- This topic has 190 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 10 months ago by Anonymous.
February 16, 2007 at 9:15 AM #8413
I heard on Rock 105.3 in the afternoon yesterday that they were making light of the whole global warming issue. Joking about how the national meeting on it got canceled because an ice storm in the area where they were going to have it. The two dumbshits on the radio Clint and BC laughed about it and explained that the whole global warming thing is a farce…
Maybe if they took a minute to get off their lawn chair in front of their house in Santucky (Santee), they’d understand one thing. The melting point of water (or ICE) at 1 atmosphere of pressure is very close  to 0 °C (32 °F, 273.15 K), this is also known as the ice point.
Now think of the polar caps. All they have to do is change temperature by 1 degree and they start melting. So yeah, Kentucky, Indiana, Colorado, etc can have a very cold day or a week, but at the end of the year, if the artic and Antarctic polar caps have heated up by one degree, then we’ll have that much more melt to deal with in our oceans. Once the polar caps start to slide from land and into the water, the sea will rise substantially.(Polar Caps can be up to 4-miles deep in some areas) So if those two dumbasses think for one second they have the luxury to ignore 1,000s of scientist and joke about it on a regional radio station that influences many of people that are completely as un educated as them, they should wake up and get a real job. Joke all they want, but they’re the joke.February 16, 2007 at 9:36 AM #45585North County NativeParticipant
I’m sorry but I don’t agree with you.
This is also a site about real estate and this post really shouldn’t be here, but I figured that the other side needs to be told.
Who are these thousand’s of scientists? The scientists that my husband and I know do not subscribe to the global warming THEORY. It is still just a theory – not a fact! The media presents it in a way that absolutely panics people. There are thousands of scientists who don’t agree with global warming. I’ll ask one of my scientist friends to give me some more information.
Its also important to know that our world has natural climate cycles. Did you know that volcanic activity can make a difference in that? Many times a great eruption has evened out the climate again and got the temperatures back on track.
Humans until only very recently have had the ability to measure the atmospheric temps, emissions, gasses and oceanic info. We really are just learning about it.
I agree that we need to be more enviornmentally aware and do something about our pollution so maybe we should be going after the auto manufacturers who have the technology for us to get better mpg. We also need to do more with nuclear energy. (Oh no! Did I just open another can of worms!) Nuclear energy is very safe and we need more nuclear power plants. Oh wait – that’s almost impossible with the bureaucrats in Washington!February 16, 2007 at 10:19 AM #45588
Yes I know all that and all I am saying is can we as a population afford to ignore it.
Yeah, Krakatoa change global temperatures over night and force the world into a three year ice age.. Yeah, things can change quickly..
Well, if you think that you can take the risk of ignoring what is going on, then do it. Like the housing market, I won’t say I told you so. We also have over 600,000 years of temperature and c02 data locked away inside our polar caps that have been studied. Anyhow, you are right about this being about the housing market. I just pissed off when those two dipshits start making comments on things they know nothing about. We could depate this for hours. I studied climate in college, so it’s your gamble on who you want to believe.February 16, 2007 at 10:30 AM #45590AnonymousGuest
Even if there is a 90% chance we are causing global warming, as the UN group of over 2500 leading scientists believe, I am not certain that it should be the most pressing issue we need to concern ourselves with. Instead, why don’t we concern ourselves with the poisons that are entering our bodies via polluted rivers, polluted air, and the use of thousands and thousands of household and industrial chemicals that are approved for use without any long term studies as to their impact on human health. My brother in law has a PHd in chemistry and I am amazed at the examples he has cited for me of common household sprays and insect repellants that have chemicals, that once in the body, never leave and actually cause internal damage to the organs of small mammals. National Geographic just did a piece on this very same issue.
BTW, this site is about housing, but there is the off topic area where things like this are posted all the time so don’t feel like you can’t bring this stuff up!February 16, 2007 at 10:42 AM #45592(former)FormerSanDieganParticipant
LostCat – I agree with you that on average the global temperature is rising, and glaciers (particularly in temperate regions) have receded dramatically over the last 50-100 years, and that man has had a hand in this. But some of your facts are a little sloppy and may take away from your message. Since you studied this in college you probably know the following, but they could be misconstrued from your post.
Once the polar caps start to slide from land and into the water, the sea will rise substantially.(Polar Caps can be up to 4-miles deep in some areas)
When you say polar ice caps you are really only talking about the Antarctic and Greenland Glaciers. The ice on the other pole in the Arctic (north) is actually Sea Ice and is typically a few meters thick at most. This ice is constantly moving around on top of the Arctic Ocean The north polar ice cap is not 4-miles deep, contrary to the Santa Claus myth.
Now think of the polar caps. All they have to do is change temperature by 1 degree and they start melting.
This is not the same as the air temperature changing by 1 degree and is misleading. If the air temperature is -20, a one-degree increase in air temperature will not cause melting. Since the air temperature in both the Arctic Antarctic, and Greenland is well below zero most of the time it matters more how much incoming solar radiation there is, so temperature is only one component. Length of the warm season and decay of the freezing season, (changes to which have been observed and documented from satellite time series) amounts of snow fall, and amount of incoming solar radiation may be more important than the average air temperature.
I like your message and enthusiasm, just don’t give detractors any ammo to shoot it down. Also, this was posted in the Off-Topic forum where virtually anything goes.February 16, 2007 at 11:44 AM #45596
LOL, go away for a little time and the chickenlittles proliferate.
It never ceases to surprise me how intelligent people can be so under-informed. My time in country is brief, so I’ll provide a single link for those here whose sources appear to be either those promting hype (“hollywood” science) or others with an political agenda. Therefore, they might be able to appreciate it (the link) as it’s “easy listening”.
