How could you NOT believe in global warming?

[chadwix]

Might as well worry about radiation from the sun and build a giant pair of sunglasses over the earth.

Also we should build giant corks to block up volcanos!

I agree with both points, oddly enough they are safer bets than what our current administration has to get us out of debt. If we charge more, we make more!!! Freaking brilliant!!!

[Slacker76]

Global warming is proven to be 10x worse than expected, how do we regulate north korea and other countries who arent in compliance? We can pat ourselves on the back all we want, but even if you find proof you cant do crap about it in the higher offending regions.

Sit under the rainbow and sing, its just as effective.

You're just losing the argument on purpose. North Korea is about the worst example anyone could cite. You know what their industrial and agricultural output is?

[shimerra]

Global warming is proven to be 10x worse than expected, how do we regulate north korea and other countries who arent in compliance? We can pat ourselves on the back all we want, but even if you find proof you cant do crap about it in the higher offending regions.

Sit under the rainbow and sing, its just as effective.

Let's give up because it's hard. Kind of a pathetic fall back argument. Completely impossible to convince to persuade people. You're right.

[Smeaky]

I remember my winters as a kid most actually had snow (21 now was 5-6). Nowdays in the middle of sweden it has been alot of random winters, either rain and snowslush or freezingly cold with piles of snow. What I mean is that it used to be balanced, now I never know what to expect to be honest oO.

[chadwix]

You're just losing the argument on purpose. North Korea is about the worst example anyone could cite. You know what their industrial and agricultural output is?

It was more of an example of countries who dont give a crap about what we say and those who cant afford to implement compliant conditions.

North korea was a good example because they dont listen to anyone apparently, i used them for that reason more so than emissions.

"Let's give up because it's hard"

That was a hypothetical statement to present my point

Id think human rights trump polluting the air, call me crazy.

[Choptimus]

How about solving the world hunger crisis first?

How about solving world poverty first?

How about we work on world peace first? At least that way we won't be blowing each others new green tech up, destroying any positive effect it may have had.

Seriously, global warming should be at the very bottom of urgent issues we need to fix as a planet.

[Adam Jensen]

How about solving the world hunger crisis first?

How about solving world poverty first?

How about we work on world peace first? At least that way we won't be blowing each others new green tech up, destroying any positive effect it may have had.

Seriously, global warming should be at the very bottom of urgent issues we need to fix as a planet.

Then we'd never solve global warming. None of those problems will ever be solved but we have the resources to mitigate ALL of them significantly, so we don't need a priority list.

[Chonogo]

How about solving the world hunger crisis first?

How about solving world poverty first?

How about we work on world peace first? At least that way we won't be blowing each others new green tech up, destroying any positive effect it may have had.

Seriously, global warming should be at the very bottom of urgent issues we need to fix as a planet.

That's the thing. With the climate changing, we'll have more people hungry and more people poor. There are wide swaths of the US agricultural Midwest that are in extreme drought. That means less food. That means less farms. That means less money, which makes people poor. And when people are poor, they get desperate. And less peaceful.

Cause and effect.

[Spectral]

Everyone of these threads starts with denialism of the actual phenomena and eventually goes to, "well we can't do anything about it". I wonder what the next turn of the denialist movement will be.

[Grizzly Willy]

It was more of an example of countries who dont give a crap about what we say and those who cant afford to implement compliant conditions.

North korea was a good example because they dont listen to anyone apparently, i used them for that reason more so than emissions.

"Let's give up because it's hard"

That was a hypothetical statement to present my point

Id think human rights trump polluting the air, call me crazy.

So, when our people are suffering and they ask why, the answer will be "because rights".

Because that's not dumb.

[Adam Jensen]

Id think human rights trump polluting the air, call me crazy.

What about my right to breath clean air and drink clean water?

[Chonogo]

Everyone of these threads starts with denialism of the actual phenomena and eventually goes to, "well we can't do anything about it". I wonder what the next turn of the denialist movement will be.

"We knew it was true all along". --Neil DeGrasse Tyson

[Sayier]

The Earth naturally goes through periods of heating and cooling. I have seen nothing that convinces me that with out a doubt this is any different then one of the many heating periods we have had in the past.

[Chonogo]

The Earth naturally goes through periods of heating and cooling. I have seen nothing that convinces me that with out a doubt this is any different then one of the many heating periods we have had in the past.

This fast and dramatic? Not without a cataclysmic event, like a super volcano going off or a big ass meteor hitting the Earth.

[Grizzly Willy]

The Earth naturally goes through periods of heating and cooling. I have seen nothing that convinces me that with out a doubt this is any different then one of the many heating periods we have had in the past.

Could somebody link the massive body of evidence again? Posts like these make me sad.

[Darkacid]

Because of threads like this that try to stifle debate.

[Chonogo]

Could somebody link the massive body of evidence again? Posts like these make me sad.

Do you think it would actually matter? Then again, I was skeptical until I actually researched it. Maybe Sayier just hasn't done what I did yet.

[Spectral]

Could somebody link the massive body of evidence again? Posts like these make me sad.

I always feel like this is a pretty good start: http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators/

[Grizzly Willy]

I'm wrapping up a course on Science and Pseudoscience, and one of the topics we're ending with is Global Warming. And man, this entire debate is so fucking fabricated it makes me mad.

[Synthaxx]

There's been warm and cold ages in the past. They're very slow and happen over thousands of years. Yes, our influence on the planet has some effect, but these periods of temperature changes happen regardless. There's also much shorter waves of fluctuation that last several decades each, but where temperatures don't reach the peak highs and lows of the longer periods. They don't come anywhere near, and fluctuations might be 1-2C over the median.

The long waves will reach peaks which can be extreme, on the verge of ice age (and sometimes into an ice age itself), or on the high peaks where temperatures are 15-20C above the median. At the moment, i'd probably guess we're on a slope up towards a high peak long wave, and a high peak short wave.

Both types of waves have been reported in the past (there was a high peak one in the 1400's i think), but there's no written evidence of the extreme low ones as they tend to start killing off life as the ice takes over. There is evidence in the earth's layers that provide evidence for ice ages, but nothing written or recorded by man.

So, while climate change does occur, it's mostly natural and expected. Sure, reducing emissions would help, but there'd be more health benefits from it, at least as long as we continue to cut down the forests and not replacing them. On the other hand, striking a balance between CO2 in the atmosphere and the number of trees on earth is a fine one.

If there's not enough trees, there's too much CO2 in the atmosphere and poor air quality is bad for us humans. If there are too many trees, there's too much oxygen in the atmosphere which while good for us, means that there's less carbon dioxide by percent-volume, which means some trees potentially die out.

As you can imagine, this is already happening, it's a cycle;
New Trees are born > Absorbs CO2 + Emits Oxygen = Better for Humans + Worse for Trees > Trees Die + Release CO2 = Better for Trees + Worse for Humans > New Trees are born

So, as you can see, even with the temperature waves, CO2 is being kept in balance. If we took all of the man-made emissions out of the world, we'd potentially kill of tree life in the short term, but the cycle would continue at a lower level and thus climate change would still continue to fluctuate as normal.