Canada leaves Kyoto

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Well well well what happens now. Canada, due to the new conservative government, has decided to leave the Kyoto climate pact to join the climate pact with USA, Australia, China, and India. Ottawa said that they couldnt meet the reduction in green house gas release into the atmosphere to levels of 1990 and are currently 25% above that target. Pardon me but how weak is that? We all know that the pact set up by the USA is just loose cannon fodder. Volontary deals are way insufficient and i would agree with that, which environmental organisations state. So much for global awareness...

[Paul]

That is interesting news, but I can't say I'm suprised. I don't think any industrial country is going to meet the Kyoto requirements, and eventually all will drop out. What country is going to suffer the pain of lowering their GDP for Kyoto? No country with a government that wants to get reelected. Face it, for the individual, when it comes down to feeding your family or saving the Polar Bear, food wins every time.

And there is the fact the the Kyoto requirements don't amount to bipcuss. If every country met Kyoto, the world would only delay the levels of pollution targeted for 2100 by 12 years. In other words, with Kyoto pollution at 2112 == pollution at 2100 without Kyoto. So much for saving the planet. Just hype IMO.

I think a better direction for spending all this energy would be a appollo-mission type effort to bring the hydogen car into fruition. A government that spends a few hundred billion on this technology, while at the same time fending itself off from the oil barrons (and somehow managing to survive fending them off) will emerge with such a huge lead on the rest of the planet, that the benefits will pay dividends for a generation. Plus, as a by product, Kyoto might be reached by accident.

[Protocol]

I think it is only a matter of time before Kyoto dies a miserable death.

[WHAT?]

Good topic, as we all would like to keep it green, and keep it clean.
Reality says, that the PC I'm using right now affects us all too. It (has) caused, causes, and will cause, greenhouse effect.

Somehow we as a world, will stop bumping shoulders and be able to live cleanly, and efficiently. It's a good goal! But will it ever happen?
Not in the near future, and when or if it does, it will be a small difference.
If we clean up the cars, something else will be the big polluter.

Then once we clean everything up as best as we can!!! A meteor will hit the planet (again), causing mass destruction. Sending hoards of debris in to the air, and causing continental shifts, and thusly MEGA volcanic activity which will add to the mess. I just wish I could be here to see it if it would happen. But I think we'd all be dead, on impact!!

We are allllll doooooomed!
The end is coming!

Now go on and take on the day!~:ditsy:

[Paul]

Regarding the Greenhouse effect, sure we can all look out the window and see that things are getting warmer, but can someone please point me to any information that demonstrates the conclusiveness that this isn't just some warming cycle that occurs periodically and naturally?

Remember back in the 70s that they were screaming to high heaven about a returning iceage! And then in the 90s it was the ozone hole which no one cares about anymore (and which got smaller all on its own). Call me crazy, but I guess by 2010 a number of climatologists will find many flaws in the current 'prefect' models of the Greenhouse effect and blow the theory away.

[Tokelil]

And then in the 90s it was the ozone hole which no one cares about anymore (and which got smaller all on its own).Well if "we" had kept going with polluting with PFC gas etc. at the rate we were Im pretty sure that wouldn't be the case.
Personally see it the same way with greenhouse effect. Surely the nature will be able to recover if stop or reduce pollution in time... Problem is if we doesn't find alternative ways in time IMO, which is why making Kyote makes sence IMO, since it "buys" us more time.

[idefiXX]

Some days ago german scientists presented a study about global warming in Germany and it looks like we will get italian climatic conditions. So what's so bad about global warming ? :silly:
No, seriously, we polluted our planet for centuries and have to deal with the consequences (Katarina and other hurricanes, flood, melting glaciers and so on). It's our duty to change this ! We have to discuss if Kyoto is the right way to do that, but you cannot deny global warming as beeing caused by mankind !

[Paul]

but you cannot deny global warming as beeing caused by mankind !
Why?

Everyone says this but no one knows why this is has to be true. I think it's just anyone who asks for evidence is going to get the social stink-eye from everyone else, so better to just agree.

I'm not a looser righty republican that rather see nuclear war than a hydrogen car, and I don't demand proof for many things that I believe. But for goodness sake, everyone must realize that WE IN GENERAL DON'T KNOW BUPCISS! Scientists are driven by ego, not facts.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Regarding the Greenhouse effect, sure we can all look out the window and see that things are getting warmer, but can someone please point me to any information that demonstrates the conclusiveness that this isn't just some warming cycle that occurs periodically and naturally?


As an Earth Scientist i can respond very well to your question. The enhanced global warming we see is of no oddity in world climate over millions of years only this time the human factor is accelerating it instead of some natural disaster or event. We all agree we are pumping masses of CO2 into the atmosphere. We are all aware CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Just look at Venus :bulb:. So there is no doubt about it we are the main contributors to increasing global temperatures by as much as 1 - 5 degrees. BUT this is nothing compared what happened during say Eocene or Cretaceous geological periods. During those times it was globally so warm that there was no permantent ice anywhere in the world! Even at the north or south pole temperatures in the summer were a tropical 20 -25 C. Even earlier, during the Carboniferous the global climate was as well way hotter up to high latitudes. In fact, there was so much tropical vegitation that the oxygen partial pressure in the atmosphere was at 0.24 atm instead at 0.2 atm we now have. Any higher than 0.24 atm and you'd get instant combustion, ie forest fires. This is a self regulating process. Photosynthesis consumes CO2 and produces O2. Fires consume O2 and produce CO2. Also explains why insects were so bloody big at that time because they had less difficulty breathing air. But i digress...

The point is that the Earth is not going to blow up, go dangerously out of balance or whatever you might believe. The only point that matters to me is that if we are not too selfish and try and keep the environment clean and regulate release of enourmous amounts of greenhouse gasses and gasses that damage the ozone layer, we at least give it an effort to prevent all low lying cities to be flooded (due to sea level rise) while they are still unprepared for such an event.

The climate is changing. Last winter was no suprise things were out of the ordinary again. America had a relatively unusually mild winter while things were much colder in Europe. Record snowfalls in Japan... Even the record number of tornadoes early in the year in the USA or droughts in other places like Louisiana and SW England and of course Africa. The list is endless... No point accelerating global change before we cannot catch up any more ;)

The cost of reparations due to extreme weather will get higher than it would cost to create a world where global emissions are regulated!

Vote Rex for world president! TY ;)

[Paul]

We all agree we are pumping masses of CO2 into the atmosphere. We are all aware CO2 is a greenhouse gas. Just look at Venus :bulb:.
The only evidence here seems to be to look at Venus. Being some 30 million miles closer to the sun has nothing to do with the predicament of that planet?

And you describe a scenario in the past where the earth was naturally warmer. So where is human intervention in all that?

I did a quick google to see if a simple answer to my question was out there. Take this result as what I'm talking about: http://www.texasep.org/html/air/air_4iss_grnhse.html

Look at the picture and the 4 points. Don't you think they made some magical leap to get from 3) to 4)? They definitely didn't provide any support for that leap. CO2 == greenhouse gas, yay, woohoo. Why? How? What process? Why not ozone? Why not nitrogen? Why....

