Incalzirea globala creste in feedback

[Zarzavat]

bingo. propaganda. care propaganda are un scop. scopul este, asa cum bine ai zis tu PMK, "carbon tax". acum arata-mi-l pe ala care s-a batut cu pumnii in piept dand vina pe industrie si co2 pentru incalzirea globala. p'aci s-a zis doar ca nu sunt clare 100% cauzele. ti-am recitit postul cel lung, si sincer nu l-am gasit foarte stiintific. e la fel de plin de speculatii ca si filmul lui Al Gore, ceea ce ma face sa cred ca e rezumatul unui filmulet anti-Al Gore

[pmk]

fiindca nu sunt om de stiinta si nu am de ce sa fac posturi "stiintifice". Am scris in mare ideea, nu trebuie sa dau 1000 de linkuri, sa fac grafice si harti doar ca sa fie postul "stiintific". Vrei sa aflii mai multe, ai internetul la indemana, doar ca inca odata, internetul nu e doar wikipedia.
Vad ca nimeni nu aduce in discutie nici un aspect concret, doar asa idei in mare. Aveti idee ce inseamna aceasta nebunie pentru tarile din africa de ex ?
Sau hai, poate sa citesti e greu. A vazut vreunu filmul de care am spus ?
Iar in postul meu nu exista NICI O SPECULATIE. Tot ce am zis e adevarat. Iar daca ai fi cautat ai fi vazut asta.

[Zarzavat]

fiindca nu sunt om de stiinta si nu am de ce sa fac posturi "stiintifice". Am scris in mare ideea, nu trebuie sa dau 1000 de linkuri, sa fac grafice si harti doar ca sa fie postul "stiintific".

la fel am facut si noi si ne-ai catalogat "coate-goale" in ceea ce priveste incalzirea globala.

Vad ca nimeni nu aduce in discutie nici un aspect concret, doar asa idei in mare. Aveti idee ce inseamna aceasta nebunie pentru tarile din africa de ex ?

am idee sefu. de asta iti repet "incalzirea globala este o certitudine, CAUZELE nu sunt 100% clare, dar efectele vor fi devastatoare pentru ca asistam la o degradare a conditiilor de viata optime pentru specia umana, lucru care s-a mai intamplat si in trecut, doar ca acum suprapopularea face aceste consecinte mult mai "palpitante" sa zicem
uite, eu ma sacrific si pun si un link care adevereste faptul ca in africa situatia nu e chiar... roza --> http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/...cean_warm.html

Iar in postul meu nu exista NICI O SPECULATIE. Tot ce am zis e adevarat. Iar daca ai fi cautat ai fi vazut asta.

iti arat doar o speculatie:

Peste 97% din emisiile de de carbon ale lumii sunt datorate VULCANILOR ( ah da vulcanii ), oceanelor, descompunerii plantelor, animalelor, din fecalele animalelor, etc. mai putin de 3 procente reprezinta industria omului.

oricum, nici nu conteaza cine sau daca e vreun vinovat de incalzirea globala. ea exista si ne va afecta direct. pana nu o sa scoatem mancarea din jobenul oamenilor de stiinta depindem de mediul inconjurator suficient de mult incat sa ne pese foarte tare de schimbarile climatice.

[pmk]

poate omul ar trebui sa isi accepte conditia pe planeta asta si sa inteleaga ca nu poate controla chiar totul... se incalzeste, asta e frate, deal with it

[ixtl]

Originally Posted by pmk

poate omul ar trebui sa isi accepte conditia pe planeta asta si sa inteleaga ca nu poate controla chiar totul... se incalzeste, asta e frate, deal with it

...si sa-si dea seama ca nu-i foare departe de o maimuta cheala si cam tembela in lacomia si antropicentrismul ei care-si tot taie craca de sub picioare de niste secole incoace.