That is, if they are not blinded by prejudice.
For some it will be hard, but don’t bother insulting my (and indirectly your own) intelligence by spewing out “Denialist” labels. I am not, and have not ever said that pollution of our environment is not a serious concern, I disagree it’s a cause of a natural climate phenonemon that people are trying to associate it with.
So heres goes, a different “mtv generation” source;
To those who try to exercise an open mind consider this:
“Thus, the task is, not so much to see what no one has yet seen; but to think what nobody has yet thought, about that which everybody sees.”February 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #45598gold_dredger_phdParticipant
The climate has always been changing. The last 10000 years have been anomolously static in terms of temperature and weather. Strange that this period would coincide with the rise of agriculture.
I don’t think this post belongs on a housing blog unless you were going to comment on how if you bought beachfront property, your grandkids would be flooded out of their house in the year 2100.
The sea level has risen in the last hundred years, by about a foot, and the overall temperature has warmed by 0.7 degrees Celsius. I don’t see any disasters or mass starvation caused by this.
This whole global warming drum beating by the liberals and their fellow travelers in the media is just an attempt to foist one-world government on the prosperous countries and introduce socialism again.
Funny how after the Soviet Union collapsed that environmentalism has been making a huge comeback. I’m sure peasants in China who make less than $1 per day are going to be worried what the weather’s like in the year 2100.
The wealthy and trustafarians have nothing to worry about or no purpose in their lives so they manufacture disaster scenarios and travel the world bleating about the end of the world unless we all stop sinning (using fossil fuels).
Environmentalism is a religion. God is no longer fashionable among the left, so they have to have something to believe in. The collapse of the Soviet Union left a big ideological vacuum and it had to be filled.
Scientists measure things and try to extrapolate from current data and theories. Scientists who are interested in political careers spout off to the New York Times and anyone else who will listen about what will happen to humanity unless their predictions are taken seriously.
As far as the weather goes, I’d be much more worried about an Ice Age than warming temperatures.February 16, 2007 at 11:47 AM #45599AnonymousGuest
Woa there hombre. Let me see if I understand what you are saying….You are saying that you want me to believe a science FICTION writer over peer reviewed science by our most accomplished scientists… OK, yes I must be the dumb one with the aggenda…LOL
Here is an idea Einstein…. if you screw up this planet’s environment with your politics… where are you going to live?February 16, 2007 at 11:57 AM #45601North County JimParticipant
Lost Cat, it could very well be a farce for all we know. The sad truth is that the science is not there to support any conclusions about human activity and planetary warming.
I have a graduate degree in atmospheric sciences so I know a little bit about the nature of the research. However, I am not claiming to be a climate expert.
All of the evidence for human-induced warming comes from numerical models. The output from these models is wholly dependent on how the modeler sets up his/her model.
In my view, there are two very important flaws in climate models.
1. The physical processes determining climate are poorly understood. How much heat is absorbed by the oceans? What other heat sinks are there and to what degree do they affect climate? It’s an extremely non-linear process.
2. The output of these models cannot be verified because of the time scales involved. Short-term modeling results can always be verified. Long-term modeling with a time scale of centuries cannot be verified. To act on their results is nothing but a leap of faith.
I personally don’t believe retooling our economy (a multi, multibillion dollar effort) based on some model output is the way to go.
It appears I’m not alone in that assessment. Here’s alink to the Byrd-Hagel resolution. Please read and discuss. It will tell you why Kyoto never made it to the Senate for ratification.February 16, 2007 at 12:01 PM #45600
Al Gore – it works both ways RB and, my “politics” aren’t involved. Regardless, his credentials are likely more impeccable than your own or Al’s. Still, my intent was for those who aren’t lost in their opinions to look into the sources he uses, which are a good introduction. As I said it’s easy listening, therefore meant for the superficially influenced.
gold_dredger, well said.February 16, 2007 at 12:06 PM #45602PerryChaseParticipant
Global warming or not, it’s a good idea to be environmentally conscious, if only so we have a more pleasant, beautiful and enjoyable environment to live in.
If the threat of global warming spurs us to do things cleanly, then all the better.
The treat of terrorism is causing us to watch out backs. Global warming can likewise cause us to be clean and tidy with our “waste.”
I agree with juice that we need to watch how we pollute our bodies with all kinds of chemicals.February 16, 2007 at 12:11 PM #45603
Sorry, can’t edit my post,
ranger bob, “peer reviewed science by our most accomplished scientists… OK, yes I must be the dumb one with the aggenda”
I would be careful about a statement like that, at least you did qualify it.February 16, 2007 at 12:18 PM #45604
Thanks, everyone. The only relationship global warming has to the housing market is the simple fact that the tech being developed to combate global warming will me the new economy here for America. We need to develop it so we can have a new item to sell to the world to keep our economy going. In the meantime, it will help make the blue skys bluer and our lungs feel a little better. So what is the harm in believing in global warming vs not? None.. It’s a good think all around.February 16, 2007 at 12:22 PM #45605AnonymousGuest
Exactly Perry –
There are things we can do do clean up environment, improve our own health and reduce death and disease caused by pollution. EG: I was in the Rockies last year, driving down on I70 to Denver from the mountains, and the skyline in Denver was thick with a dark layer of smog. I’m sure that getting rid of that pollution would reduce asthma cases, respiratory problems, deaths and in the event the majority of scientists out there are actually right, it might actually have a small impact on preventing global warming.February 16, 2007 at 12:27 PM #45608
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.