[Paul]

As a side note here, I'm not belittling environmental degridation, I just think we need to put effort in actions that actually work. I've heard from plenty of enviros that even if the Greenhouse effect isnt human caused, we still should do something! Anything!

I'm more for a targeted approach, rather than running around blindly hoping any action is better than none. Usually these random stabs at doing the right thing makes things worse.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

The only evidence here seems to be to look at Venus. Being some 30 million miles closer to the sun has nothing to do with the predicament of that planet?

Venus is a good example with runaway global warming because it's atmosphere is almost completely CO2. As a consequance the mean surface temperature is in the order of 400C! Some places hot enough to melt lead! Mercury, the closest planet to the sun doesnt have an atmosphere and is infact "cooler" than venus in the sun lit part!

And you describe a scenario in the past where the earth was naturally warmer. So where is human intervention in all that?

Like i said, it doesnt mean that there needs to be human interference for this enhanced global warming to occur. But you cannot deny we do not take a great part in contributing to it no matter how you look at it.

I did a quick google to see if a simple answer to my question was out there. Take this result as what I'm talking about: http://www.texasep.org/html/air/air_4iss_grnhse.html

There is no simple answer to the questions you ask. That much is clear. The Earth system is a dynamic complex system where one event affects another. cf chaos theory where in the popular example the waving of many butterflies wings in one place causes tropical storms elsewhere in the world. Ie a small change causes a big effect. When you just look at the carbon, nitrogen and the water cycles you might aleady realise that there are many sources and sinks. And between those there are the many many fluxes to consider as well as the residence times at every reservoir. Heck we still havent even found why there is apparently still more uptake of CO2 than models show. Many scientists believe it takes place either at the ocean - atmosphere contact or at large forests in N America. Or who knows? But to say we know nothing is just a nihilistic approach which serves no one. We all seek knowledge and even though we are incapable of modelling the way nature truely works, we can get estimates which help in many respects to our basic understanding of how processes occur, which in turn could provide vital information for eg optimising food produce, predicting hurricane paths and even eventually Earthquakes. All beneficial to mankind.

Look at the picture and the 4 points. Don't you think they made some magical leap to get from 3) to 4)? They definitely didn't provide any support for that leap. CO2 == greenhouse gas, yay, woohoo. Why? How? What process? Why not ozone? Why not nitrogen? Why....

CO2 is a greenhouse gas because it traps the infrared radiation coming from the Earth and reflects it back to Earth. However it isnt the worst kind of gas. Methane (CH4) is 30 times as powerful and N2O (nitrous oxide or laughing gas) is up to 300 times as powerful as CO2 to cause a heat trapping effect. If you like chemistry just take a look at the chemical reactions involved. N2O is broken down in the atmosphere that involves sunlight also attacking O3 molecules (ozone). Heck even water vapour is a contributor to global warming!

Trust me. Many of this has been figured out. If you are not convinced perhaps you should do some research on your own ;) No offense intended.

I'd like to conclude with another possible but natural cause to enhanced global warming. This is the melting of trapped methane in permafrost and methane hydrates on the continental shelf at plate margins. There is a lot! of methane trapped in ice there too. When the ocean levels change, so do the stablility conditions of this ice containing methane on the two locations described. Bam! The ice melts and massive amounts of methane is released in the atmosphere. Result: Enhanced global warming. This is one of those processes that can be described as a positive feedback loop. There exist many of these positive and negative! feedbackloops that control the global temperature. An example of a negative feedback loop is that as it gets hotter, more water is evaporated. As a result the average global cloud cover increases and this produces a cooling effect.

Oh man i could go on forever. I havent even mentioned volcanic eruptions and catastrophic volcanic eruptions. I'll let you guys think about that! Remember CO2 is released from volcanoes which leads to warming, but initial massive amounts of ash in the atmosphere leads to cooling.

Thank you :)

[Paul]

CO2 is a greenhouse gas because it traps the infrared radiation coming from the Earth and reflects it back to Earth.
If Greenhouse gasses reflect infrared radiation reflected from earth's surface, then it reflects incoming infrared radiation too. And since there is more incoming radiation than reflected radiation (since the source of the radiation is the sun, not the earth), greenhouse gases should be cooling the earth not warming it.

Sorry Rex, I think you give too much credit to the belief that humans and science understand how things function. You're right in that it's a complex system, and until we can get an accurate weather forcast for next week, I won't give any creedence to these folks who's egos and jobs depend on saying they know things.

Just remember this idiom: we think scientific fact from 50, 20, even 10 years ago is laughable today. Today's science will one day be 10, 20, 50 years old, and laughed at just as hard.

Edit: I think the pursuit of knowledge is intrinsic and imperative for humans. But we should all take a lesson from Socrates and don't let our arrogance let us believe we know more than we do.

[blackspawn]

In todays scientific world (if one can call it that) I think there is little doubt about certain things concerning global warming those being:

- our world is indeed warming up, since the 19th century a steady climb of average temperature has been registered. Examples of this are the ever increasingly receding ice caps.
- CO2 gases do cause a greenhouse effect which makes the temperature rise.
- if the current trend isn't inverted results could be desastrous, increased desert regions, rise of ocean waters etc.

Now the thing is are we responsible for all this? well I think it is generally accepted that human intervention (whether by cutting down trees ou filing the air with various gases, not the good kind) is one of the main factors that have contributed for the recent rise in temperature. But are only we to blame? that isn't clear cut but that we had a big part in it of that I'm certain (as are many "learned" people).

But I agree with Paul in that governments could be more... energetic, so to speak, in searching and implementing new clean sources of power (namely transportation vehicles based in hidrogen cells and such). But unfortunatly our dependency on oil makes a lot of people very wealthy (our entire economy is based on it) and those people are ususally those that have the power to effect global (or near global) changes...

Anyway I believe that slowly people are becoming aware and more concered with the environment I've faith this will improve in the future :D

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

If Greenhouse gasses reflect infrared radiation reflected from earth's surface, then it reflects incoming infrared radiation too. And since there is more incoming radiation than reflected radiation (since the source of the radiation is the sun, not the earth), greenhouse gases should be cooling the earth not warming it.

You dont get it which is ok. It is not only infrared radiation that comes from the sun into the atmosphere but the whole electromagnetic spectrum including visible light. But a great part of that radiation becomes infrared when the earth surface is heated. Ie infrared radiaton = heat.


Sorry Rex, I think you give too much credit to the belief that humans and science understand how things function. You're right in that it's a complex system, and until we can get an accurate weather forcast for next week, I won't give any creedence to these folks who's egos and jobs depend on saying they know things.

Im sorry you have so little faith in science. I really do.

Just remember this idiom: we think scientific fact from 50, 20, even 10 years ago is laughable today. Today's science will one day be 10, 20, 50 years old, and laughed at just as hard.