[bogdan george]

http://www.dailytech.com/Sun+Makes+H...ticle12823.htm

Din articol:

In the past 1000 years, three previous such events -- the Dalton, Maunder, and Spörer Minimums, have all led to rapid cooling. One was large enough to be called a "mini ice age". For a society dependent on agriculture, cold is more damaging than heat. The growing season shortens, yields drop, and the occurrence of crop-destroying frosts increases.

Deci si prin urmare, it's all a big mess. Voi credeti ce vreti, ca dovezi sunt sa sustina si global warming, si global cooling, si global ce mai vreti voi. Pana una alta, eu ma duc sa mai forez nitel.

[Zarzavat]

mmm interesant articolul. stiam ca soarele este intr-un minim, dar stiam ca in 2008 incepe ciclul 24 care se preconiza ca va fi foarte intens - http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/sd...olarcycle.html

pe de alta parte se pare ca in acest an gheata nu s-a mai topit ca pana acum - http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fea...s_feature.html

oricum ar fi, schimbarea conditiilor de mediu intr-un sens sau altul (cald/rece) influenteaza negativ societatea umana. suprapopularea s-a datorat in mare masura conditiilor ideale de mediu din secolul trecut. e drept ca vom trece si peste schimbari climatice majore, dar cand vom face recensamantul vom constata ca ne-am imputinat simtitor ceea ce n-ar fi un lucru rau in esenta

[Double Jay]

U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

INTRODUCTION:

Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.


The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.



Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears “bite the dust.” (LINK) In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement. (LINK)


This blockbuster Senate report lists the scientists by name, country of residence, and academic/institutional affiliation. It also features their own words, biographies, and weblinks to their peer reviewed studies and original source materials as gathered from public statements, various news outlets, and websites in 2007. This new “consensus busters” report is poised to redefine the debate.


Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.



“Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media,” Paldor wrote. [Note: See also July 2007 Senate report detailing how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation - LINK ]



Scientists from Around the World Dissent



This new report details how teams of international scientists are dissenting from the UN IPCC’s view of climate science. In such nations as Germany, Brazil, the Netherlands, Russia, Argentina, New Zealand and France, nations, scientists banded together in 2007 to oppose climate alarmism. In addition, over 100 prominent international scientists sent an open letter in December 2007 to the UN stating attempts to control climate were “futile.” (LINK)



Paleoclimatologist Dr. Tim Patterson, professor in the department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic. Patterson noted that the notion of a “consensus” of scientists aligned with the UN IPCC or former Vice President Al Gore is false. “I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority.”


This new committee report, a first of its kind, comes after the UN IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri implied that there were only “about a dozen" skeptical scientists left in the world. (LINK) Former Vice President Gore has claimed that scientists skeptical of climate change are akin to “flat Earth society members” and similar in number to those who “believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona.” (LINK) & (LINK)


The distinguished scientists featured in this new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; geology; biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics; chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; engineering; physics and paleoclimatology. Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Gore.



Additionally, these scientists hail from prestigious institutions worldwide, including: Harvard University; NASA; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR); Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the UN IPCC; the Danish National Space Center; U.S. Department of Energy; Princeton University; the Environmental Protection Agency; University of Pennsylvania; Hebrew University of Jerusalem; the International Arctic Research Centre; the Pasteur Institute in Paris; the Belgian Weather Institute; Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute; the University of Helsinki; the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S., France, and Russia; the University of Pretoria; University of Notre Dame; Stockholm University; University of Melbourne; Columbia University; the World Federation of Scientists; and the University of London.


The voices of many of these hundreds of scientists serve as a direct challenge to the often media-hyped “consensus” that the debate is “settled.”



