Where do you stand on climate change?

[Minimalist]

I've done my share, too.

[LukeMC]

An unlikely campaign. Who'd have thought it?

[Autumnlicious]

The science is not diminished and this 'Climategate' has merely brought down an inquiry into the data, which is good. Re-examining data is always excellent. Professor Watson rightly points out that the science is at heart of the matter, not the people, and we should focus on that.
[youtube]gpEGBgHxNTQ[/youtube]

[Pippy]

I think it is silly to consider that modern humans, especially most westerners, have had no impact on the earth. We drive a lot of cars, and burn shit and what not...

My scathing rant the other day was about Al Gore advancing solutions that were disingenuous. I am involved in another about the severity of pollution. I am not entirely sold that humans are literally warming the earth, but that humans have to be having an impact, yes.

[lilphil1989]

Well, carbon dioxide reflects a portion of the earth's ~blackbody radiation back at it, keeping it out of thermal equilibrium with the space around. Lots of gases do this, it's the reason the earth's temperature is ~300K and not ~3K like it's surroundings. Increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere decreases the earth's radiation losses, making it warmer.

As far as the basic science is concerned there's not really much to argue against, it's quite simple (indeed Lord Rayleigh hypothesised that increasing greenhouse gases would cause an increase in global temperature, and he died in 1919).

The problem is that it's not readily apparent that the earth is warming, due to the complexity of the earth's climate (solar cycle, el nino oscillations etc).
Which leads to "it's colder this summer than last summer => the earth isn't warming" style arguments.

And it's difficult to predict the future of the climate in a fluid mechanical formalism, because the Navier-Stokes equations are bloody hard to work with.

[ib.me.ub]

It is probably good that it is happening. I was worried for a while, but I have now decided that we most likely need a good storm or two. Maybe evem a tidal wave or three and a few fires, plus the oceans needs to rise about 20 - 30 meters, that would also be good. Maybe decrease the popualtion by about 5 billion, that would do the trick. I supppose nature will have it's way in the end, and bring everything back into balance.

Therefore, I think we should look at Global Climate Change as a good thing!!!!! A bit of population control....

[Pippy]

mmmmmm eugenics.

Who deserves to be 'controlled'?

Can I get an exemption? I have done all I could to help the earth, I am not her enemy.

But if she squishes me, I will see you all i the after life. tee hee hee

[ib.me.ub]

Hmmm, eugenics?, not really! It's not so much about selective breeding, but total population control, in an el natural way.

Who deserves to be 'controlled'?

Well nobody, except those who cannot control themselves...., which is most of the population unfortunately.

Can I get an exemption? I have done all I could to help the earth, I am not her enemy.

But if she squishes me, I will see you all i the after life. tee hee hee

Yeah sure, I can put in a request for you, but She is a bi*ch though!!!

Otherwise, see you on the flipside.............!!!!

[Edwardo Piet]

But if she squishes me, I will see you all i the after life. tee hee hee

I doubt it.

EvF

[Zhalentine]

Well, carbon dioxide reflects a portion of the earth's ~blackbody radiation back at it, keeping it out of thermal equilibrium with the space around. Lots of gases do this, it's the reason the earth's temperature is ~300K and not ~3K like it's surroundings. Increasing the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere decreases the earth's radiation losses, making it warmer.

As far as the basic science is concerned there's not really much to argue against, it's quite simple (indeed Lord Rayleigh hypothesised that increasing greenhouse gases would cause an increase in global temperature, and he died in 1919).

The problem is that it's not readily apparent that the earth is warming, due to the complexity of the earth's climate (solar cycle, el nino oscillations etc).
Which leads to "it's colder this summer than last summer => the earth isn't warming" style arguments.

And it's difficult to predict the future of the climate in a fluid mechanical formalism, because the Navier-Stokes equations are bloody hard to work with.

Actually CO2 absorbs heat and begins to vibrate. The CO2 molecules will eventually emit the energy and stop vibrating. What you described sounds like CO2 is reflecting heat like a mirror reflects sun light, but the CO2 is actually absorbing heat and keeping it within the atmosphere. When the heat is released it is usually absorbed by another greenhouse gas.