We learn from our mistakes. If you believe we should just throw all research into the dustbin than that is too bad. I applaud all scientific advances because they enlighten us. I dont want to go too off topic buh have you ever wondered how your computer works? How you cellphone works? There is true science behind that. Many years of modelling and predicting the desired cause - effect of system. The same holds true for the global climate system.

PS Dont think that because you might not understand a process (like global warming), others wont either. Hell i dont even know more than a fraction there is to know, but that's why people specialise in different research areas and together we can figure it out or at least get a global understanding of the processes that interest us. Then on a discovery channel level that is explained to the uneducated.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

But I agree with Paul in that governments could be more... energetic, so to speak, in searching and implementing new clean sources of power (namely transportation vehicles based in hidrogen cells and such).


Yes indeed! Hence the Kyoto Protocol! That should provide at least some incentive for governments to look for new practical solutions using renewable energy sources while at the same time reducing their gas emissions! But some developed countries are just too selfish IMO which brings me back to post 1. Very unfortunate. And all this time fragile Africa is getting punished for our unwillingness to do just a simple thing: reduce CO2 / greenhouse gas emissions and slow down an already rapidly changing global climate.

[blackspawn]

Just remember this idiom: we think scientific fact from 50, 20, even 10 years ago is laughable today. Today's science will one day be 10, 20, 50 years old, and laughed at just as hard.
You cannot think like that because then anything that's presented to you as a scientific fact can be dismissed because "it may not be true tomorrow". More so I don't believe in coincidences... :D

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/images/New%20Fig%201.gif (http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggccebro/images/New%20Fig%201.gif)

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Graphics/EarthsSurfaceTemp.png

Yes indeed! Hence the Kyoto Protocol! That should provide at least some incentive for governments to look for new practical solutions using renewable energy sources while at the same time reducing their gas emissions!
Yes but the problem is that this kyoto protocol although in the rigth direction has no real impact... because in pratice it is just a signature on a piece of paper and with the exception of 1 or 2 countries nothing or almost nothing has been made to acheive it (at least in my country no measure to stop emission has been taken). Again a "oilopoly" has much influence. If we ran out of oil in a few years I'll bet that in 3/4 year we would have world wide implementation of clean energy sources... only this isn't the case so "no need to hurry".

Take the US for example (bad example I know) a good while ago they tried to hide the report the EPA made several references to global warming were removed from a report, which later came to public. Again shadowy interests influence policy that should have our welfare in it's best interest but is sidllined in favor of "other" interests

[Paul]

Im sorry you have so little faith in science. I really do.
If you believe we should just throw all research into the dustbin than that is too bad.
:cheeky: I knew someone would go there. Which is why I added the last sentence in my previous post.

I applaud all scientific advances because they enlighten us. I dont want to go too off topic buh have you ever wondered how your computer works? How you cellphone works? There is true science behind that. Many years of modelling and predicting the desired cause - effect of system. The same holds true for the global climate system.
I have a degree in mathematics and computer science. I know we have the brains to make toys that can descipher each others signals. But these are things WE created, and even then they are limited by our own knowledge of them.

The environment is not something we can understand from the ground up because we can only look at its effects, which by the laws of physics, happens after the cause. We strive to understand, but to say we do understand is complete arrogance.

For me the jury is still out. I know a titch about human nature, and I accept the falibility of our facts due to repeated failures and biases in the past. This whole thing just 'feels' like manufactured crisis of the moment.

I'm betting by the time all the new Prius owner's batteries go dead (they have a 5yr life span) and they need to pay to dispose of and then replace them (for a total of $5k plus the eviro damage due the toxicity of the batteries), the science behind what is going on and what to do will have changed.

And believe me, I'm not a cynic! I think we'll come out of this as good (depending on your perspective) as ever!

[Paul]

Sorry, I had to do this. You have your chart, here's mine:

http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.jpg

Yea, I know. I'm not making any point here. But charts can be funny!

[blackspawn]

Sorry, I had to do this. You have your chart, here's mine:

(...)

Yea, I know. I'm not making any point here. But charts can be funny!

lol point taken! damn pirates we should put a stop to them! :gasmask:

I still believe that the emissions we are currentely producing are harming our environment and once we mess with such a complicated system that is global weather... there may be no turning back. I guess future will tell.

[Willow of Oz]

Sorry, I had to do this. You have your chart, here's mine:
Yea, I know. I'm not making any point here. But charts can be funny!

It's probably a much better chart than most people realise. Because even having seen the chart before, I find that it's easy to forget the key point - to think critically. Too often you see a graph like that and go "hey, the global temperature is rising (true), the number of pirates are decreasing (true) *therefore* the decrease in pirates is causing an increase in temperature. Sure it's easy to laugh at it on this graph, but it's an easy trap to fall into when shown any set of statistics.
With complex systems such as climate change it is especially important to remember this.
Both sides here have helped me view this a little more critically than before.
Thanks guys, carry on.

[Paul]

I still believe that the emissions we are currentely producing are harming our environment and once we mess with such a complicated system that is global weather... there may be no turning back. I guess future will tell.
And with that I will agree. We are harming our environment.

But (for better and for worse) the forces at work in the global environment are greater than anything we can muster. We can't warm or cool the world at our whim. We will suffer in some form for the harm we do, but we are not in control of what form that will come in.

[Willow of Oz]

I still believe that the emissions we are currentely producing are harming our environment and once we mess with such a complicated system that is global weather... there may be no turning back. I guess future will tell.
(not picking on you here blackspawn!)

I see this sort of quote often: "I still believe..."
(actually, freaky connection to the chart, but that's not my point).
It's all over the forums. And elsewhere too probably, but it's here that I've noticed it. Some people present facts, some hypotheses are drawn, facts are debated, hypotheses countered, and people make posts with nothing to back them up saying, well, I still believe...
The upshot being that they are admitting they have no expertise in the matter, they don't care about it, they don't care about what you're saying, they'll believe anyway.

[acushla]

Then once we clean everything up as best as we can!!! A meteor will hit the planet (again), causing mass destruction. Sending hoards of debris in to the air, and causing continental shifts, and thusly MEGA volcanic activity which will add to the mess. I just wish I could be here to see it if it would happen. But I think we'd all be dead, on impact!!

We are allllll doooooomed!
The end is coming!

Now go on and take on the day!~:ditsy:
I love your optimism? You did, however, forget about Bird Flu.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

That pirate chart is very funny but you guys are putting it out of context. It was a joke for the people who believe in Intelligent Design and that ID isnt real science at all! The Flying Spagetti Monster is another good joke! :D

I understand you Paul. We may never know the real truth or the answer to the questions we seek, but we can get close. That's how models work. They represent a simplification of the whole and focus on a single aspect of the whole. That helps us understand the system we look at. No surprise there are many many climate models that all yield different results. They are 'simplified'. Still you wouldnt believe what all is taken into account. The climate is unpredictable, but we can, using laboratory experiments in controlled situations, identify the individual reactions that make up the whole of an immensly complex system, and get a grip or basic understanding. I wouldnt say we know nothing.

