Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Science & Nature' started by Martin Alonzo, Jun 1, 2017.
RE-GREENING the Planet with Global Warming and CO2
I watched 'some' of the video Martin and all I know is the weather has got hotter (for us)
We also suffer humidity in recent years, which of course makes the temperature unbearable
This issue just doesn't make sense to me, each side claiming their response is money motivated
One thing I'm sure of, the planet is on a collision course and no one will be around to say
I told you so
Please don't say to me about 'freak' weather that we have had for hundreds of years
because it is 'freak weather' something out of the norm, it comes it goes
What is happening now is continuous
We had smog in London, which killed many, cutting down on coal emissions cleared us of the problem.
Now we have more planes than ever, more cars than ever, fridges - freezers etc etc, which has surpassed the
Is giving the coal merchants what 'they' want worth the risk to the planet ?
Jobs are plentiful away from the coal anyway, its just a matter of diversifying into another field that helps
with climate control and at the same time providing jobs
You are saying then, as I perceive your post's wording, that the ongoing diatribe both for and against "Global Warming" is certainly less than a global "scam", and perhaps more realistically a certainty?
Thanks for your reply Frank
I'm just trying my best to understand what's going on
It just makes sense to me that 'all' the pollution we create, 'must' cause problems
Growing up, the main contributor was coal and it did cause massive problems to air quality
Anyone with breathing difficulties were sent to special hospitals 'in the country' where the air was fresh
Now there would be nowhere to send them, finding 'fresh' air is like finding a needle in a haystack
What is the problem, cutting down on emissions ? What is wrong with that !
It is obvious that anything we do has an effect on the world. Science has talked about the butterfly effect that the beat of a butterfly in Africa can be the source of a tornado in Brazil. Having said that are we the biggest cause of global warming if so we are God because the ice poles on Mars are also melting. I thing the sun has a bigger effect on our weather than we do. This is a great opportunity to bring in another tax and it would be good if they could do something to help the ice caps on Mars. They know once a tax has been put in place it is permanent. The Canadian income taxes raised for the first world war has not been paid off yet. Global warming is nothing more than a tax on weather.
I don't disagree with what you say Martin, but I don't think we should be complacent either
Its obvious also that all pollutants will rise up into the atmosphere
I think I gave a fair reason above for my thinking on this, I'm merely a concerned citizen who is 'genuinely'
BTW - why would it be good to help the ice caps on Mars ?
It would show we can do something about what is happening. because Mars is having the same problem as we are. They [1%] will not let us have free energy which will solve what we are doing they just want you to pay more taxes
Oh, you can't have free energy Martin, what about the coal merchants, electricity and gas merchants ...........
I guess the little people will just have to plough on with their solar panels
Where do you get your solar panels free ?? Making solar panels causing more environmental damage than Niagara falls power station
Really Martin - I'm even more confused
Just another money making scheme then
Well I'm not convinced - yet, I guess I'll just have to watch from above when my time comes and hope for the best
I also guess I'm not clued up enough, never heard of these ice caps, wasn't big news here
I recall seeing channels and they said there must have been water on Mars, maybe I'm just more
interested in this planet
Anyway, thanks for the explanation of where you're coming from
Patsy it is good we are all concerned and if paying taxes could solve it I would be right with you. they have another set of taxes for the next ice age too
I think that there are two issues here that are being combined together as if they were all just one issue. One issue is whether or not people/humanity is causing warming of the whole earth, and the other issue is whether pollution is affecting the earth.
I believe that the two can interact; but that there is essentially two issues happening here.
Obviously, pollution effects the whole earth, some places more than others, and the places most affected are the higher-population areas of the world.
There is no doubt that people are the basic cause of this pollution, and we do all need to care about what we do and how it can be made to be less polluting. Our air is getting polluted, and so is the water, and most of it is from factories or somekind of industry pollution of the environment.
Whether the earth is getting warmer or going into a colder era right now is also something that people cannot agree on, and each view has their justifications for believing the way that they do.
Since the earth has been going through these warming and cooling cycles for thousands of years, it is definitely not something new that is caused by our human pollution.
It is simply that the two factors are merging right now. We are polluting more than ever before, and now the sun and earth are changing their cycle, not because of that pollution, but because that is how things work.
The sun goes through these periods of cooling down, and then warms back up, and it certainly is not because of vehicle exhaust fumes or coal mining here on this earth.
Fresno has probably the worst air in CA. Mainly because of its geographical location. We're like a bowl surrounded by mountains. We get all of LAs bad air falling on us, plus we're huge in agriculture...some things we can't do anything about like our location but we have strict laws on emissions and no wood burning fireplaces allowed for most of the year.
We probably also have the most homes with solar panels...there's about 5 on my block alone. We also have the highest rates for gas and electric.
Since so many homes have solar, PG&E has raised the price of gas so as not to lose income. Many people were complaining about this in my neighborhood watch app.
They paid a lot to get solar and their bills aren't any lower...
Also, although Fresno is the ideal place for solar since we average more than 300 days of sunshine a year, there are many places that hardly get any.
