|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message ... In article , Lee K wrote: "donquijote1954" wrote in message groups.com... there is a 90 percent chance that global warming is human-caused. " While humanity's three billion tonnes (gigatonnes, or GT) per year net contribution to the atmosphere's CO2 load appears large on a human scale, it is actually less than half of 1% of the atmosphere's total CO2 content (750-830 GT). The CO2 emissions of our civilization are also dwarfed by the 210 GT/year emissions of the gas from Earth's oceans and land. Perhaps even more significant is the fact that the uncertainty in the measurement of atmospheric CO2 content is 80 GT -- making three GT seem hardly worth mentioning." Human activity is adding more like 25 gigatons of CO2 to the atmosphere annually, just from burning of fossil fuels. The latest figures are about 7 PgC, which is 7 petagrams of carbon annually, and multiply that by 44/12 to get petagrams (gigatons) of CO2. All the other carbon is just circulating around the biosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere. Burning of fossil fuels is adding carbon to these at a rate of 7 gigatons of carbon, or 25 gigatons of CO2, per year. - Don Klipstein ) Credentialed scientists in the cited article differ with your take: "The CO2 emissions of our civilization are also dwarfed by the 210 GT/year emissions of the gas from Earth's oceans and land." |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
On Thu, "Lee K" wrote:
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message ... All the other carbon is just circulating around the biosphere, hydrosphere and atmosphere. Burning of fossil fuels is adding carbon to these at a rate of 7 gigatons of carbon, or 25 gigatons of CO2, per year. Credentialed scientists in the cited article differ with your take: "The CO2 emissions of our civilization are also dwarfed by the 210 GT/year emissions of the gas from Earth's oceans and land." An interesting article; http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/f...ef&rfp=dta&p=4 Thanks for posting it, today NBC Nightly News had a preview of the global warming report expected tomorrow, as "very likely" something, at least they aren't as cocksure as the amateur proponents. And in opposition in flavor, they showed video of cattle freezing and starving in the central US plains where 4 feet of snow fell in the last few weeks. But more topical, I am watching a documentary on George Washington Carver and all the soy and peanut products he pioneered or invented, soy diesel and plastics and even newspaper inks are replacing petroleum products, and are renewable, even the Ford U car made of soy plastic was surprise to me, even though I have known for 60 years about soy plastics; http://media.ford.com/article_displa...ticle_id=14047 Renewables allow ignoring the global warming argument, renewables are the way to attack the problem, wastefulness should be avoided, but CO2 allocations and reductions in economic activity are not as effective. Joe Fischer |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
donquijote1954 wrote:
Hey, that I knew. What is missing in this report though is who among humans are to blame. See, NOT ALL HUMANS POLLUTE: some drive Stupid Unnecessary Vehicles while others ride bicycles. Others simply post spam and troll messages to Usenet, thus wasting electricity on the thousands (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of Usenet servers worldwide. - Logan |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:12:28 -0600, Logan Shaw
wrote: donquijote1954 wrote: Hey, that I knew. What is missing in this report though is who among humans are to blame. See, NOT ALL HUMANS POLLUTE: some drive Stupid Unnecessary Vehicles while others ride bicycles. Others simply post spam and troll messages to Usenet, thus wasting electricity on the thousands (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of Usenet servers worldwide. - Logan It really doesnt matter whether mankind is or isnt causing global warming because there simply is no solution to a global problem. The world is comprised of some 190 countries all with their own Governments who will all do their own thing and there will be no agreement about what should be done, ever. The world has no mechanism for solving a global problem. How is anyone going to stop a country like China from building its 500 coal fired power stations. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
On Feb 1, 6:53 pm, Cosmopolite wrote:
THE BANANA REVOLUTION http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote40 And how much pollution does the manufacture, shipping and retailing of a bycicle cause. Since you are using the internet, you are also to blame for the pollution that computer manufacture etc. and power production emitt. In short, we are all in this TOGETHER. - Hide quoted text - NO, NO and NO. I'm a frugal monkey (notice the group above called "frugal-living"), not a hungry lion. Monkeys are COOPERATIVE and perhaps there is the most room for frugality. Here's some pep talk for the revolution coming soon... Continuing with the coops, here are some good reasons why many people would join them if given the choice... "Most people are living on Kibbutz Arava for two reasons: 1.) to be able to work for themselves [no politician, no bureaucrat, no boss, in other words, no lion], and 2.) to be able to raise their children in a safe and comfortable environment [in other words, no jungle]. In a world whose cities are increasingly becoming more polarized and violent, these basic wants/needs are synonymous with life on a kibbutz. Internally, Kibbutz Arava functions rather communally and ecologically. There is a central dining room and commons area. Food that is eaten in the dining room arrives as bulk, wholesale crates, thus eliminating retail wastes such as packaging and plastic wrappers. The kibbutz is a pedestrian community. People are able to walk and ride their bikes to any kibbutz activity. In fact, there are only five leisure cars available for the 130 adult members. On kibbutz, people don't throw much away. When things break, they are fixed either by the garage, carpentry shop, or laundry. Things are not easily thrown away, as items are scarce. There are public commodities, such as a coffee and tea lounge, a pool, an entertainment area, a computer and fax room, a music studio, and a horse stable. By offering these amenities, the kibbutz eliminates the need for everyone to have their own TV, computer, etc [no consumerism, which feeds the lion]." kibbutz... http://www.objectsspace.com/encyclop...ex.php/Kibbutz |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
Leo Lichtman wrote: "donquijote1954" wrote: (CLIP) See, NOT ALL HUMANS POLLUTE: (CLIP) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Answer a few questions: 1.) How does the LBS get its merchandise? Is there any fuel consumed in the delivery? 2.) How does mail get to your house? 3.) Do you use electricity? How is it generated? 4.) How do the groceries get from the producer to the store? ...Need I go on? OK, let's create a scale, in which, say, I'm a 5 and the SUV gas- guzzlers are a 10 (the perfect polluter), then I would be ready to move down perhaps to a 3, provided I'm safe to go out and ride my bike. And then perhaps I would need a kibbutz coop and reduce my need to a 1 (0 is when you die). |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Only the revolution can save the planet
On Feb 2, 4:16 am, (Mauried) wrote:
On Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:12:28 -0600, Logan Shaw wrote: donquijote1954 wrote: Hey, that I knew. What is missing in this report though is who among humans are to blame. See, NOT ALL HUMANS POLLUTE: some drive Stupid Unnecessary Vehicles while others ride bicycles. Others simply post spam and troll messages to Usenet, thus wasting electricity on the thousands (tens of thousands? hundreds of thousands?) of Usenet servers worldwide. - Logan It really doesnt matter whether mankind is or isnt causing global warming because there simply is no solution to a global problem. The world is comprised of some 190 countries all with their own Governments who will all do their own thing and there will be no agreement about what should be done, ever. The world has no mechanism for solving a global problem. How is anyone going to stop a country like China from building its 500 coal fired power stations. You said best. There's one hope though: THE REVOLUTION (coming soon)... WORLD REVOLUTION "The World Revolution is an idea for a new, global activist social movement for progressive social change. It aims to resolve in a definitive and comprehensive manner the major social problems of our world and our era. Major issue areas of the World Revolution include: peace, human rights, the environment, and world poverty." http:// www.worldrevolution.org/ VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!! You may have liked what you read above and decided to join in such an effort or any other effort to change the world --for the better, of course, because you want change that's NONVIOLENT AND DEMOCRATIC. Thus you are part of the solution and not part of the problem. However, if you wished for something truly different, appealing to the pleasures of life, in a shorter time frame, because you want to live it, then look no further and 'feel' and 'taste' our EPICUREAN REVOLUTION.* Welcome to the 'BANANA REVOLUTION,' which attacks top-down politics by being irreverent of power, requiring the participation of the individual and proposing a simple yet satisfying lifestyle... WE ARE THE REVOLUTION; WE CAN HAVE THE GOOD LIFE, HERE AND NOW. Well, it's also very funny and sexy to make it more appetizing. Please see http://webspawner.com/users/donquijote40 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Do not feed the Dinosaur!
See what they are doing in Canada...