Anyway just look at the oil prices now. They rocket! However, this time it is a direct result of politics. Still there will be a time when all oil that we can easily get to will be used up. Maybe in 30 years already. I've done this calculation once. ;) We'll see. Anyway, it'd be a good thing for countries that they anticipate this or we may be in deep shit. The economy of the world is too darn fragile.

[blackspawn]

(not picking on you here blackspawn!)

I see this sort of quote often: "I still believe..."
(actually, freaky connection to the chart, but that's not my point).
It's all over the forums. And elsewhere too probably, but it's here that I've noticed it. Some people present facts, some hypotheses are drawn, facts are debated, hypotheses countered, and people make posts with nothing to back them up saying, well, I still believe...
The upshot being that they are admitting they have no expertise in the matter, they don't care about it, they don't care about what you're saying, they'll believe anyway.
Actually thats not that kind of "I still believe". I see what you are saying but the fact is in this matter (global warming vs greenhouse gases) there I several experiments and scientific papers that I could refer you to that support the idea that the gases are a direct cause to the recent rise in temperature (among other causes human related or no). Yes you could probably refer equally to papers that deny or put in question those that I present however people like me who have no experties in the matter (but wholly oblivious to the matter either, I do have some degree of knowledge and sometime read articles about this subject) can only hear experts opinions and with what knoledge you possess make somekind of conclusion. And from what I've read in recent years it seems to me that the theory that greenhouse gases (along with the destruction of the ozone layer, the cutting down of the amazon forests, etc.) is gaining strength with more and more data supporting it.

Read this report from 2001: http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf (start from page 4) this is why I "still believe" ;)

About IPCC (http://www.ipcc.ch/about/about.htm)

[Willow of Oz]

Actually, that's a pretty solid defence blackspawn. And at the time I don't think I mentally linked your post with your earlier ones (which I might have attributed to RMI) so I was really taking it out of context.

And RMI, yes I'm aware of the origins of the graph, but I think we have to be careful not to let those origins lead us to dismiss its message. I mean, I looked at that CO2 emissions and concentrations graph and thought, ooh, the concentrations have risen a lot since the emissions began rising. And then drawing a causation between the two. But correlation does not equal causation. And *that* is the purpose of the graph. Every time someone shows you a graph with a correlation it's because they are pushing causation - I'm just saying to keep thinking critically and realise when you make that leap from "facts 1-n" to "therefore...".

The problem with complex systems is that they are complex.

With the weather we also have longer term trends that can make things even more difficult to decipher, from 7 year weather patterns, to little ice-ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age), warm periods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_climate_optimum) and of course the usual full on ice ages with their glacial and interglacial periods. All of these last for varying amounts of time. Hence, what is 'normal' global climate. Would we still be in a mini ice age without our increase in greenhouse gases? Without them, would we still be heading towards a 'climate optimum'/warming period?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoclimatology

[BALTY]

In the beginnig, God said.....
Oooops, got to go now....
I've got gas pain!:pirate:

[Willow of Oz]

Read this report from 2001: http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/un/syreng/spm.pdf (start from page 4) this is why I "still believe"


Quite a good article, if others are wondering.
Well, I don't know where page 4 is, but let's assume it's the Study Global Warming bit:There are several ways that scientists study how Earth's temperature is changing. Although each method has some uncertainties, they all suggest a similar story—that Earth has warmed dramatically over the last 140 years and that Earth is now warmer than it has been in the last 600 years.
Note that the medieval warming period (aka climate optimum) that I mentioned in my last post was from 1000AD - 1400AD (ie, ended 600 years ago). Note also the part about warmed dramatically in the last 140 years: I also mentioned that we just came out of a little ice age (~ 1400 - 1900) so you'd expect things to warm up.

[Antman]

I think it is only a matter of time before Kyoto dies a miserable death.

"...Oh no, there goes Kyoto...
Go, go Godzilla..."

To bring it back to music

[Antman]

...can someone please point me to any information that demonstrates the conclusiveness that this isn't just some warming cycle that occurs periodically and naturally?

God did not know how to make plastic. Now that we have sufficient amounts of plastic available for God's use, humans are no longer required.

Every fundamentalist conservative left-wing environmental facist ditto-head Republican Nader whiner knows that ;-)

[Antman]

Oh man i could go on forever. I havent even mentioned volcanic eruptions and catastrophic volcanic eruptions. I'll let you guys think about that! Remember CO2 is released from volcanoes which leads to warming, but initial massive amounts of ash in the atmosphere leads to cooling.

Your study is evident. Thank you for your posts in general.

As a human who lives nearby, I am most concerned about the Yellowstone caldera. It is possible that Bin Laden won't have Dubya to kick around if that thing "blows".

[Antman]

With the weather we also have longer term trends that can make things even more difficult to decipher, from 7 year weather patterns, to little ice-ages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Ice_Age), warm periods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_climate_optimum) ...

Interesting, but I still believe that the Dark Ages were caused by Y1K.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Your study is evident. Thank you for your posts in general.

As a human who lives nearby, I am most concerned about the Yellowstone caldera. It is possible that Bin Laden won't have Dubya to kick around if that thing "blows".

Thank you :) Indeed at Yellowstone exists a 'supervolcano' which has been dormant for too long already if you look at the intervals of previous eruptions. Check here (http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/planetearth/volcano_monitor_010807-2.html). I dont remember exactly what those were but think in 100 000 years. As with earthquakes it is hard to near impossible to predict what year it happens, let alone what month or day. I believe St Helens is still rumbling along after a new bulge formed in the crater. Check these (http://vulcan.wr.usgs.gov/Volcanoes/MSH/Images/MSH04/framework.html)awesome recent (April 2006) areal photographs). Other supervolcanoes are at eg New Zealand and Sumatra.

And obviously with massive eruptions, comes swift climate change. But i think it'd be silly to 'wait' for one to happen because we have no knowledge when that would be. ;)

[Antman]

http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=are_you_a_global_warming_skeptic_p art_ii_1&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1

[krazyd]

Interesting, but I still believe that the Dark Ages were caused by Y1K.
Ah hahahaha! :D that come so out of the blue in this D&M academic debate!

Back on topic:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect

These kinda make it difficult to deny that the greenhouse effect is real.

The real debate is whether or not humans have caused an accelleration in the greenhouse effect. Now since it is undeniable that we have dramatically added to the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and since higher concentrations of these lead to an increase in the greenhouse effect....

Of course, whether or not this is disaterous for the planet is very debateable. I mean, all the hippies are crying about how x number of species are being wiped out by climate change and how a lack of diversity is going to mean the end of the world, but this has happened thousands of times in the earth's past! Ever heard of a theory by a guy called Darwin? In fact, if it wasn't for a massive climate change about 65 million years ago we would probably be a bunch of intelligent lizards!

Plus, there is a much more powerful (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal) effect at work which is probably going to occur over the next thousand years which could dramatically effect the climate and will certainly effect the thing we all rely on almost absolutely today - electricity. :evolved:

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

I mean, all the hippies are crying about how x number of species are being wiped out by climate change and how a lack of diversity is going to mean the end of the world, but this has happened thousands of times in the earth's past!