Do they really - I don't know Martin its hard to figure anything out with all this fake news going around
I do value your opinion and for giving it. I don't presume for a minute your mind is 'fixed' on anything, you seem willing to observe
listen and come to a conclusion that may well change - a bit like meself
Your link is no longer working. Here is the updated source:
@Neville Telen, I agree with everything in the video. Global Warming is such a fraud and so illogical that I have wondered how it continues to exist. The biggest "greenhouse gas" of all is water vapor. CO2 is down the list a ways, and I know of greenhouse operators who actually pump CO2 into their greenhouses to accelerate plant growth. We have lots of pollutants that we should reduce or eliminate, but CO2 isn't on the list. The entire scenario is a control and profit issue. Al Gore, the great environmentalist, owns the private home which is the biggest energy consumer in Tennessee, and flies to most of his appearances in a private jet, the most inefficient method of transport on the planet. He DID want to sell "Carbon Credits", which would allow him and his cronies to profit big-time from the fraud. He is a master con man, nothing more.
The video you gave said more water is needed to 'green the planet'. Melting the polar ice caps should certainly fix that:
The video mentions CO2 as 'the miracle molecule'....here's some additional miracles the video forgot to mention:
Yes, greenhouse operators "actually pump CO2 into their greenhouses to accelerate plant growth". They do not pump CO2 into their homes however, because it does not accelerate human growth, and prolonged exposure has side effects....water vapor has no such ill effects. Whether or not Al Gore is "the great environmentalist", or practices what he preaches is of zero consequence, and merely one of many smoke screens employed by Big Business to 'cloud' the issue. The research is in, the science is in, the effects on the polar ice caps can only be denied by the willfully blind (or by skillful use of Adobe Photoshop). But as I said, the ship has done sailed, so it don't much matter. Irregardless of what the optimists and idealists would have you believe, it's too little and way too late to do anything about it, other than sit back and enjoy the ride. The fat opera gal has done bellowed her swan song, so nothing remains left to do but watch and see which side was right...the libtard scientists or the Big Business cheerleaders.
I don't know the dates on the videos, but the first one comments on the state of things in 2012 and says the model is based on satellite measurements over 35 years--hardly a period of geologic time. The melting seems to have reversed since then based on reports I am getting from the arctic coast. I haven't been up there myself since 1997, but there was plenty of ice at that time. I am hearing reports of sea ice coming onshore this summer (July), something that does not usually happen in the summer and it tends to bring the bears with it...but at least you can see them coming in the summer. The second video has some valid points--dissolved gasses and increased snow. The snow slows freezing but also slows melting from above and itself will eventually become ice. After all, glaciers are formed from snowfall. The polar vortex was moving toward North America, but I don't know where it was last winter. It historically has "dumped" over Asia, causing outbreaks of very cold weather over Siberia. If it has moved to this side of the planet, I don't know what, if anything, that portends. It could result in colder winters and wetter summers, but not necessarily.
No, but the oxygen produced by the plants does.
If you believe the propaganda, so be it. You can believe whatever you want. Have you been to the arctic? Do you know anyone there?
When people go on with all of the talking points of the man-made global warming agenda, I feel like asking if they believe in the Easter Bunny too. The theory is one giant contradiction built on lies and media hype. The only thing the global warmers having going for them is a media that knows better but doesn't mind lying to people.
Since my previous post I have done further research on the topic, and it no longer appears to be so black 'n' white.....for every reference I find on polar melting, I can find another negating it (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...espite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html). However even this article admits "while few scientists doubt that carbon-dioxide emissions cause global warming, and that this has caused Arctic ice to decline, there remains much uncertainty about the speed of melting". Sometimes these conflicts are from the same source (https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/sea-level-rise/ vs. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/02/ross-ice-shelf-bore-antarctica-freezing/). Herein lies the problem. Separating the wheat from the chaff, and finding that sweet spot of consensus.
Some scientists are obviously libtards that will gladly put their political dogma before their science. Some are obviously 'hired guns' that will 'prove' whatever Big Business wants proven. I think everyone here is old enough to remember the 'proof' that nicotine is not addictive, smoking does not cause cancer, LSD causes "chromosome damage", etc. Another problem comes from Google and other search engines deciding to stop listing the date of articles, search page links, and so on, making it quite difficult to track down relevant (i.e. current) data. There is a National Geographic article titled 'The Big Thaw', which took over 15 minutes to find out it was done many years ago, and even longer to find something current (https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/02/melting-arctic-permafrost-toxic-mercury-environment/). This is a long-winded way of me saying that I may of been wrong, or I may of been right, or I may of been half-right/half-wrong....since there seems to be no 'sweet spot of consensus', it's time to just flip a coin.
An excellent point. CO2 goes in, and the plant converts it into oxygen. CO2 accelerates plant growth. The more CO2, the more plants, the faster they grow, the more they multiply, and the more oxygen is produced. Exactly as said in the 'RE-GREENING the Planet' vid. What the video conveniently neglected to mention is the obvious side effect:
I ain't no scientist, and cannot say for sure that this will eventually produce arm-long cockroaches or hornets, like millions of years ago, but I can't say it won't either. I can say that if Mother Nature is given an opportunity to do something, she has the tendency to jump on it like a cat on a mouse. On the bright side, it probably won't matter. No one here will have to fight off a swarm of giant skeeters (like in that crappy Hollyweird movie), nor will your children, nor their children live to see it....evolution is a very slow process.