21-03-2002 05:07									#91
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

BTW - Isn't Louisana gaining land every year? Isn't New Orleans around the delta? Why would global warming cause a flood there?

	21-03-2002 09:21									#92
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Urban Ranger DarkCloud, I don't have my figures on hand, so we will have to go back to them later. One thing to remember is climatic changes are hard to predict since it is definitely non-linear. An increase of one degree can mean a massive shift in climatic patterns. There is already indication that the Atlantic Conveyor Belt is weakening. The Antarctic ice cap is melting at an unprecedented rate already

Yes, I udnerstand that, the ice cap melting is unprecedented for human ages if I understand correctly- it has melted before... Before it has melted completely off.

And Mac- Actually Louisiana and Florida lose coastline each year, as do the Eastern Coast States in the US and the Atlantic Boarding European nations

	21-03-2002 17:00									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

I thought the Mississippi dropped sediment off at the delta and that was adding to Louisiana... Are you saying all of that soil just gets wahed into the gulf?

	22-03-2002 06:58									#94
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Actually, that may be happening, but overall the coast of Louisiana is losing land and New Orleans may very well be flooded in a few more decades.

	27-03-2002 16:54									#95
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: That's just rubbish. How on Earth can you predict what the world will be doing in 40 years? You can't. You can only speculate given the current trends and technologies, which are inevitable to change.

Exactly, you’ve just answered the question for yourself – ‘based on current trends’

Of course this is assuming there’ll be any trees in 40 years, considering the rate the rainforests are being denuded etc…

quote: Anyone know the name of that bozo running around in the 60's saying that in 50 years there'd be no oil? What about the wise guys who said Lake Erie was dead? What I'm tyring to demonstrate is that you simply can't know. You can guess, you can speculate, you can call up the Physic Network, you can fear monger, but you simply can't know. Consider that fact that if you told someone in the 1850's that there'd be 6 billion people on the Earth they'd more than likely believe there'd be a shortage of horses used as transportation because they had no way of foreseeing the invention of the automobile

I agree, but you have to legislate with what you know at the time – things could end up far better than predicted, or they could end up far worse! Surely it is logical and responsible to act and ensure that the former happens – rather than the latter!!?

quote: BTW - Isn't Louisana gaining land every year? Isn't New Orleans around the delta? Why would global warming cause a flood there?

Wrong! 40% of the state is at risk of becoming submerged and they are losing X number of football fields of the Bayou to the sea every year (it was a large number!). New Orleans is already at least 8ft below sea level, which isn’t very good when you’re surrounded by the stuff! I saw and heard this stuff with my own eyes only last month!

Bottom line is that we're not insuring sufficiently for the future and we all know that in real life insurance is that necessary evil that prevents you from losing everything if your house burns down or your car gets totalled - so why not apply this prudent failsafe to safeguarding our lives and those of our children!!?

	27-03-2002 17:55									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I did some research on this for French class (no, really!), and whether the Kyoto Protocol should have been passed or not.

Meteorological satellite data has shown that the global average temperature HAS increased, but over the last 30 years it has benn around a 0.0002% increase. At this rate we won't need to worry for a helluva long time.

And the human contribution to most greenhouse gases is minute in comparison with nature's own sources. There is a worry with losing the carbon sinks of the rainforest, but the ocean is a hugely bigger sink that we can't really evaporate that easily!

	27-03-2002 18:25									#97
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Part of me really hopes global warming is happening.

I have it the same way Krazy. I hate the cold winter.

On the other hand, I don't like temperatures above 30 degrees Celsius either. Then my freezer can't follow keeping the beers cold enough

**

But of course global warming exsist! You have to be ironheads or sponsered by the oil-industry to deny that without any serious considerations.

	27-03-2002 19:42									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

hey new beach front property! Not bad


Max, Max, speak for yoursef. You are the biggest polluter in all my games. Dirty polluter.

Oh I know thats not the same asreal life. But sort of. Why would America reduces its indstry, infrastructure, to combat somthing that isnt even proven to exist. Do you have any proof? No.....Does anybody else? No.... Just a bunch of doomsday perdictions and mixed scietific data from scentists who's reputations are questionable.

	04-06-2002 11:40									#99
	Put an end to popups!

quote: And all Im saying is that no one has proved that this is not the natural course of nature.

quote: If global warming is happening, its not because of human emissions.

quote: GLOBAL WARMING IS A FARSE!

Just to take a few of your comments, posted earlier.

Any new points of view?

	04-06-2002 11:56									#100
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Everyone:

It seems the Bush Jr. administration is acknowledging the role that humanity plays in the global warming scene. Still sticking with the voluntary approach to reducing emissions from industry, though.