Funny you should say that. At this point in Earth's history there are more different species than ever before. Everyday new species are discovered. In the jungle alone can one find over a thousand different beetle species each adapted to their own niche. There are indeed periods when mass extinctions have occured. The most massive one was at the Perm - Triassic boundary if i recall correctly. As much as 90% of all species were wiped out. Evolution could practically start anew. But dont forget that we think in years, maybe 10ths of years. But these disasters happen over time scales of 60 - 100 million years. Just try to imagine how much time that really is. Homo Sapiens Sapiens (that's us) have only existed for what? 100 000 years max? That's nothing! ha ha ha (sorry for the evil laughing ;))

About geomagnetic reversals. Fair point, as they have occurred numerous times in Earth's history but there is no clear relationship with any major disasters recorded in the rocks at a time the magnetic poles switched. Like extinctions of more than usual amount of species and all that or flooding events or sudden droughts.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

This is also very relevant when we look at climate changes over periods of 20000, 40000 and 100000 years. The Milankovitch cycles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles). Have a read :) These cycles can be found in rocks as changes in climate bring on different depositional environments.

[Roj]

That is interesting news, but I can't say I'm suprised. I don't think any industrial country is going to meet the Kyoto requirements, and eventually all will drop out. What country is going to suffer the pain of lowering their GDP for Kyoto?

And what are the people in those countries going to do to those governments when clean air becomes a commodity and global warming (now irreversible, by the way - Gaia Theory is unfortunatley now proven and accepted by climatologists everywhere) decoimates economies EVERYWHERE because of the refugees it will create?

Typical shortsighted greedy companies and politicans.

Mother Nature will clean the mess up - and likely toss humanity out with the trash in the process.

I can't say I'll be sorry.

[BALTY]

OH Roj!:rolleyes:

[Roj]

OH Roj!:rolleyes:
Gaia Theory gives us between thirty to a hundred years before the full effects of global warming create catastrophic climate changes. Wanna lay odds if you're still around?

You can see the changes taking place already in my beloved Caribbean. More storms, ever growing more violent. The US tasted two last year - this year and every year thereafter there will be more in ever increasing cycles of intensity.

[Willow of Oz]

And what are the people in those countries going to do to those governments when clean air becomes a commodity and global warming (now irreversible, by the way - Gaia Theory is unfortunatley now proven and accepted by climatologists everywhere) decoimates economies EVERYWHERE because of the refugees it will create?

Typical shortsighted greedy companies and politicans.

Mother Nature will clean the mess up - and likely toss humanity out with the trash in the process.

I can't say I'll be sorry.
:cyclops: :cheeky: :globe:
I think your penultimate sentence is actually a reasonable remark.
Edit: and I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just saying that's a reasonable sentence.

[Roj]

:cyclops: :cheeky: :globe:
I think your penultimate sentence is actually a reasonable remark.
Edit: and I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just saying that's a reasonable sentence.
Supposedly "we are stewards of this land".

We've done a piss-poor job.

Everthing has consequences.

[rorythedog]

Supposedly "we are stewards of this land".

We've done a piss-poor job.

Everthing has consequences.

Agreed. Always nice to hear a North American resident agreeing what the majority of us Europeans have been saying all along.

[Roj]

Agreed. Always nice to hear a North American resident agreeing what the majority of us Europeans have been saying all along.
Remember:

I'm not from North America.

And we Yardies have a strong connection to the sea, earth and sky.

[rorythedog]

Remember:

I'm not from North America.

And we Yardies have a strong connection to the sea, earth and sky.

Hence my reference to your residential status. :apple:

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Spacecraft seek climate clarity (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4944058.stm) (BBC news)

Cool!

[WHAT?]

Rex, by god... You are always on top of things!!!:foureyes:

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Rex, by god... You are always on top of things!!!:foureyes:

RSS feeds :P

[WHAT?]

Well! Whatever it takes... good job!

[acushla]

Hence my reference to your residential status. :apple:Good point!

[WHAT?]

With getting back to the effects of the people polluting this fine place in which we live....
The latest reports of the population of this world is amazing!
The estimates for the next generation are equally alarming.
NEVER before has there been more humans here at once (and it's rapidly growing). Now this is nothing new to me, and my understanding of the population growth.
One of my greatest regrets is mentioning this to my mother just days before her heart operation, from which she never recovered! That was over 12 years ago. Not that THAT made any difference, I still don't like the fact that I brought it up at that time. It was just in conversation, as I we would chat about such trivia at times.
Anyway... It was brought up here before. Also brought up were questions about medicines keeping people alive longer! Medicines helping 3rd world countries. Episodes of Star Trek, were utopia on earth is when we find a cure to all diseases! Then an episode were they visit a planet of people who were overpopulated, and they were trying to find answers to the problem. Lastly, some movies were about this, but in different arenas, or coming from a different angle. LOGAN's RUN being one of them.
So what is the answer (long term)!
Of course AIDS was a government plot to help fix this right?:ponder: :rolleyes: I hope no one really believes that!
But am I way out on a limb by asking for rebuttal on the population growth?
Please understand. I'm not for stopping the help for others, especially 3rd world countries.
Does anyone remember talking about this, and what effects on what the population would be today, if certain plagues, and wars would not have happened? Millions and millions of people have died of diseases, and wars, improper health care practices. ..... and that's just within MY life time! Think how it was with in the last hundred years> and if those deaths would have never happened the way they did. You'd have a bigger neighborhood today!!

[Willow of Oz]

But am I way out on a limb by asking for rebuttal on the population growth?

:silly: I'm staying waaay out of this one.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

1 child per family? It's already happening in China...

Actually Europe could use higher birthrates. Especially Germany and Italy they have negative birthrates. Ie more deaths than births. So we rely on immigrants. BUT problem is that most immigrants are not educated and cannot get a proper job! So as a result they cost more money instead that they contribute to a nations economy. So they dont really replace the working middle class which runs the country. Children and the elderly only cost money as well. So there are measures that people should really work until they're 64 of age. Euh... ok this has gone way offtopic heh heh. But it's still interesting to see how it all ties together!

It's also interesting to note how more and more people come to the big cities. Unlike the previous century there hasnt been a greater flux of young people to the cities to find work. But what about farming? Where does all the food ultimately come from? Yes, from the land. But who will be left to take care of that? Not the working middle class! :bulb:

I'll leave it here. :)

(ps by middle class i mean people of 18 yrs to 50 yrs or whatever ;))

[rorythedog]

There's always adoption. I'd favour that anyway.

[WHAT?]

REX:
I didn't know that about some European countries hmmm!
But as far as China, yes I was thinking about that right after signing off!
What if they were to go democracy, and away from communism? Would they be able to continue the only one child Law? Hmmmm! I guess, but where's the freedom in that?

RORY:
Actually Adopting would be great if everyone would do so with at least one child somewhere throughout the world. I admire those who do! Can you imagine the impact?