A May 2007 Senate report detailed scientists who had recently converted from believers in man-made global warming to skepticism. [See May 15, 2007 report: Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics: Growing Number of Scientists Convert to Skeptics After Reviewing New Research – (LINK) - In addition, an August 2007 report detailed how proponents of man-made global warming fears enjoy a monumental funding advantage over skeptical scientists. (LINK) ]


This report counters the claims made by the promoters of man-made global warming fears that the number of skeptical scientists is dwindling.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...8-3c63dc2d02cb

[CriSaZd]

Ultima glaciatiune a incetat acum 10.000 de ani, si e normal sa existe o alternanta a perioadelor reci cu cele calde, problema ar fi ca noi le intensificam. Sunt mai multi factori. Spre exemplu, o data la fiecare 11 ani, la suprafata soarelui au loc explozii, ceea ce duce la o ridicare a temperaturilor. Nu mai zic de greselile pe care le face umanitatea, insa este de apreciat ca s-a reusit inchiderea gaurii din stratul de ozon.
Cam amalgamate ideile mele....sry

[pmk]

cum ziceam...

[PigBrother]

Nici macar nu conteaza daca noi provocam sau nu incalzirea globala. Temperaturile sunt in crestere? Da. Ne afecteaza? Da. Putem sa le afectam in sens negativ? Sa vedem.

Daca nu incercam sa ne rezolvam probleme, indiferent daca sunt cauzate de noi sau nu, inseamna ca am coborat degeaba din copac. "Nu stiu frate, ce sa fac" poate gandi si un cercopitec.

[oldshooterman]

Unii incearca sa mai faca citeceva, macar proiecte. "New Sahara Forest Project Aims to Bring Food, Water, Energy to Desert"
http://www.dailytech.com/New+Sahara+...ticle12848.htm

[pmk]

da, nice and funny, ce ati zice de alt proiect intitulat: cum sa aducem apa curenta si electricitate oamenilor care mor de foame si boli ca nu au medicamente in africa.

[Zarzavat]

o problema mai importanta ca emisiile de co2 si importanta lor mi se pare DESPADURIREA. aceasta problema este foarte delicata si ne va costa scump de tot. padurea joaca un rol FOARTE important in mentinerea actualelor conditii de viata.
2008 a fost un an excelent pentru agricultura, pe mai peste tot. avem surplus. burta plina = lumea e fericita. daca 2009 nu va fi la fel sa vezi distractie criza alimentara va reveni in lumina reflectoarelor.

[pmk]

Originally Posted by Zarzavat

o problema mai importanta ca emisiile de co2 si importanta lor mi se pare DESPADURIREA. aceasta problema este foarte delicata si ne va costa scump de tot. padurea joaca un rol FOARTE important in mentinerea actualelor conditii de viata.
2008 a fost un an excelent pentru agricultura, pe mai peste tot. avem surplus. burta plina = lumea e fericita. daca 2009 nu va fi la fel sa vezi distractie criza alimentara va reveni in lumina reflectoarelor.

da corect cu padurile. Plus ca padurile consuma co2, eu in loc sa fiu disperat ca producem mult co2 ( desi nu face nimic ) as fi disperat sa plantez copaci )

[Double Jay]

Originally Posted by PigBrother

Nici macar nu conteaza daca noi provocam sau nu incalzirea globala. Temperaturile sunt in crestere? Da. Ne afecteaza? Da. Putem sa le afectam in sens negativ? Sa vedem.

Daca nu incercam sa ne rezolvam probleme, indiferent daca sunt cauzate de noi sau nu, inseamna ca am coborat degeaba din copac. "Nu stiu frate, ce sa fac" poate gandi si un cercopitec.

Comparate cu ce? Anul asta a fost mai frig decat anul trecut.

[PigBrother]

Cu statistica

[Double Jay]

E doar pe 100 si ceva ani, nu se pot da predictii pe o perioada asa de scurta. Si cat a crescut temp? 0,6-0,8 grade?

[Rush]

There is no such man made global warming concept,the fact is that our whole solar sistem is constantly warming




period

[ixtl]

Originally Posted by Rush

There is no such man made global warming concept,the fact is that our whole solar sistem is constantly warming

Hau iz dat?
Mai ales ca observatii detaliate ale sistemului solar, relevante in privinta asta, se fac doar de vreo 100 de ani incoace.