Gatekeeper

	04-06-2002 19:13									#101
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by CyberGnu Actually, people have already proven that there is better than a 90% chance that global warmng is caused by humans. It is not our fault you don't have the education to understand the proof. The height of arrogance must be to assume that since you don't understand something, it must be false...

I think you are overstating the scientific case. Please supply a peer-reviewd reference that suports that 90% figure.

	04-06-2002 19:39									#102
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

More recently I attended a guest lecture on CO2 levels from Greenland (IIRC) ice cores. They had a complete set of CO2 levels in the atmosphere going back several hundred thousand years, and the tiny rise we were in was dwarved by the enormous fluctuations that can only have been natural, and perhaps periodic.

Of course, this can only certainly be the atmospheric levels IN GREENLAND, and recent evidence has of course shown that whilst some places are experiencing warmer temps, others still are actually getting colder...

I'm still not convinced with global warming being very significant and a universal phenomenon. I was, but not since I had to research it for my French talk (it could of course be French propaganda, since all the articles I could use were French - what are the odds of a French conspiracy against the world?)

	04-06-2002 19:45									#103
	Re: A few things to note about satellite data: Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Ramo 1. The orbits of satellites tend to degrade. Much of the "cooling trend" in this dataset can be attributed to the fact that their altitudes have been decreasing due to atmospheric drag (pressure and temperature being proportional). 2. Satellite data experiences noise due to surface microwave radiation. 3. The disparity between satellite data and surface data has been far from uniform. In some areas, such as in North America, satellite data tends to be equivalent to surface data, whilst mostly over oceans, the two datasets have diverged. 4. Satellite data shows different results in each area of the atmosphere. While there's a cooling trend in the lower stratosphere, the lower troposphere is getting slightly warmer, and th upper troposphere is getting clearly warmer. In short, satellite data should not be trusted.

1. What are the magnitudes of these errors?

2. Are you rejecting all temp measurements? Or just those who give you data you don't like?

3. Which are more relieable: sattelitte instruments or despersed humand read thermometers?

4. Compare the significance of heat island error and human facotr error with that of sattelete orbvit decay.

5. If both sets of data have flaws wouldn't you want to keep the data sets and look at both? Not throw out measurements!! (TRY to think like a scientist...not a high school debater.)

6. How about balloon data or shipboard data? They should avoid the errors of heat island and the errors of orbit decay.

	04-06-2002 20:02									#104
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Gatekeeper Everyone: It seems the Bush Jr. administration is acknowledging the role that humanity plays in the global warming scene. Still sticking with the voluntary approach to reducing emissions from industry, though. Gatekeeper

This has gotten a lot of press but has been very fluffy (silly journalists...typical.)

What exaclty is the change in Bush Admin views? Is there new science? New evaluation of the science? Are the saying human caused GW is a fact? A possibility? What are they saying on the issue of dangers from warming? (i.e. effects)

	04-06-2002 20:07									#105
	Increase the size of your Attachments

This was the best link I could find to answer your questions. Note: I did basically no actual looking

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...03/MN215596.DTL

	04-06-2002 20:09									#106
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

It is interesting that the debate here mirrors the scientific debate I have been reading for years on the Internet. What seems to be happening in reality is uncertain. The evidence can be read in multiple ways: warmer, colder or no change.

What is clear is that the models have not predicted what is actually happening, indicating that they have not fully accounted for all of the factors. Further and continued research is required.

Also, both sides of the debate should tone it down just a bit.

I personally believe that in the short term, humans can moderately increase the temperatures on earth. But whatever we do is dwarfed by long term natural phenomena, such as sunspot activity, orbital eccentricities or something deus ex machina like a comet's tail we every now and then pass through. (There is an article on this I read some years ago.) Prudence dictates that we make choices to reduce greenhouse gasses assuming the models are correct.

However, think about this: We are at the end of the longest interglacial period in the last million years. We should be heading into another ice age. Perhaps CO2 emissions are holding it off. Do we know whether the any of the models have orbital eccentricities in their calculations?

	04-06-2002 20:29									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Garth Vader This was the best link I could find to answer your questions. Note: I did basically no actual looking http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic...03/MN215596.DTL

That's exactly what I'm talking about in terms of the coverage.

Anybody got a link to the report?

	05-06-2002 00:46									#108
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

here you have British take on Bush administration agreeing that there is global warming but that we will have to adopt .

http://www.guardian.co.uk/globalwar...,727202,00.html

	05-06-2002 01:27									#109
	Inflate your Upload Space

One thing that we could do in the short-term is a simple regulatory change that would have dramatic effects. As I understand it now, if one builds a solar collector on one's home, for example, that generates more power than it consumes over a given billing, the owner is not given credit for the excess. Imagine, though, what would happen if there rules were changed and the homeowner or business were paid for the net power they input into the system combined with a tax credit for construction of solar collectors. A lot more solar collectors would be built because they would become cost-effective.

