Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
 Global cooling. >

Global cooling.

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

Global cooling.

Old 04-23-2007, 08:03 AM
  #11  
Typical Buck
 
MountainHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 753
Default RE: Global cooling.

Wow, you can use photo editing software (or did you copy that from some neocon website?). Now, if you could only learn how to think for yourself...
MountainHunter is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 08:23 AM
  #12  
Dominant Buck
 
burniegoeasily's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
Posts: 26,274
Default RE: Global cooling.

ORIGINAL: david m

if global warming is a myth, i want to hear the explanation for why the polar ice caps are melting.
Same reason they were in the 1800s and the 1700s. Global fluctuations which have been recorded since the Romans grew grapes in the U.K.. Also supported by carbon dioxide traces in artic ice core samples. This is nothing new. I can remember getting ready for the scary ice age we were suppose to be in right now.
burniegoeasily is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 08:54 AM
  #13  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,553
Default RE: Global cooling.

ORIGINAL: MountainHunter

Wow, you can use photo editing software (or did you copy that from some neocon website?). Now, if you could only learn how to think for yourself...
Hey, don't be so hard on American Pride!
Red Lion is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 09:00 AM
  #14  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location:
Posts: 4,553
Default RE: Global cooling.

I watched most of "Green, the new red, white and blue" and found it pretty good. They did well dicussing things like how much floralcarbons that an average family puts into the atmosphere per year, around 13,000 pounds and was that technology will reduce said emissions, from alternative power sources like nuclear to changing lightbulbs. They also did well talking about China and that it they do not get on board, no matter what the US does wil not matter. China is only second to the US in floracarbon emissions per year. Even though I think that Arnold Swarzenegger is a goof, I did like his statement regarding 98% of the scientific community sees global warming/climate change as a big concern and 2% not.
I know that there are some here that think that we really do not have any real concern, but I believe that we do.
Red Lion is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 01:51 PM
  #15  
Dominant Buck
 
burniegoeasily's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: land of the Lilliputians, In the state of insanity
Posts: 26,274
Default RE: Global cooling.

I have concerns myself. But something people refuse to mention/understand, the carbon on our planet now is the same carbon that has been here since this rock cooled down. Remember Antoine Lavoisier little law; Conservation of Mass. Just food for thought.
burniegoeasily is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 04:08 PM
  #16  
 
Northwind~'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: MA
Posts: 430
Default RE: Global cooling.

Science is the most concrete thing we have to go by, and if the vast majority of the scientific world is acknowledging that global warming is a real threat, I don't see what is so hard to believe. One question I have is why are so many people so strongly opposed to the theory of global warming? Likewise, why is it that "environmentalism" seems to be a bad word so often? Is it because these concepts are associated with those liberal tree huggers? I dislike Al Gore as much as the next person here and I consider myself to be a conservative, but I am also an outdoorsman. I love the outdoors and respect nature as much as any "tree hugger." So please forgive me if environmental issues are very close to me. I am not in any way suggesting that one who does notbelieve in issues such as global warming does not care about the environment, but I am just asking the question: why not? It seems to me that people get very personal about it, as if they simply do not want to believe no matter what evidence is presented. The theory of global warming is just that, a theory. But there is an immense volume of evidence behind it. Climate change is a fact. The earth's climate has always been changing and fluctuating. These fluctuations usually occur over thousands or millions of years, and life forms are generally able to adapt to these changes over a long period of time. The larger fluctuations, however, such as the last ice age are still often accompanied by mass extinctions. Science supports the fact that CO2 is a greenhouse gas in that CO2 in the atmosphere allows light energy coming from the sun to pass through the earths surface, but as that light energy is absorbedby the earth's surface andconverted into heat energy which is radiated back into the atmosphere, CO2 traps the heat like the glass in a greenhouse. There is also sufficient evidence that atmospheric CO2 levels have been on the rise since the beginning of the industrial revolution. This can be attributed to the burning of fossil fuels, which contain C and produce CO2 when burned in the presence of O2. Simple enough. There is a logical order here that is not very hard to believe. The solution to this problem would be to find alternate energy sources rather than continue to burn fossil fuels, which are non renewable and present a host of other problems from mining/drilling damages to smog and acid deposition, so why not? I am not suggesting that the industrialized world be turned upside down, but it is definitely a problem that we need to solve and have the ability to solve. The problem of rapid Ozone depletion in the stratosphere has largely been solved by the phaseout of CFC's, so why can't wesolve the CO2problem in the troposphere by reducing fossil fuel use? It is something that has to be done smoothly but efficiently and relatively quickly. Sure, the Carbon being released into the atmosphere has always been on earth, and there have been extreme climate changes in the past. But the carbon being released has been in a sink, excluded from the carbon cycle and thus not affecting the earth's climate for millions of years. By releasing so much of this carbon in the matter of a few decades, one would think that there would be some ramifications. Which brings up another point. Even if the earth has been experiencing a warming period for centuries, it is generally accepted in the scientific world that CO2 emissions have quickened that rate. At the projected warming rate, species would not be able to adapt and evolve, a process which often takes millions of years, in the matter of a century or a few decades. One must also consider that although there have been extreme climate fluctuations in the earth's past, there areperiods in the planet's climatic history which one would not want to live in. As for global cooling, this could be part of the ramifications of melting ice caps brought on by global warming. In the North Atlantic, the warm water flowing north from the Gulf stream cools off, increases in salinity,and thus becomesmore dense, sinks to depths of up to 4000 meters, known as the North Atlantic Deep Current, and flows south tothe southern tip of Africa and Antarctica, through the Indian Ocean and to the Pacific,where it rises and flows back through the Indian Ocean and back to the North Atlantic where it sinks again near the southern tip of Greenland. This process, known as the oceanic conveyor system, takes about 1000 years to complete. Fresh water from melting icein the North Atlantic would decrease the density of water coming up from the Gulf stream and it would not sink into the NADC. The conveyor system would shift southward to around Bermuda instead of Greenland, and warm water from the Gulf stream would no longer reach the North Atlantic, which could lead to a cooling effect. These types of rapid climate fluctuations are not something we want and we should try our best to prevent them. That's just my $.02.
Northwind~ is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 05:54 PM
  #17  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location:
Posts: 497
Default RE: Global cooling.

ORIGINAL: david m

if global warming is a myth, i want to hear the explanation for why the polar ice caps are melting.


It might have something to do with the sun putting out more heat.
american pride is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 06:06 PM
  #18  
Typical Buck
 
MountainHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 753
Default RE: Global cooling.

The variance insolar radiation is less than a tenth of one percent, so there is something else at work.
MountainHunter is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 07:49 PM
  #19  
Giant Nontypical
 
jeepkid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: ****ifornia
Posts: 5,049
Default RE: Global cooling.

ORIGINAL: MountainHunter

The variance insolar radiation is less than a tenth of one percent, so there is something else at work.
NATURAL CYCLE, clouds, solar rays...

Some of the ice caps are getting smaller, while others are getting bigger. Whats your point?

And the ice fields on Mars are melting, do you think our CO2 made it all the way there??
jeepkid is offline  
Old 04-23-2007, 08:34 PM
  #20  
Typical Buck
 
MountainHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 753
Default RE: Global cooling.

Here's an article on the topic:

http://www.livescience.com/environment/070312_solarsys_warming.html

MountainHunter is offline  

Quick Reply: Global cooling.


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.