Global Warming: Man made carbon emmisions or natural cycle?

[AKcharger]

Personally, I can tell you the glaciers here in Alaska ARE receding but they have been since the turn of the 20th century, decades before our cars, and planes came along. To me, when I see the government proposing a tax on farting cows/pigs I think this becomes clear...simply the latest money and power grab 


In any event thanks for the vote!   


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,462445,00.html

[tan top]

 i think it is worlds natural cycle !!  pluss  chopping all the rain forests down in different parts of the world don't help ... as trees take carbon dioxide  out the air & convert it into oxygen

[A383Wing]

Where is the "both" vote box??? 

[AKcharger]

There ya go!

[RD]

though there are less trees in the amazon river basin.. there are more trees in the United States then there was 150 years ago.  As the people become less and less reliant on using wood as a staple construction and home heating resource, as say our ancestors from 150 years ago, and the paper mills and other tree farms are using new methods to maintain their supplies through updated planting/harvesting methods... the trees inside the United States have greatly multiplied.  Though I cannot source an international consensus on how the other countries tree populations have either been positive or negative, I can source a MCG article about 4 to 5 years back that did a good job of researching the tree growth in the Northeastern part of the United States.  I know for a fact that there are more trees in Kansas than there ever have been from my studies in Kansas History and the review of many before/after pictures of towns, farms, ranches, etc.. in the Kansas Historical Archives.

So... there may be trees being downed in South America.. but there are a lot of trees growing in abundance in North America too!  So.. more oxygen for us, YEAH!!!

[Khyron]

Trees are overrated

[Big Lebowski]

   Mother nature is responsible for 99.997% of the Worlds greenhouse gases. Earth = 78% Nitrogen, 21% Oxygen, and 1% greenhouse gases...97% of that 1% is water vapor (rain & clouds for those of you in Rio Linda). Now we get down to Co2, carbon dioxide = 0.3% of 1%, and man generates 0.003% of that. Remember Volcanos, termites, & rice fields generate twice the amount of Co2 that we generate by burning dino oil. This Co2 level has gone up and down since before cavemen learned to BBQ.
    My point is...15,000 years ago, North America had a mile high wall of ice (5200' for those of you in Rio Linda) where Chicago now stands. This wall of ice stretched back to the North Pole (Santa's house for those of you in Rio Linda), and soon this massive ice sheet began to melt, fairly rapidly...Then, as the hairy cavemen tended to their forest fires, they managed to melt it all.
    George Carlin said it best..."Weeee didn't melt it allllll"

[Dave22443]

I agree with all of BL's facts.  They are well documented for anyone wishing to take the time to look them up.  (and I have)

I have always thought it funny that so many of the recent forums on global warming have been delayed or reschedualed due to unexpected/early snow fall 

And whats the report out just this past week?  That 2008 is going to go down as the coldest year this decade.

But I call Bull Sh** on the global warmongers for one main reason alone:  They refuse to debate facts or desenting views and when "challenged" (I.e., asked a simply question) they get all pissy and start attacking you.

Anyone unable to withstand an honest debate has no right to push their agenda.  And just for the record, I felt the same way about "Joe the Plumber".  He asked an honest question and was attacked for it.  Meanwhile, the answer to the question, which should have been the real debate, got lost and burried.  And that my friends, is known as "Having an Agenda" and has nothing to do with science.

Global warming and Global cooling (remember the 70's ice age warnings?) are cycles  caused mainly by the sun.  And since the sun is currently going through a cool cycle (I.e., few, if any, solar flares), then things are going to get a lot cooler around here for a while.  A few years probably.  Then guess what happens 

I voted natural. 

[TK73]

Not this shit again...

According to leading climate scientists the warming cycle is natural but has been accelerated due to human activities since the beginning of the industrial age.

Seems the "deniers" usually don't bother to really check the story out... The only "debate" on this topic has been political.

Can we lock this F@#$ER yet??

[AKcharger]

Not this s#$t again...Can we lock this F@#$ER yet??

TK
No need to be upset/angry,  I really what to know how many people here believe in GW or not. A very fair question I believe considering the other undeniable earth shattering crisis' that have "evaporated" such as:
- Over population 60's
- Energy crisis (we were supposed to have run out of oil 8 years ago) 70's
- Global cooling late 70's
- Nuclear power/melt down 80's
- Ozone layer 80's & 90's
- Y2K


Thanks

AK

[superduperbee]

120 years ago, scientists found a massive hole in the ozone layer. It later closed up all on it's own.............or did environmentalists diaper all the penguins to muffle their farts?

[dodgecharger-fan]

I think it's a natural cycle.

That whole argument aside, I do have some concerns about the article.

"Farmers so far are turning their noses up at the notion, which is one of several put forward by the Environmental Protection Agency"

"Butterfield said the EPA has not taken a position on any of the proposals."

"Butterfield said the EPA is reviewing the public comments and didn't have a timetable for the next steps."

So, either the article is wrong in stating that the proposal was put forth by the EPA, or the EPA pulls proposals out their butts and puts them on the table without thinking them through at all... or a bit of both.

Or maybe this is the work of some covert organization and I could safely change my vote to hoax/scam. They seed the ridiculous idea; attribute it to the EPA; the media calls up the EPA for comment; the EPA doesn't want to deny that the idea is theirs so they delay; everyone cries foul (or is that fowl ); and someone either makes a lot of money/someone loses a lot of credibility/ or both..

If nothing else, it gives the Internet something to talk about.

[TheGhost]

Both.

It's a natural cycle, but we're helping it along.