	05-06-2002 01:33									#110
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Yes, if you subsidize something you will get more of it. Any more brilliant insights?

	05-06-2002 01:34									#111
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Come on GP. Ned's a bit behind the rest of us in common sense and ability to think logically. So that's actualyl a milestone in the development of his mind. Let's not bee too sarcastic about that

	05-06-2002 01:39									#112
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Pollution is bad.

	05-06-2002 01:41									#113
	Suffering from ads?

No. Volcanos are bad. And because there can be no proof that human-caused "pollution" causes a significant amount of warming in comparison to natural warming, we should look after our economies first and just go on.

	05-06-2002 01:45									#114
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

my honors chem teacher from last year installed solar panels into his house when they got tax credited for them, and he says they worked marvelously in heating his house, cut down his energy needs tremendously.

	05-06-2002 01:54									#115
	Remove this text

Global Warming is occuring, there shouldn't be any question about that. Unfortunately, its becoming an "evolution vs creationism" debate. Smart people on the left vs idiots on the right (no political pun intended).

The questions we should be asking are:

How much is the global warming a natural trend, how much of it is due to humanity?

Is global warming going to be harmful to humanity, or helpful? In the context of lands becoming drier/wetter, of course its bad if coastal cities get flooded.

If it is humanity's doing, and if it is harmful, can we reverse it?

Personally, I think on average, global warming is occuring, but the lack of ozone actually creates a greater range of extreme temperature zones due to heat escaping and entering the atmosphere with greater ease. The envelope of greenhouse gases around cities (smog) helps keep the temperatures from hitting those large extremes.

[if I were dictator of the world rant mode]

I would create a controlled temperature environment on the planet with seperate zones as follows (in Fahrenheit):

Tropical (75-100 degrees - high humidity/rainfall
Temperate Zones (55 - 80 degrees - light humidity/light rainfall
Cool Zones (25-55 degrees - moderate precip)
Paradise Zones (75-90 degrees low humidity - little precip)

If people really wanted anything above 100 degrees, or below 25 degrees, I'd put them in a space ship to the sun and pluto, respectively.

[/if I were dictator of the world rant mode]

	05-06-2002 01:55									#116
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Ecthelion Come on GP. Ned's a bit behind the rest of us in common sense and ability to think logically. So that's actualyl a milestone in the development of his mind. Let's not bee too sarcastic about that

Thanks for the kind words, Ecthelion.

GP, actually, if you think about what I said for a couple of seconds more, the regulatory change will simple eliminate a free ride by the utililities. They now do not have to pay for the excess power put into the system by homeowners. Eliminating this free ride by private companies is not a subsidy.

The tax break is intended to incent homeowners to build solar colectors rather than diesel generators to generate home power.

	05-06-2002 02:02									#117
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Didn't the middle east used to be a paradise? Obviously the weather conditions do not remain stagnant over time.

I'm sure global warming is occuring. But are humans the cause? And what if we are the cause? It surely isn't worse than us cutting down the rain forest. Either way species will die. As for humans, we will adapt. We always do. We are very versatile.

As for the extinct species? Well I mourn their loss, for it is a loss of a part of us.

but I still don't think that we have done enough in the time since oil was discovered as an energy source to permanently damage the global weather patterns. And eventually the oil will run out. Problem solved!!! (although we have enough coal to last a very long time- same with natural gas). I'm not one of these alarmist who think if we don't stop emission in 2 years the world will come to an end. The weather patterns may change, but then they will change again. Species will adapt. The ones that don't will die off. Simple as that.

As long as those whales that send signals to alien species galaxies away don't die off we will be O.K.

Last edited by Dis on 05-06-2002 at 02:10

	05-06-2002 02:07									#118
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

by the way from a post above.

The ozone layer doesn't affect global warming. That is a separate problem regaring ultra violet radiation and those ever-pale Australians . Err I mean chloroflorocarbons. Such stuff as Halon also poses problems to the ozone layer.

	05-06-2002 02:15									#119
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Ned Thanks for the kind words, Ecthelion. GP, actually, if you think about what I said for a couple of seconds more, the regulatory change will simple eliminate a free ride by the utililities. They now do not have to pay for the excess power put into the system by homeowners. Eliminating this free ride by private companies is not a subsidy. The tax break is intended to incent homeowners to build solar colectors rather than diesel generators to generate home power.

I understand the concept!!

It's just going to increase solar cell usage via a subsidy. Obviously more if excess power is required to be purchased by utilities. (I thought it already was...but that's another story.)

	05-06-2002 02:31									#120
	Increase Your PM Length

GP, Not in California anyway. A lot of us looked into building solar collectors during the power crisis only to find that if you put net power into the system you got no money back. This changed the calculus just enough so that solar collectors made no economic sense.