REX:
Farming! Yes, I have a lot to add to that too, but will opt for digression....:cheeky:
this may be thread-run-a-way enough!

[Roj]

1 child per family? It's already happening in China...

Actually Europe could use higher birthrates. Especially Germany and Italy they have negative birthrates. Ie more deaths than births. So we rely on immigrants. BUT problem is that most immigrants are not educated and cannot get a proper job!
OK, now take that train of thought and extrapolate further to this inevitable conclusion:

As Global Warming inexorably progresses (it can no longer be stopped), polar ice fields will melt and glbal water levels will rise alarmingly. This will change sea currents and thus weather patterns and such changes will escalate rapidly, if not exponentially as the planetary climate destabilizes. Coastal areas will flood out and also be subhected to a catastrophic increase in debilitating storms, typhoons and hurricanes.

Much of the coastal areas on this planet are in underdeveloped countries such as Bangladesh. As these areas are devastated, the refuges will flood developed countries in desperation seeking solace. That influx will place the economies and social infrastructures of those countries under severe strain - and they will inevitably collapse as the flood of refugees continues to mount. Technology will similarly collapse as the ignorant will vastly outnumber the educated and the resources required to sustain an ever increasing user base begin to dwindle rapidly.

Humanity is essentially a vicious predatory animal covered by a thin beneer of civility about a molecule in thickness. As the above events escalate, society will break down rapidly. Ignorance will reign as the educated and education become a very scarce commodity. We will devolve to the Dark Ages faster than one can say "witch trials".

When asked in a very recent interview what developed countries should do to protect themselves against the coming debacle, Dr. Lovelock (the creator of the now proven Gaia Theory) very quietly replied that those countries should do their best to protect and storehouse knowledge. The example he gave was that we should try and remember that diseases are caused by virii and bacteria and not by witches.

I found that answer painful in its truthfulness and inevitability.

[idefiXX]

In my opinion your view is very pessimistic. As long as humans like you and me pay attention to those problems there will emerge solutions. We clearly need radical solutions regarding the climatic and social problems of our future, and we won't be able to abide todays civil system, but I still trust (in?) humanity :) Well, I have to, since I am one of the youngest of this forum and it's also my future that is endangered.

[WHAT?]

OK, now take that train of thought and extrapolate further to this inevitable conclusion:

As Global Warming inexorably progresses (it can no longer be stopped), polar ice fields will melt and glbal water levels will rise alarmingly. This will change sea currents and thus weather patterns and such changes will escalate rapidly, if not exponentially as the planetary climate destabilizes. Coastal areas will flood out and also be subhected to a catastrophic increase in debilitating storms, typhoons and hurricanes.


I had heard, that when they melt, and thusly current pattern change will cause an inverse effect (eventually)! Meaning that an ice-age would be follow! Think aboout that! huh??
THE END IS NEAR!

[acushla]

With getting back to the effects of the people polluting this fine place in which we live....
I for one would be very much in favour of 'one family, one child' program. This would be one of the quickest and most effective methods of stemming the tide of environmental damage.

Of course it will never be implemented because two many left-wing 'intellectuals' would make some noise about 'rights' blah blah blah...and then go on to tell you all the things that Government's and Corporations do to increase profits at the expense of the environment. As if knowing somehow leads to solutions.

It occurred to me...funny how the majority of people who have the solutions to a better world environment don't have the discipline to care for their own bodies with the food they choose or the exercise they neglect to do. I mean really...have you ever seen a conference of environmentalists?

Next.

[acushla]

But what about farming? Where does all the food ultimately come from?
Kellog's?

[acushla]

The End Is Near!
The End Is Here!

[Roj]

In my opinion your view is very pessimistic.

Yes it is. it's also I believe quite accurate. Humanity has a long history of screwing up, a history that has become more alarming in scale over the last century.

As long as humans like you and me pay attention to those problems there will emerge solutions.

No. Greed has ruled and will continue to rule all - until there is nothing left to rule. This has been the case for literally thousands of years. We have smply become more efficient at it wothin the last hundred.

We clearly need radical solutions regarding the climatic and social problems of our future, and we won't be able to abide todays civil system, but I still trust (in?) humanity :)

Not I. As Swift replied once when he was asked if he had anything to declare:

"Humanity has not evolved one iota from the primordial scum which spawned it".

Besides, Global Warming is now irreversible. There's not much in the way of remedial action one can take when the planet is irrevocably ****ed up.

Well, I have to, since I am one of the youngest of this forum and it's also my future that is endangered.

It's the future of my children too and I fear and grieve for them.

Honestly.

[Roj]

The End Is Here!
Sadly, yes.

[rorythedog]

Ah, consensus at last! :beer: :beer: :beer:

[Roj]

Of course it will never be implemented because two many left-wing 'intellectuals' would make some noise about 'rights' blah blah blah...

I do believe you'd have far more difficulties with religious fundamentalists (I editied that description before pressing "send" in the interests of forum decorum) who would mouth pious platitues against contraception and for "go forth and multiply" than you would with intellectuals.

Dogma bears me out on this.

Also, lest you forget, China has a left wing government.

[Roj]

I had heard, that when they melt, and thusly current pattern change will cause an inverse effect (eventually)! Meaning that an ice-age would be follow! Think aboout that! huh??
THE END IS NEAR!
I had heard of that but I odn't give that much credence in the near future.

I grew up in the Caribbean. My dad and I used to track storms on a map. Thirty years ago, there were nowhere near as many serious storms - if you had two big fellas per year, it was a catastrophically bad year. They also materialized in the September / October timeframe. Now there are at least three times as many storms, they start in June and more than three "big fellas" - on average. This has been the ever-increasing trend over the last five years.

THAT I give credence to.

[BALTY]

http://www.whoi.edu/cms/images/dfino/2006/1/occi_abrclimate_wef_19061.gif
Yes, I heard of this mini Ice age. The glaciers melt down, and breakage occurs creating current blockage, especially up near New foundland:paranoid: , and Greenland. Then the warm currents, which are warmer than normal (hence the the concern in the first place right?) never reach where they should, and versa visa! Botta boom botta bing!
Movie over! I'll give it 3 stars outta five. :cheeky:
Ahhh! Not in my lifetime!
:globe: Keep it green!!!! But first keep it real!!!
http://www.whoi.edu/cms/images/dfino/2006/1/occi_abrclimate_wef_en3a_19069.gif

[Willow of Oz]

In my opinion your view is very pessimistic. As long as humans like you and me pay attention to those problems there will emerge solutions. We clearly need radical solutions regarding the climatic and social problems of our future, and we won't be able to abide todays civil system, but I still trust (in?) humanity :) Well, I have to, since I am one of the youngest of this forum and it's also my future that is endangered.

Then idefiXX, I have good news for you.

The Spike. The Singularity.