Send a Message to Canada's Top Greenhouse Gas Polluters Dear Sir/Madam, Your company is listed as one of the top 10 Greenhouse Gas polluters in Canada. [Your Comments] I urge you to give Canadians a real gift this holiday season by committing to reduce your Greenhouse Gas emissions by 6% below your 1990 level. Sincerely, [Your Name] [Your Address] Yep, the worst polluters get punished (I suggest not buying from them) for being filthy. Not a bad idea for other places where pollution is ignored... This is a comment to the above initiative: "If nothing is done the earth will follow the path of the Dinasaur." See the exclusive T-shirt "Do not feed the Dinosaur! Ride a Bike!" http://www.zazzle.com/product/235628722888324810 |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Only the revolution can save the planet
On 2 Feb 2007 05:51:17 -0800, "donquijote1954"
wrote: You said best. There's one hope though: THE REVOLUTION (coming soon)... Stick it. Joe Fischer |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
"Humans 'very likely' making earth warmer" is wrong
Climate Change's Carnival Atmosphere
Thursday , February 01, 2007 By Steven Milloy The global warming carnival hits its full stride this week in preparation for the release of the long-awaited and much-hyped United Nations report on global warming. It's unfortunate for the climateers that this week's climate science doesn't live up to all the hoopla. The week started out with a Congressional hearing in which Rep. Henry Waxman accused the Bush administration of trying to squelch the science about global warming. Rep. Waxman seems to have overlooked the fact that, if silencing debate was the administration's goal, there was a far better way to go about achieving that goal - that is, by cutting off the alarmist's financial support. The Bush administration, after all, is by far the largest funder of global warming alarmism, pouring about $30 billion of federal dollars into climate- and alternative energy-related research over the last six years. Many of the beneficiaries of this taxpayer largesse, particularly NASA's James Hansen, have become media darlings. Not to be outdone, Sen. Barbara Boxer's Environment and Public Works Committee held a hearing during which, as the Aberdeen American News (South Dakota) put it, "presidential contenders for 2008. expounded - and at times tried to outdo each other - on why they believed Congress must act to reduce heat-trapping greenhouse gases." And those were some of the more tame circus acts. Al Gore was nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for his global warming alarmism. Paris officials announced that the Eiffel Tower would shutdown its 20,000 flashing light bulbs and go dark for five minutes on the eve of the release of the UN report. The National Football League announced that it would plant 3,000 trees to offset carbon dioxide emissions caused by this week's Super Bowl. A California state legislator introduced a bill to ban regular (incandescent) light bulbs and to mandate fluorescent lighting in homes and businesses by 2012. The bill is called the "How Many Legislators Does it Take to Change a Lightbulb Act." These hijinks also extended into the science community. First, the UN isn't releasing its full report this week - just the curiously edited "Summary for Policy Makers." The detailed report on the science won't be issued until May or so because it's not finished. If you're wondering how the UN can issue a summary of a report that's not even finished, fear not. The UN has announced that changes to the full report shall be made "to ensure consistency with the Summary for Policy Makers." The UN process - akin to shooting first and asking questions later -is the exact opposite of the traditional scientific method. In an apparent effort to either out-shine or to add urgency to the UN report, a new study co-authored by NASA's James Hansen (Science, Feb. 2) claims that the UN's climate models have under-predicted actual climate change, particularly with respect to sea level. Hansen's study reports that the climate models: (1) slightly underestimate actual global temperature increase; and (2) greatly underestimate actual sea-level rise. Hansen and his co-authors conclude that their findings show that previous projections have not exaggerated, but may in some respects have underestimated, the extent of climate change. But Hansen's global temperature claims are questionable since the locations he relies on for temperature measurements are as much as 1200 kilometers (720 miles) apart. As an example of what this means, a temperature taken in New York, N.Y. (where the average February high is 42 degrees Fahrenheit) would be assumed to be representative of the temperature data from as far away as Atlanta, Ga. (where the average February high is 57 degrees Fahrenheit). That can obviously be quite a large (and uncertain) assumption in a game where the alarmists make their gloom-and-doom predictions based on average global temperature changes on the order of a few tenths of a degree over several decades. Moreover, NASA's own data indicate that there appears to be no significant change in temperature trend since the early 20th century. No doubt this is why Hansen and his co-authors admit in their study that the time period they considered for their temperature analysis (1990-2006) is "relatively short," rendering it "difficult to establish the reasons" for this warming. Not mentioned, however, is the fact that Hansen's claim of greater warming during 1990-2006 is driven in large part by a brief spike in warming (caused by an El Nino event) that occurred during 1997-1998. The spike is over and subsequent temperature data indicate that the warming trend is back to normal. With respect to sea level rise, according to another new study, the mean level of sea-level rise has not accelerated recently and was more than 30 percent greater during 1904-1953 than during 1954-2003. As with the temperature data, Hansen and his co-authors acknowledge in their paper that the time periods are too short to draw conclusions: "Again, we caution that the time interval of overlap is short, so that internal decadal climate variability could cause much of the discrepancy." Showmanship, rather than facts, is driving the climate debate - and, yes, there still is a raging debate despite pronouncements to the contrary by Al Gore and the mainstream media. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Bay Area dreams that could be realized" (Humans Think They Own the Earth) | Mike Vandeman | Mountain Biking | 0 | October 12th 05 02:24 AM |
"Bay Area dreams that could be realized" (Humans Think They Own the Earth) | Mike Vandeman | Social Issues | 0 | October 12th 05 02:24 AM |
"Bay Area dreams that could be realized" (Humans Think They Ownthe Earth) | Westie | Mountain Biking | 4 | October 9th 05 10:33 PM |