geelhoed Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 geelhoed - From your own charts you will see that the CO2 increases lag behind the temperature - so what causes what? The lag between CO2 and temperature is in the cooling phase, not the warming-up phase. In the hot earth plantlife flourishes and the chemical balance then requires a high CO2 level. The release of CO2 by the oceans is also a chemical balance, the problem is that more CO2 cause higher temperatures an more release of CO2 (also from the bottom) I agree that blaiming the heating up of earth on one cause is much too simplified. Ocourse the earth and solar periods are important. But that doesn't mean that CO2 is not a contributing factor, or that we have way too much in the atmosphere nowadays! BSc or PhD who'd you beleive? I'd beleive 90% of the UN climate comittee scientists (probably not BSc's). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geelhoed Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 A very interesting program, that confirmed a lot of what I already believed. Yes, humnas may be having an effect on global warming. But if global warming is soley human created, how the hell did the last ice age end? Funny, nobody who believes in humans being to blame for GW can come up with an answer to that one... The allegory of a camel and a straw comes to mind. True we are in a warming up cycle, but do we really need to add to the problem? (If it is a problem, catatrophic climate change should reduce the earths population to a more CO2 friendly size) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robthehungrymonkey Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I missed the programme (spurs are the top priority!) and i'm away as of Sunday too! D'oh. I still haven't seen anything that really makes my mind up, but i'm swayed towards the "it's mostly hype" side. I'd like a proper debate with people from both sides arguing a point. I still haven't seen this. The only debate i've heard was on 5 live when the "scientist" for the green brigade just shouted at the scientest arguing against it (who was an old bloke, who obviously, though very knowledgeable wasn't the best at arguing), the green side just shouted their ideas loudly dissmissing every idea with plain volume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter pan Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Geelhoed. The government are raising taxes based on global warming, and the uni you study at are paid for by who.........? Something along the lines of being led around like sheep springs to mind. Perhaps people should stop ignoring the elephant in the corner whose name is global climate history, and start questioning what they are being told by a vested interest group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geelhoed Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Hiding behind interest groups is so lame. Scientists are scientists because the don't care about money. It's in the companies where the interestgroups are. Esso(?) giving money to anti climate propaganda, ring any bells? BTW I was funded by a fundamental research foundation which in turn is funded by the government. So now I'm a puppet of the government? Loads of research funding comes from Shell around here, I've used computers bought with their money. So now I'm a puppet for the oil industry? Rubbish! I've never considered who pays my research and I'll tell you neither are most of the scientists, and I'll bet that there is a strong correlation between this and the 90% of UN scientists who made up that report! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Keene Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 A very interesting program, that confirmed a lot of what I already believed. Yes, humnas may be having an effect on global warming. But if global warming is soley human created, how the hell did the last ice age end? Funny, nobody who believes in humans being to blame for GW can come up with an answer to that one... The allegory of a camel and a straw comes to mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter pan Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 My point was that there are as many vested interest groups funding the pro AGW lobby as there are (oil companies?) funding research for anti AGW groups, Not least the government, who I believe provide cash for universities. I personally have made good money out of global warming, But that does not necessarily make it right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AR1961 Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 So, the Scientists MUST be right? Says who? Wasn't it the Scientists who told us in the 70's that we were heading for another ice age?? One of my friends is a Physics Phd and he defines science as "the closest approximation of the truth available to us at the present time!" Its happening and we need cars, get the scientists to stop bleating about it and get them to get their collective finger out and find a way of removing the CO2 from the atmosphere. Oh and by the way, can they also persuade the Brazilian government to stop selling tracts of rain forest the size of Portugal to McDonalds for beef production? Finally, my research is paid for by me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter pan Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Whenever I see the reactions of the pro AGW lobby to someone who dares the say that perhaps AGW is not quite what we are being `led' to believe, it reminds in of the Aliens in the Donald Sutherland version of the body snatchers who point and scream at anyone who is not `one of them' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gromit Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 The release of CO2 by the oceans is also a chemical balance, the problem is that more CO2 cause higher temperatures an more release of CO2 (also from the bottom) Call me Mr Thicky, as someone who does not have a PhD in anything, are you telling me that the bottom of the ocean warms up that quickly as the surface temperature increases. Surely the time for the bottom of the ocean to warm up would take, as it said in the program, many many years. So from what I can see any increase in ocean temperature must lag way behind the actual cause. Puts fireproof suit on and stands by for a good flameing. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterg Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Geelhoed, if you'd watched the programme you would have noted the fact that tens if not hundreds of scientists who were originally signed up to the IPCC resigned from it after the committee started publishing articles that left out vital important details such as the comment "in conclusion, there is no scientific proof that man made CO2 is contributing in anyway to global warming" It's all a myth designed to create a new industry that the developed world can use to make more wealth out of the poorer nations..... why else would they be denying African countries from building electric power stations and trying to make them use solar and wind energy devices instead? - brilliant bit in the prog where a guy in Africa (can't remember where exactly) was supposed to use solar panels but despite being told there was enough power for his needs, he found that he could have a light on or] a fridge on but not both that's useful isn't it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geelhoed Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 QUOTE It's all a myth No it isn't. QUOTE One of my friends is a Physics Phd and he defines science as "the closest approximation of the truth available to us at the present time!"If you choose to believe anything it might as well be the closest approximation of the thruth, no? QUOTE Surely the time for the bottom of the ocean to warm up would take, as it said in the program, many many years. Correct but on the global timescale 1000 years is not that much. The sudden rises in CO2 are probably caused by release of the carbohydrates on the bottom of the ocean. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pistonbroke Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Whatever happened to the massive great hole in the ozone layer which we were all responsible for and was predicted to end the world overnight ? Seem to remember the boffins saying that was the major contributor to GW dont seem to here much about that anymore yet not long since i distinctly remember it was in all the papers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spence Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Whatever happened to the massive great hole in the ozone layer which we were all responsible for and was predicted to end the world overnight ? Seem to remember the boffins saying that was the major contributor to GW dont seem to here much about that anymore yet not long since i distinctly remember it was in all the papers I think we were all gonna die of acid rain at one point as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geelhoed Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Ozonhole and global warming are quite some different effects. Although the physical principle is the same. CO2 (H2O and CH4 as well) absorb apart of the electromagnetic spectrum and then release it again. unfortunately this is the wavelength of the thermal radiation of earth. Whcih means that the influx of radiation of the sun passes through the CO2 heats up the earth, the radiation from earth is held up by the CO2. O3 absorbs the shorter wavelength of the sun which has the power to damage skin, but the overall heat resulting from this is not so big. Good example of journalist misinterpreting the scientists, same thing happens now with the greenhouse effect, if one scientist says: "it's no so bad" it's gets blown up to the front page. If 10000 say it is bad, you don't hear anything. Media are looking for sensation and since the greenhouse-effect is nolonger sensation, it is better to sell your advertising slots with "it's a hoax". I understand that you laymen have trouble distinquishing between the truth and hoaces but I assure you CO2 isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.