Two phrases for the one event.
We've got 20 or 30 years then the combination of artificial intelligence, genetics and nanotech will radically transform the human species, and indeed our world. Long long before 2100 we will be gods, or ruled by gods we create.
See books by Damien Broderick and Ray Kurtzweil.
Fear nothing, my children.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Balty, you are so on top of things! ha ha You make a good point though. The melting of the Greenland icesheet may cause a stop in the currents that are momentarily flowing at the surface and in the deep part of the oceans, but it'll start to stop near greenland of course. Why? Because the excess freshwater coming into the oceans will dilute the ocean water causing it to remain buoyant and thus no longer sinks to complete the circulation pattern. We also call these currents the conveyor belt. No circulation means that the hot waters in the gulfstream (the flow from gulf of Mexico past the British isles and Iceland) will no longer heat up the Northern hemisphere in particulary in Europe. Europe as you all may know lies at the same longitude as New York and above and yet we have usually mild winters. That is caused by the weather patterns that are in turn affected by the gulfstream. Last winter was exceptionally cold for a long time in Europe. But one winter doesnt count as evidence of course ;). The real evidence comes from measurements of the speed of the Gulfstream since 1980 (i think). What we see is that the Gulfstream has steadily been flowing slower and losing its strength. :cheerful:

Weather forecast Netherlands: This week temperatures will rise to 25C woohoo! :cool: I'm all for it!

[acushla]

The melting of the Greenland icesheet may cause a stop in the currents that are momentarily flowing at the surface and in the deep part of the oceans, but it'll start to stop near greenland of course. Why? Because the excess freshwater coming into the oceans will dilute the ocean water causing it to remain buoyant...

Wow...the things you learn as a member of the forum...better than being in school!:ponder:

Keep it coming...!:) :) :)

[acushla]

Also, lest you forget, China has a left wing government.

What I said was 'Left wing Intellectuals'...not Left wing Governments.

Repeat after me...'Intellectual and Government should NEVER be used in the same sentence.':foureyes:

As to the 'religious fundamentalists' who would mouth pious platitudes against contraception... I heard the phrase 'genocide by stupidity' used against the Catholic Church in regards to its policies as applied to Africa.

[WHAT?]

Acushla, could you clarify that statement about 'genocide by stupidity' ?
Is that because of the contraceptives issue, and HIV? Or something else. I haven't had my morning coffee yet!
I keep hitting myself to wake up! But that doesn’t help my brain.
Seriously, I'm not awake yet!
Thanks:sleeping:

[acushla]

Acushla, could you clarify that statement about 'genocide by stupidity' ?


I think the case was being made that with the situation the way it is in Africa today, for a Church to insist on it's policy of no condoms could be interpreted as 'genocide by stupidity'.

Let's face it, there are legions of people who feel that the Catholic Church itself is/was a huge contributor to sexism, anti-semitism, racism, genocide, global stupidity, intolerance, and halting the advancement of humanity in general.

None of which would have been condoned by Jesus.

[madjo]

What I said was 'Left wing Intellectuals'...not Left wing Governments.

Repeat after me...'Intellectual and Government should NEVER be used in the same sentence.':foureyes:
As if there are 'Right-wing intellectuals'? :D :silly:

just kidding.

But you are correct, sir, current governments (all over the globe) are really showing how stupid they can be...

[Willow of Oz]

On the other hand, if the catholic church believes that it is the word of their god that contraception is a grave sin (genesis, re: onan, etc) then they can hardly turn around and say, Oh, but let's just do it a bit when it's convenient.
Up until the early parts of this century, all christian branches followed the catholic one in this regard.
If your god has slain people in the past for this transgression, then without divine instructions to the contrary you do not go against his will.

[Antman]

Repeat after me...'Intellectual and Government should NEVER be used in the same sentence.'

Intellectual and Government are not used in this sentence.

[Antman]

Greater minds than mine have argued that the quality/function/form of intelligence will breed itself out.

That is, in the long term, intelligence is not a replicable trait.

I believe...
...conciousness is a property of matter
...intelligence is a property of form
...human is a transient form

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Intellectual and Government are not used in this sentence.

Eek! Stop right there! This thread is the most unbalanced one since a long time. Ermm lets just keep this thread related to weather and natural disasters ;) Oh and it doesnt have to be scientific. That's what i make of it :P.

[WHAT?]

POLITICS & RELIGIONhttp://forums.beyondunreal.com/images/smilies/shakehead.gif

[Antman]

...human is a transient form

To the open question, I must lean with Mr. Quinn. Much ado about nothing, insofar as little, perhaps nothing, of this world is subject to the control of man.

Besides, catastrophe is a relative term. Playwrights and politicians die, maggots feast.

Let only vanity serve as my defense should I strike a righteous pose and assume that all the world is mine. I am formed of this ground, stardust from stars burst. I am accidental and incidental and ever so fleetingly gone, and knowing this...

...knowing this is the reason why.

There is something about "I" that welcomes the coming storm.

See also Sciam blog entry (http://blog.sciam.com/index.php?title=could_global_warming_be_worse_than _you_t&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1)

[acushla]

Intellectual and Government are not used in this sentence.Whippersnapper!

[WHAT?]

OK, Achushla............. I'll bite!
What is CREATION STEPPER?

[acushla]

OK, Achushla............. I'll bite!
What is CREATION STEPPER?Taking a cue from Roj...CREATION STEPPER : means you step it in and throughout Babylon without
fear - cuttin' edge, livin' on the edge, fear no foe.

Lookin justice in the eye and saying, What are you doin ?"!!

JAH RASTAFARI.:)

[Toe]

Well, it seems even Dubya's own goons are now telling us that global warming is being caused by humans.

New York Time article (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/science/03climate.html?hp&ex=1146628800&en=8ac3b60a5ccad31d&ei=5094&partner=homepage)

[jkrzok]

The Shrub's hacks are still using weasel words (an appropriate image for this administration, I think) like this is just one study of 21 studies planned. At the rate they're going, Florida will cease to exist and the Mississppi river will cut the eastern half of the nation into a two thousand mile long penninsula and they'll still be looking for new studies.

[acushla]

Florida will cease to exist and the Mississippi river will cut the eastern half of the nation into a two thousand mile long peninsula and they'll still be looking for new studies.Like what to do with all that new found 'beach front'?

I've watched a few PBS programs on 'changing climate' and the environment, as well as listened to several renowned 'experts' talk about the current situation in the world and the things that need to be done to have any sort of positive impact and I realize as I listen that none of these proposals is ever going to be implemented which is about the exact same moment that I cease to worry about it...or point fingers.

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

Well, it seems even Dubya's own goons are now telling us that global warming is being caused by humans.

New York Time article (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/science/03climate.html?hp&ex=1146628800&en=8ac3b60a5ccad31d&ei=5094&partner=homepage)

Yeah common misconception...global warming has always been happening. There always have been greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. What people all mean is that humans cause enhanced global warming on a small timescale (geologically speaking) simply by exhausting masses of greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere.

[acushla]

Just about to get some zzzzz's and as I was finding the remote to turn off the TV some breaking news story comes in about a huge (as in 'huge') yellow cloud drifting over Europe (or Scandenavia...or both...or somewhere) but definitely heading towards Great Britain.

