Maybe Global Warming is man made
I was listening to BBC where a Japanese dude in a "mascot" outfit (not Disney Tokyo) died in 38?C = 100?F. In that segment they were babbling on about how the temperature has gone up 3?C in the last century (at least in Tokyo) got me thinking. I know dangerous. Anyways I remember "Morpheus" from "the Matrix" mentioning human produces 25,000 BTUs (over a lifetime maybe) but more like 250 and 400 BTU (according to google). Figure about 2 Billion folks in 1927 to about 7 Billion today and all the miles of black top I'm thinking yeah, maybe. So I'm wondering when population becomes 10 billion and the temperature goes up will we get a clue that there's too many people and start culling folks? Yeah I know that'll be a hard sell for curing Global Warming.
0
-
Start with the Muslims . 0 -
Remembering an experiment we did in 9th grade science class over 50 years ago. Introduced 2 fruit flies into a sealed mason jar with air holes, 1\4 filled with cooked oatmeal on the bottom of the jar.
Within about a month there were a gazillion fruit fly's. A week or so later there was nothing left but a rotten smelling mess of muck!0 -
Global warming is a B.S. thing dreamed up by politicians and supported by some 'scientists' so they get more money to 'study global warming.' 
The politicians need a crisis to entice the public of their worth to solve this fake issue. :twisted:
IF there were no major issues, we would have NO USE for politicians............think about it :!: :!: :!:
:shock:0 -
too many people and start culling folks?
oboma tried that by doing away with retired peoples insurance0 -
Here's all you need to know, according to NOAA. Note that there is no mention at all of human activity or "population heat" effect.
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/abrupt-climate-change/Glacial-Interglacial%20Cycles0 -
Y'all boys are living in a cave some where. Real Neanderthals. Because I watched the debate last night, and there was no doubt among those ten statesmen, that global warming is real. The Washington governor said it is the centerpiece of his campaign, and right now is our last chance to stop it, or else we all will die. 0 -
Suggestion: as a warmup, let's have him stop some smaller weather phenomenon first. For example, a hurricane. After he shows he can do that, we'll talk about global climate. 0 -
I disagree, humans have impacted everything. Deforestation has to have some impact on the planet, trees that used Co2 and produced O2 have been heavily harvested and not replaced, humans have practically destroyed the worlds waterways rivers and oceans with plastic and other pollutants and debris, what impact has burning a gazillion gallons of oil had? I agree that the earth has gone through ice ages and firestorms without any help from mankind but I think it is stupid to think we have not had an impact on the planet.
Further I think it is prudent to look into ways to reduce the impact mankind has on the earth and its resources if doing that makes me a looney liberal so be itQuick&Dead wrote:Global warming is a B.S. thing dreamed up by politicians and supported by some 'scientists' so they get more money to 'study global warming.'
The politicians need a crisis to entice the public of their worth to solve this fake issue. :twisted:
IF there were no major issues, we would have NO USE for politicians............think about it :!: :!: :!:
:shock:0 -
I was in England in 1982 in June and wore wool (and carried a brelly) the whole time. The next summer temperatures soared into the 80's and people were dying of heatstroke. They had no AC, never needed it. Now they do. It is all in what you are accustomed to.
If you think the industrial age has not impacted the planet since the 1750's, you are not paying attention. The Missouri Botanic Gardens Arboretum at Gray's Summit was created because the trees in the city were dying from pollution from burning coal.0 -
allen griggs wrote:Y'all boys are living in a cave some where. Real Neanderthals. Because I watched the debate last night, and there was no doubt among those ten statesmen, that global warming is real. The Washington governor said it is the centerpiece of his campaign, and right now is our last chance to stop it, or else we all will die.
The U.S. uses about 1/6 of the global energy. Last nights debaters said we have plenty of room in the U.S. for more immigrants. With more people energy use will go up. CO2 emissions will go up. Do they want to sacrifice their green agenda for more immigrants? Because of our climate and all of our electrical conveniences we must use a lot more energy per capita than someone coming from a third world central American country. If we transform these people into American style consumers, how is this being green? Bob0 -
Climate changes. That's what defines it as climate and not static weather. (That's a "Duh!")
I have a question for the human-caused crowd: If humans have had an effect, how big an effect is it? Are we responsible for 10% of the change, or 1%, or 0.00001%? I ask that and NOBODY can answer it.
Then I ask how big an effect will all our "corrective actions" make? Will they correct 10% or 1% or 0.00001%? And NOBODY can answer that.
So, until they can give me a fairly precise answer to both questions, I say we have no damn business trying to mess with the climate.0 -
One of the Libtards running for President said "it was too late, move to higher ground".
What a dolt0 -
And add all that methane from 10 million people farting then we have a REAL problem :? 0 -
So no to my theory of body heat from 7 billion folks raising the mercury, eh? What if I add live stock? Figure 100 years ago... Wait never mind. I figure wild animals back then would've out numbered the live stock today so that's moot. I suppose we'll just need to put up a shield like in "Highlander 2".
I wonder how much of the earth is covered in black top? That does retain heat from the day. 100 years ago I reckon what 1%? Today that number has to be at least in the teens or low 20s? I'll look online for guesses of land mass covered in black top.0 -
Culling would be a good start. 0 -
yosh, next time you fly cross country, look out the window and try to estimate the amount of blacktop/roads compared to unpaved land. It ain't much.
That's just this country. we've got more roads/buildings/cities than almost anywhere else, and we have only a tiny fraction of the land covered. All but the far West is trees and crops.0 -
There were ice ages in the past. Something warmed up the planet and it wasn't dinosaurs driving SUV's.
