Climate Change is a Complex Subject, Not Just a Political Football

Discussion in 'All Things Boats & Boating' started by troy2000, Aug 19, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,665
    Likes: 79, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    Climate is changing is NOT proof it is man made.
    A spin on how a relatively tiny bit of manmade CO2 COULD be a "forcing agent" for atmospheric warming is not proof, it's speculation.

    Every other argument I've read, is speculative and ALWAYS eventually falls back on, all that CO2 we are pumping HAS to be bad.

    And while scientists are doing the speculation, that does NOT make those speculations scientific PROOF!

    I'll agree to leave the politics alone, if YOU agree to it.

    But woe betide who fires first shot! LOL :)
     
  2. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,531
    Likes: 226, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Wood Butcher

    There is still no proof that climate change is man made. Don't shout fire unless there is one.
     
  3. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    In simplistic terms: greenhouse gases act as an insulating blanket. They absorb and re-radiate infra-red energy from the Earth that otherwise would mostly radiate into space, and keep the Earth's temperature about 60 degrees warmer on average than it would be without them. That isn't idle speculation; that's the way it is.

    CO2 isn't the most efficient greenhouse gas. But it has a significant effect, simply because relatively speaking there's a lot of it. In fact, there's about one and a half times as much of it in the atmosphere today as there was 150 years ago, mostly because of humans burning fossil fuels. Again, that's not idle speculation. That's simply the way things are, and a 50% increase is hardly a 'tiny' one.

    Given that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and given that there's a lot more of it than there used to be, why do you find it so unbelievable that CO2 might be holding in more heat than it used to, thereby raising the average temperature of our surroundings?

    Arguing over whether CO2 is 'good' or 'bad' is pointless. Obviously it's good, in the sense that it's an integral part of the setup that makes this planet habitable for us. But too much of a good thing can be bad. We all need water to live, but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to stick your head in a bucket and leave it there.
     
  4. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    There's plenty of proof. And simply pretending there isn't won't make it all go away.
     
  5. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,531
    Likes: 226, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Wood Butcher

    Empirical or Imperial?
     
  6. SamSam
    Joined: Feb 2005
    Posts: 3,841
    Likes: 171, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 971
    Location: Coastal Georgia

    SamSam Senior Member

    No, I obviously did read it because I was able to tell you that the article isn't about climate change or the exhaling of ammonia, as you think,
    but it is about feedlots and the runoff from manure and it's harm to the environment. Ammonia is a big part of that runoff.

    Here, read it yourself since it seems you haven't... http://www.epa.gov/region9/animalwaste/problem.html

    Climate change isn't even mentioned. Global warming gets a small line, but in relation to methane and not ammonia.

    You can be as complex as you want, but misunderstanding is not complexity.
     
  7. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,531
    Likes: 226, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Wood Butcher

    This thread surely generates a lot of manure running off something.
     
  8. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,665
    Likes: 79, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    Total % of atmospheric CO2 that is manmade?

    0.3% but over the last 20 years it has risen to 0.4%

    Relatively minute!

    And the forcing agent speculation, has never been anything BUT speculation.

    Most arguments about AGW are circular.

    We have global warming (maybe) and it's man made.
    How do we know man caused it?
    Because he releases carbon from fossil fuels.
    How do we know this is bad?
    Because we have global warming from it.

    Ad infinitum
     
  9. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,665
    Likes: 79, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    I have suggested in other threads, that a fleet of barges with solar powered desalizination plants be constructed by the advanced, wealthier nations, to provide fresh water in coastal regions suffering from drought.
    Ignored.
    it doesn't do ANYTHING to stop the polluting with CO2.
    Only a carbon tax/wealth redistribution scheme will suit.
    We have to STOP being so rich and living so luxuriously.
    The world can't AFFORD our selfishness.
    Bunk.

    Now, I believe change ALWAYS is happening, and not just in climate.
    It stimulates new technologies, new wealth, new jobs, new opportunities.
    And I'd rather it got warmer than colder.
    ice ages don't appeal to me.
     
  10. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    Arguments that the effects of CO2 must be insignificant because it's only a small percentage of the atmosphere are irrational. It isn't how much of it there is that's important, but what it does.

    Blood is only about 7% of your body weight, and only 1% of your blood is white blood cells. Does that mean white blood cells don't do anything significant?

    Your supposed circular argument is more of a twisted pretzel; that isn't the way climate change theories developed. And repeatedly calling the data, research and studies that have been done 'speculative' doesn't make them go away.
     
  11. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,665
    Likes: 79, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    The point, MY point, is this a thread about how climate is changing? or about how MAN is changing climate?
     
  12. troy2000
    Joined: Nov 2009
    Posts: 1,743
    Likes: 170, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2078
    Location: California

    troy2000 Senior Member

    I thought it would be obvious I intended it mostly as a place to discuss man-made climate change, and what we can and should do about it. But you're certainly welcome to discuss what we should do in response to change in general, whether you think it's man-made or not.

    The barge idea is an interesting one. Who would you put in charge of handing out the water produced?
     
  13. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,665
    Likes: 79, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    Thankyou Troy
    The topic and new technologies DO interest me.
    I just get my panties in a wad over MAN-made, and discovering the intended meaning, mostly USA made, and the inevitable proposed political hamstringing of America.

    Let RED CROSS or CDC or any humanitarian group or several dole out the water, as long as they are NOT politically motivated.
    That of course, eliminates the UN. :)
     
  14. Yobarnacle
    Joined: Nov 2011
    Posts: 1,665
    Likes: 79, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 851
    Location: Mexico, Florida

    Yobarnacle Senior Member holding true course

    This may sound ridiculous at first, but my mind keeps returning to it.
    The concept is something I read in a science fiction story many decades past.

    An enterprising individual cheaply bought several hundred acres of arid desert.

    Using some military surplus, also purchased for pennies on the dollar, they constructed a luxurious self sustaining habitat.

    What keeps haunting me, was the water source.
    In the story, a double walled (torroidal) flexible, plastic tube was inflated and sent aloft using solar heated hot air. The base of the tube was anchored over a cistern. The tube extended upwards thousands of feet, and hot air rose and cold air descended to air condition the quarters, and condensation cascaded down the walls of the tube.

    Obviously winds would topple this air duct.

    but it seems to me, there is something in the concept that just MIGHT be usable! :)
     

  15. dskira

    dskira Previous Member

    Let me understand sam sam:

    Global warming is not a climate change? Pollution is not linked to climate change nor global warming? EPA is talking studying all these farms animals just for the fun of it? Why you think they are interrested?

    You sound more like me now:)
     
Loading...
Similar Threads
  1. El_Guero
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    999
  2. rasorinc
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    2,092
  3. gonzo
    Replies:
    675
    Views:
    39,395
  4. gonzo
    Replies:
    587
    Views:
    42,210
  5. Grant Nelson
    Replies:
    21
    Views:
    3,066
  6. Pericles
    Replies:
    11,312
    Views:
    835,297
  7. Boston
    Replies:
    162
    Views:
    11,247
  8. Boston
    Replies:
    4,617
    Views:
    284,655
  9. hmattos
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,317
  10. brian eiland
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,191
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.