evidence supporting the conclusion that current warming is occurring in response to human activities, and they are not the primary evidence. The National Research Council is the principal operating arm of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. It is a private, nonprofit institution that provides science and technology advice under a congressional charter. A committee roster follows. Copies of Surface Temperature Reconstructions for the Last 2,000 Years will be available from the National Academies Press; tel. 202-334-3313 or 1-800-624-6242 or on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu. Reporters may obtain a pre-publication copy from the Office of News and Public Information (contacts listed above). http://nationalacademies.org/ http://www.realclimate.org/ http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/22/science/22cnd-climate.html? Dave
QUOTE: Originally posted by solzrules QUOTE: Originally posted by rrandb You obviously have never heard of TVA, Hoover dam, the Grand Coulie dam, etc. etc. The TVA dams displaced more people than live in the state of RI. You must of been home sick that day in school.[#oops] None of those ***s misplaced that many people. (Do you have Info??? I make a habit of not believing every thing I hear. I done learnt that in school. [:D]) Also, the U.S. government wasn't out bulldozing cities flat so boats could pass above them after the river filled out. If they did, I am sure there would be a lawsuit or two (don't you think??). The neat thing about communist China is that they can just decree that is what will be done. End of story. Kiss your belongings good-bye. Thank God for the U.S.A.
QUOTE: Originally posted by tomtrain Okay, daring to be dumb here. Some questions. This report talks about surface temperatures. What about temperatures higher up in the atmosphere? Is there no way to determine their past nature compared with today? And do they have more of an impact on overall climate? This whole existence we're part of is dynamic. We can't hold time still. In terms of eras of time, carbon moves back and forth from solid states to gaseous states. How are we to know what is "liveable"? As far as we can predict, the Earth will use up its core heat eventually, and turn into a cold rock like our neighboring planets. To aspire into the future, should we as humans focus more on developing ways of existing that are not tied to living conditions on Earth?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.