There were mass extinctions in the past - again plural. I expect the cycles to continue until the Sun goes red giant and consumes the planet.0 -
The solution to children detained in border camps is to build a wall and defend our borders.
The solution to reducing mans impact on the global environment is a massive increase in nuclear energy.
The solution to criminals is to make the punishment fit the crime.
The solution to violent crime is to arm citizens so they can defend themselves.
The solution to the National debt is to balance the budget.
The liberals aren?t interested in solutions.0 -
Rocky Raab - So more like "rivers" of black top with islands of asphalt.
charliemeyer007 - I think we'd need a big ass rock that tumbles out from space to kick up dirt to cause an ice age. I don't think North Korean nukes will be enough.0 -
i have been doing my thing to offset global warming...very hot and dry here so when i drive anywhere i put the AC on MAX and roll the windows down .... 0 -
Since humans cause climate change, let?s import more human baby making machines to solve the problem.
Yeah, that?ll fix it.0 -
LOL Over 100 years of weather data, computer modeling and super high tech equipment and we still can't predict the weather and you want someone to give you specific information on exactly how much impact humans have made or will make through changes LOL Rocky Raab wrote:Climate changes. That's what defines it as climate and not static weather. (That's a "Duh!")
I have a question for the human-caused crowd: If humans have had an effect, how big an effect is it? Are we responsible for 10% of the change, or 1%, or 0.00001%? I ask that and NOBODY can answer it.
Then I ask how big an effect will all our "corrective actions" make? Will they correct 10% or 1% or 0.00001%? And NOBODY can answer that.
So, until they can give me a fairly precise answer to both questions, I say we have no damn business trying to mess with the climate.0 -
Here is a question for you, EXACTLY how much damage have we caused in the ocean? How about air pollution? Give me an exact number LOL Rocky Raab wrote:Climate changes. That's what defines it as climate and not static weather. (That's a "Duh!")
I have a question for the human-caused crowd: If humans have had an effect, how big an effect is it? Are we responsible for 10% of the change, or 1%, or 0.00001%? I ask that and NOBODY can answer it.
Then I ask how big an effect will all our "corrective actions" make? Will they correct 10% or 1% or 0.00001%? And NOBODY can answer that.
So, until they can give me a fairly precise answer to both questions, I say we have no damn business trying to mess with the climate.0 -
So, you're saying even though we don't know for sure if humans are a cause, or by how much, we should go ahead and take drastic and expensive actions that may or may not help by an unknown amount? 0 -
I have flown and taken pictures from the planes in the 70's and currently. Currently the whole USA is covered with a brownish haze, that was not there in the 70's.
I drove to Los Angeles in the late 80's and the air was horrid, you could not see downtown through the smog. California enacted and enforced strict pollution laws, especially on cars, and in 2000, the air was breathable and mostly clear.
So, you can stay ignorant and pee in your drinking water, or you can clean up your act. To say there is no problem because you can't quantify by some pencil neck geek, is simply ignorant.0 -
We were talking climate change, not air pollution. 0 -
mag00 wrote:I have flown and taken pictures from the planes in the 70's and currently. Currently the whole USA is covered with a brownish haze, that was not there in the 70's.
I drove to Los Angeles in the late 80's and the air was horrid, you could not see downtown through the smog. California enacted and enforced strict pollution laws, especially on cars, and in 2000, the air was breathable and mostly clear.
So, you can stay ignorant and pee in your drinking water, or you can clean up your act. To say there is no problem because you can't quantify by some pencil neck geek, is simply ignorant.
I think you need to do a little more research. Over the last fifty years the overall air quality in the U.S. has improved. However California still has 8 of the worst cities as far as air pollution. L.A. being number 1. Don't take my word for it do your own google search. Hint - USA air quality last 50 years. I'd give you a link but there are to many to list. I'm not saying we don't need to keep progressing on air quality but the sky is falling rhetoric only turns people off. Bob0 -
Just because you say it is so, don't make it so.
I cannot get a clear picture from the airplanes any longer. Couple that with the invasive searches and cramped with sick people I now won't fly unless absolutely necessary.
I know first hand, and those are my accounts, no amount of google yourself is going to change that. As far as greenhouse gases go, about all I know is that the oceans are absorbing lots of it and the coral reefs are showing the results in die off. Half of it has bleached and died since 2016. That is an alarming statistic. Some think it is from the temperature rise which allows more absorption of CO2.
The big question is how long do we have at current rate? Then what can we do to slow/stop/reverse the trend.
Let's not forget, California did clean up their air when the set to it. I saw first hand, and I mean "saw" with mine own eyes. And smelled with my nose.
The question then becomes are you the jerk peeing in the well?0 -
I'll just quote you right back at yourself: "Just because you say it is so, don't make it so. " 0 -
I understand your concern Mag00 and somewhat agree with you. But by not educating yourself and spouting personal anecdotes makes you sound like the 4 new politicians that make the news with comments on subjects they know nothing about. Speaking of politicians remember Al Gore said we would all be close to death by now. The all knowing AOC said we only have 13 years left. A couple of days ago Yang said it is to late to stop global warming. Yang is probably as close to the truth as any of them. Mankind has little to say if the planet decides to warm up a few degrees. If we are prepared for the problems instead of wasting time trying to change the inevitable maybe the human race will survive. I am for cutting CO2 emissions for the oceans sake not so much for the effects it has on warming. If the oceans become to acidic we will lose the biggest supplier of oxygen. We cut way back on sulfur dioxide emissions (think acid rain). When technology catches up we will be able to ameliorate CO2 emissions as well. Of course if we implement the green new deal today we will solve the problem by either starving or freezing to death half the population. Bob 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
45 comments