[TruckDriver]

I believe the majority of it is a natural cycle. Just look at how the world surface has changed in 100,000,000 years. All the continents were attached to each other at one time. To think is is never going to change again in the future would be just stupid. To me, that's like saying, when there are well over 100,000 other proven galaxies in the universe (proven by Nasa), that we here on earth are the only intelligent life out of all of them. Ya, right. Get a life

[dodgecharger-fan]

Just strap a tube of algae on the livestocks' backs and hook a few strategically place hoses...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12834398/

The EPA can pay for the equipment, BUT they get the fuel that is created from the process. They can then become an energy company. They can sell the energy back to the farmers - with a huge subsidy - so the animals can be slaughtered, the tubes refilled and installed on fresh livestock.

Someone might suggest we just stop breeding so much livestock and eat less meat, obviating the need for so many burping, farting, animals. That means eating more fruit and veggies... which is what the livestock eats... which makes them so gassy. So, then WE end up with the algae tubes strapped on our backs. 

[Silver R/T]

China is #1 world pollutant. Ive seen a movie about global warming and most of the smog/carbon comes from their factories. Of course U.S. is #1 consumer so it is part America's fault.

[Charger_Fan]

I think it's a natural cycle & that the whole global warming scare has just been an excuse for some groups to get rich.
(I accidentally voted on the scam one, I meant to vote on both)

[defiance]

120 years ago, scientists found a massive hole in the ozone layer. It later closed up all on it's own.............or did environmentalists diaper all the penguins to muffle their farts?

Actually, there continues to be a hole in the ozone layer, it simply stopped growing --- oddly enough, soon after legislation and regulation massively curbed the production of cfc's, which scientists stupidly identified as a leading cause of the expansion of the hole.  But they're always wrong.

[Silver R/T]

120 years ago, scientists found a massive hole in the ozone layer. It later closed up all on it's own.............or did environmentalists diaper all the penguins to muffle their farts?

Actually, there continues to be a hole in the ozone layer, it simply stopped growing --- oddly enough, soon after legislation and regulation massively curbed the production of cfc's, which scientists stupidly identified as a leading cause of the expansion of the hole.  But they're always wrong.

it "really helps" (jk) whem NASA, etc. send out space ships once in a while, it's really "good" for earth's ozone layer.

[mikesbbody]

Global what?  does the tooth fairy exist too?

[Mike DC]

A very fair question I believe considering the other undeniable earth shattering crisis' that have "evaporated" such as:
- Over population 60's
- Energy crisis (we were supposed to have run out of oil 8 years ago) 70's
- Global cooling late 70's
- Nuclear power/melt down 80's
- Ozone layer 80's & 90's
- Y2K

I think a lot of those crisis scenarios WERE true at least to some extent.  We just averted or minimized them in one way or another. 

The overpopulation problem is real.  We just souped-up our crop yields to compensate, and reproduction rates have gone down as the poor get educated.  But the basic issue remains, and we would indeed be in some deep sh*t right now if not for those countering factors showing up. 
 
We would have been in a pretty deep oil problem by now if we hadn't CAFE'd our cars down from the 1970s mpg rates.  (We wrote those laws because of the "fearmongering" about oil shortages.)  That, and a couple of recessions taking some big bites out of usage over the years.   But I don't think that just assuming multiple deep recessions is a very valid long-term energy policy.

Nuclear power meltdowns . . .  Do Chernobyl and Three Mile Island ring a bell? 

Ozone layer?  Probably overblown worrying about the damage from the specific weak spot that was in the news.  But it's still too early to tell in the big picture IMHO.   

Y2K?  Now that one was indeed total crap. 

[TheGhost]

China is #1 world pollutant. Ive seen a movie about global warming and most of the smog/carbon comes from their factories. Of course U.S. is #1 consumer so it is part America's fault.

You saw it in a movie?  Then it MUST be true!  I mean, movies aren't as reliable as the internet, but still!

[BB1]

I believe in Santa Clause and the Easter bunny too. 

[defiance]

A very fair question I believe considering the other undeniable earth shattering crisis' that have "evaporated" such as:
- Over population 60's
- Energy crisis (we were supposed to have run out of oil 8 years ago) 70's
- Global cooling late 70's
- Nuclear power/melt down 80's
- Ozone layer 80's & 90's
- Y2K

I think a lot of those crisis scenarios WERE true at least to some extent.  We just averted or minimized them in one way or another. 

The overpopulation problem is real.  We just souped-up our crop yields to compensate, and reproduction rates have gone down as the poor get educated.  But the basic issue remains, and we would indeed be in some deep sh*t right now if not for those countering factors showing up. 
 
We would have been in a pretty deep oil problem by now if we hadn't CAFE'd our cars down from the 1970s mpg rates.  (We wrote those laws because of the "fearmongering" about oil shortages.)  That, and a couple of recessions taking some big bites out of usage over the years.   But I don't think that just assuming multiple deep recessions is a very valid long-term energy policy.

Nuclear power meltdowns . . .  Do Chernobyl and Three Mile Island ring a bell? 

Ozone layer?  Probably overblown worrying about the damage from the specific weak spot that was in the news.  But it's still too early to tell in the big picture IMHO.   

Y2K?  Now that one was indeed total crap. 

Actually, y2k could have been real too, but the massive reprogramming efforts that were expended in the late '90s.

[Silver R/T]

China is #1 world pollutant. Ive seen a movie about global warming and most of the smog/carbon comes from their factories. Of course U.S. is #1 consumer so it is part America's fault.

You saw it in a movie?  Then it MUST be true!  I mean, movies aren't as reliable as the internet, but still!

It was a documentary, based on facts. You should stay in school kid, maybe you could buy a real car next time and KEEP it