The last word of the news item?

'Ominous'.

No kidding.

Can't wait to wake up.:nervous: :scared: :o

[Antman]

...a huge (as in 'huge') yellow cloud drifting over Europe...

Yellow would indicate chlorine. A cloud 'huge' enough to be described as "drifitng over Europe" is of some concern, but my considered response is that you were subjected to sensationalist journalism (as opposed to yellow journalism).

Off topic, just because my mind is constipated with disgust - George Bush is a hell spawn!

[acushla]

Yellow would indicate chlorine. A cloud 'huge' enough to be described as "drifitng over Europe" is of some concern, but my considered response is that you were subjected to sensationalist journalism (as opposed to yellow journalism).

Not one single word about it since the 'breaking news'!

[Rex_Mundi_Incarnit]

This thing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4762283.stm) could be the next trigger for (temporal) global climate change. Definitely worth keeping an eye out for.

[idefiXX]

Not one single word about it since the 'breaking news'!
Hehe, I think what you saw is the pollen-map of Europe - just saw this yellow, scary (I am hardcore allergic) cloud too ;)

[acushla]

It s now approx 28 hrs. since this story first 'broke'...and not even a whisper about it...curious as it was a 'breaking news' item.

I was actually relieved to see that a few actually knew what I was talking about...it means I really do walk, talk, breathe, see and hear. Not one person I have mentioned it too during the day had any idea of what I was talking about (as they we're sleeping at 3:30am)...and I was beginning to think they were looking at me as if I had finally 'broken on through to the other side'.

If you know what I mean.:)

This explains it: http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=11446&channel=0

[Paul]

Now here's something that makes sense. You know what makes the earth warmer? Uh duh, it's the sun.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/18/ixnewstop.html

[rorythedog]

My wife and I just watched PANORAMA (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/5005994.stm) on the telly. A very interesting documentary. As long as you're using Realalternative you can watch it again from the link.

[acushla]

Now here's something that makes sense. You know what makes the earth warmer? Uh duh, it's the sun.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/wsun18.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/18/ixnewstop.htmlI read about that study approximately a week and a half ago...just prior to traveling to my fathers farm outside of Ottawa (Manotick) in order to be at my sisters birthday celebration. I know most, if not all, of those in attendance and without exception they're political orientation is left wing liberal with a capital L.

What amazed me was, when I reported on the study, without so much of a blink of an eye it was immediately scoffed at and dismissed as pure drivel. In my naivety it is difficult for me to understand such reaction. These people have made up their minds and anything that suggests alternative causes not to their liking is immediately rejected.

One would think that an inquisitive person would at least want to examine the study in a little more detail before dismissing it.

'Contempt prior to investigation is the worst kind of ignorance.'

[Antman]

'Contempt prior to investigation is the worst kind of ignorance.'

Also known as Forum Disease, a semi-debilitating disorder similar to macular degeneration, except the primary affect occurs in the mind's eye. Commonly misdiagnosed as hemmorhoids due to its frequent appearance in assholes.

[WHAT?]

I get the reference Antman, and I'm sure he does too if reading this!

Anyway Acushla, They must not be truely liberal. More like anti-conservative!

Also, as a side bar. Truely anti-conservative folks like to add name calling to their conversations. Someone pointed that out to me in the past. By god, if that doesn't hold true in most all cases.

[rorythedog]

I get the reference Antman, and I'm sure he does too if reading this!

Anyway Acushla, They must not be truely liberal. More like anti-conservative!

Also, as a side bar. Truely anti-conservative folks like to add name calling to their conversations. Someone pointed that out to me in the past. By god, if that doesn't hold true in most all cases.

Numptie!

[WHAT?]

Cute Rory:rolleyes: :silly:
But I thought it to be spelled numbty!
Is that just a Northern/Southern Scott difference ?

[rorythedog]

Cute Rory:rolleyes: :silly:
But I thought it to be spelled numbty!
Is that just a Northern/Southern Scott difference ?

The spelling varies according to where you find yourself in this fine land.

For more spellings and definitions LOOK HERE (http://www.rampantscotland.com/parliamo/blparliamo_index.htm)

[Antman]

I get the reference Antman, and I'm sure he does too if reading this!

In particular, I had no one in mind. If the shoe fits, however, buy them in every color.

...methinks.

[acushla]

I get the reference Antman, and I'm sure he does too if reading this!

Anyway Acushla, They must not be truly liberal. More like anti-conservative!

Wow...you are very perceptive. I had never considered it in that light but now that you point it out I realize you are dead on the money. That is precisely what they are...anti-conservative.

Allow me to share something else that occurred while at the farm. The conversation began to focus on prisons and sentences. All of them are very quick to point out that studies have shown that prisons do not serve as a deterrent to criminals and that the longer one stays in jail the more likelihood that upon release they are a 'better' criminal. These 'facts' prove that the building of more prisons and longer sentencing (and the serving of the full sentence) which is being implemented by the new Conservative government is misguided.

However...when pressed to present an alternate solution the room becomes very quiet. Someone suggested that we need more programs and opportunities for young people which would steer them away from gangs and criminal activity. A valid suggestion, as far as it goes, but does nothing to address the current situation and those who exhibit psychopathic behaviour and are criminals no matter what the situation.

I replied that, in my opinion, jails were not so much for the criminals as they are for us, the law abiding citizen. If you perform a home invasion, rob a bank, molest a child sell drugs, murder, rape and any one of a number of violent and destructive crimes then we don't want you on the street where you have the opportunity to recommit.

I do not know what you think of when the word 'criminal' is mentioned, but I am certain that all of us has read a story or seen a news item that, if you considered it carefully, you were glad that the bastard was sent away.

[WHAT?]

Wouldn't it be great if we could just have an unimpeded highway that we could all travel reasonably fast, yet safely (not too fast or too furiously). But you know, they do exist today, and there will always be that guy who will want to be 1 % faster! Even though this guy could very well be me, it still begs of the question… why can't we all just coexist W/O bucking the system?
Most all of us here buck the system one way or another right? On the cusp of the law, yet most times within the law for the most part? Come on! Admit it!!! Most of us do very minor things if, and when we do. But there is always someone who’ll take it beyond the limit, for whatever reason.

Freedom! Some people handle it better than others. We need to protect those who can.

Are we willing to take the chance with a radical change in the penal systems? When will we ever see the light? The benefits? After it backfires?
Are we going to continue down a path that may or may not go anywhere? When will we see the light? We can gauge the good, and the bad of it since it's been in place for some time.

Two different prospectives.

I say we build a wall around the prisons and fill them up with water!
No, I think FE or someone else said that about Iran! Sorry!



(hehehe! he said penal:bandit: )

[acushla]

I'll see your 'An Inconvenient Truth' and raise you with one 'Bird Flu'.

[rorythedog]

In the UK bird flu has turned out to be just another dangerous dogs.

[Antman]

I'll see your 'An Inconvenient Truth' and raise you with one 'Bird Flu'.

I fold.