View Poll Results: Do you accept the scientific consensus of Anthropogenic Global Warming
Yes 28 75.68%
No 0 0%
Not sure 9 24.32%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-24-2007, 02:57 PM   #1
genius2687
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Global Warming

How many of you accept the scientific consensus that the earth is warming up, and that humanity is mostly responsible for this? (i.e., the fact of anthropogenic global warming

I sure as hell do.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 03:07 PM   #2
Spherical Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I'm more or less on the fence at this point. There isn't nearly enough evidence to really be convincing, and it doesn't help that the majority of those attempting to argue for global warming are all Al Gore humping, eco-friendly hippies who will jump on any and every save the [X] program, where X can be anything from Whales to termites.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 03:23 PM   #3
Gnosital
still unsmited
 
Gnosital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,661
Yeah, the hippies.

And the swimming polar bears.
Gnosital is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 04:05 PM   #4
Spherical Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Those god damn swimming polar bears are just so cute.

  Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 04:05 PM   #5
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
Gnosital wrote View Post
Yeah, the hippies.

And the swimming polar bears.
Polar bears swim very well partly because their hairs are hollow (which is why they are white).

I am convinced that the planet is warming, but the kilotons of volcanic gasses and methane escaping from the sea floor and the methane from animals just seems to overwhelm what puny humans can do. It is seldom mentioned that humans also generate anti-greenhouse gasses like sulfur compounds. In their fervor to blame humans for global warming, they wrongly mix in the ozone layer depletion as though it were relevant.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 04:41 PM   #6
Rat Bastard
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
What Sterny said. Also, keep flying in those airliners! They may contribute to "global cooling". Here's some more on global cooling.

http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...4068db11f4&p=4

We don't know enough to predict the weather with certainty even a few days in advance.

Also, the Sun is entering a phase in which its output may be reduced enough to require us to burn every tree on the planet just to keep alive. [/sarcasm]
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 05:27 PM   #7
Kamikaze189
Senior Member
 
Kamikaze189's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Giant rock hurtling through space
Posts: 767
The most compelling thing I remember from Al Gore's movie (unpleasant truth? uncomfortable truth? I can't remember) were the ice cores.

I was curious how it's possible to determine the temperature and make-up of the atmosphere from the ice. Anybody know anything about that, or a good place to read about it and the process?

“Whoever attacks the popular falsehoods of his time will find that a lie defends itself by telling other lies.” - Robert Ingersoll
Kamikaze189 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 06:05 PM   #8
Professor Chaos
General of the Attacking Army
 
Professor Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,904
I don't believe in Global Warming. I also don't believe in Gravity or Evolution.

When virtually every scientist on the planet is in agreement on something, and tells me about something, I tend to listen.

I will grieve. Grief is not a theistic concept. ~ Sternwallow
Professor Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 06:47 PM   #9
GodlessHeathen
Obsessed Member
 
GodlessHeathen's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 3rd notch in the bible belt
Posts: 1,342

Christian: One who believes that the New Testament is a divinely inspired book admirably suited to the spiritual needs of his neighbor. - Ambrose Bierce
GodlessHeathen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 10:00 PM   #10
bokonon
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Kamikaze189 wrote View Post
The most compelling thing I remember from Al Gore's movie (unpleasant truth? uncomfortable truth? I can't remember) were the ice cores.

I was curious how it's possible to determine the temperature and make-up of the atmosphere from the ice. Anybody know anything about that, or a good place to read about it and the process?
The make-up of the atmosphere can be known because bubbles of it get trapped in the snow before the snow compresses into ice, and those tiny bubbles can be tested today.

I don't know how they infer the temperatures of days past from ice cores, though I guess they're a pretty fair indication that the temperature got low enough to freeze water.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2007, 10:10 PM   #11
ocmpoma
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
If I remember rightly, it has something to do with thickness of alternating layers and correlation with later (as in more recent) layers and other sources of information, which allows calibration and thus extrapolation to earlier time.
  Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2007, 05:09 AM   #12
Philboid Studge
Organ Donator
 
Philboid Studge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Beastly Muck
Posts: 13,136
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote View Post
Polar bears swim very well partly because their hairs are hollow (which is why they are white).

I am convinced that the planet is warming, but the kilotons of volcanic gasses and methane escaping from the sea floor and the methane from animals just seems to overwhelm what puny humans can do. It is seldom mentioned that humans also generate anti-greenhouse gasses like sulfur compounds. In their fervor to blame humans for global warming, they wrongly mix in the ozone layer depletion as though it were relevant.
I'm not sure who 'they' are, though they do exist. It is true that a depleting ozone layer is a not an immediate driver of warming, but it is relevant to climate change. Some of the confusion may be because certain human-made gases -- namely chlorofluorocarbons -- trap heat and deplete the ozone layer. (CFCs account for less than 10 % of atmospheric warming)

It's also true that natural (read non-anthropogenic) sources comprise the lion's volume of greenhouse gases, but it's believed that humanity's puny contribution can push the system past a tipping point. Hence the fervor.

Some of the more zealous doomsayers claim that the tipping point can trigger positive feedback loops. For example, the methane hydrate deposits on the sea floor are released as the sea warms, then enter the atmosphere and drive further warming, releasing more methane and et cetera.

Did you know that a single, adult moose expels (from both ends) the methane equivalent of 2,100kg of carbon dioxide emissions? That's roughly equivalent to the GHG's farted out by an automobile traveling 13,000km ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
La propriété, c'est le vol ...
Philboid Studge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2007, 05:20 AM   #13
Philboid Studge
Organ Donator
 
Philboid Studge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Beastly Muck
Posts: 13,136
Quote:
Professor Chaos wrote View Post
I don't believe in Global Warming. I also don't believe in Gravity or Evolution.

When virtually every scientist on the planet is in agreement on something, and tells me about something, I tend to listen.
A Thee-tard would claim that you cling to "faith", Prof.

There's some truth to that claim. However the crucial difference between your faith in scientists and mouth-breathers' faith in their Invisible Friend is that you could, in theory, learn the science yourself and test it. (One caveat, though: the three theories you cite do not enjoy the same degrees of robustness.)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
La propriété, c'est le vol ...
Philboid Studge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2007, 08:40 AM   #14
Professor Chaos
General of the Attacking Army
 
Professor Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,904
Quote:
Philboid Studge wrote View Post
A Thee-tard would claim that you cling to "faith", Prof.

There's some truth to that claim. However the crucial difference between your faith in scientists and mouth-breathers' faith in their Invisible Friend is that you could, in theory, learn the science yourself and test it. (One caveat, though: the three theories you cite do not enjoy the same degrees of robustness.)
Understood, but where do you draw the line? If all of the local meterologists tell you it's going to rain tomorow, do you take an umbrella with you or do you study the jet stream? When the FDA tells you not to use toothpaste made in China, do you analyze the chemical content or do you buy another brand?

Scientists do the dirty work and present the facts to the public. There's no "faith" involved, IMHO, because the information is there to be analyzed by anyone and, as you suggest, the methods of finding said information and testing it can be learned by anyone.

I will grieve. Grief is not a theistic concept. ~ Sternwallow
Professor Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2007, 09:07 AM   #15
whoneedscience
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Can I at least point out that that's one of the most loaded questions I've ever heard?

That said, I find the evidence in favour of a human-caused warming convincing, while all the arguments on the other end seem very much like those for a Bush conspiracy behind 9/11.

If anyone has anything they think are valid critiques, though, I'd be happy to hear them. I've spent most of my nut time recently fighting evolution and atheist conspiracy theories.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:33 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational