I think not! Anybody got something that pollutes even worse then my ranchero that I can go wander around in for a while? It's too freaking cold and I have way to much to get done for this weather... :flame:
I'm glad I moved to Texas.
I can fire up the BBQ grill and both my lawn mowers for a while. Those things will contribute to global warming more than all 3 of my vehicles combined.
Maybe we should begin a campaign to get ranchers to start feeding thier cattle baked beans... that should help warm things up a bit:eek:
yeah at least here anyway i know the current weather is payment for the spring like temps we had about a month ago.
Speaking of BBQing, I had to bring my propane tank into the shop to heat it up, before the BBQ would even light last night.
Ironically, its so cold that I have to leave my car running, thus contributing to pollution and global warming. So if it heats up, I will actually cut down on greenhouse gas emissions.
Good point... actually though, I don't believe in global warming as it's presented, just felt like being a wise ass today since it's so freaking cold and we're all gonna die thanks to global warming :flip:
cold?:rollin: :rollin: what are you talking about:dunno: :D it is'nt cold outside..
here take a look..
http://www.weather.com/weather/local/33436?lswe=33436&lwsa=WeatherLocalUndeclared&from=whatwhere
:edit: come to think of it tonight if it gets below 60 degrees i might have to put pants on instead of shorts..
now who's the wize a$$:raspberry
I also do not believe in global warming, mainly because there is no
legitimate science to back it up.
The world may be warming but it ain't because of emissions from us.
emissions is #9 out of 10.
Sun is #1 and water is number2 on the list of reasons why.
The sun isn't the cause of global warming. It's how much sun is getting through the ozone layer that is. Duh.
Yay, -21 degrees, -38 wind chill. i so love this weather. I still wear shorts to school!
im tired of hearing about global warming... melting the ice caps and such. you know what was caused by the last time the earth went through global warming? ICE AGE.
btw, global warming isnt how much the sun is getting THROUGH, its how much the atmosphere isnt letting the reflected heat from the sun BACK OUT.
My thoughts exactly :D Somebody I never even mentioned this to thinks the same way... WOOHOO!!!
Yep, it's the Greenhouse Effect.
And global warming is a reality. But it's the emissions from things like coal power plants, ocean liners, and Airplanes that have the biggest effect, in my opinion. Smog, you can blame that on your car.
Anyway, yes, Global warming triggered an Ice Age (or two). Let's all jump on that. :rolleyes: I need an Ice Age like a hole in the head (or ozone layer). I know people are tired of hearing about it, but you're going to keep hearing more and more, so long as we keep on being as irresponsible as we are (myself included). We're kicking our planet in the nads. It's only a matter of time before we get bitch slapped back.
Sure, it's cold this January, as January's are (I know it's the fifth, ;) just bear with me), but this has to be one of the warmest winters I've ever witnessed.
Let's not be so hard on ourselves. We dont produce the tinyest fraction of the polution that emerging industrial nations such as China do... or South American counties which have no emissions standards what-so-ever on cars.
The US and Canada are probably the cleanest, least polluting most regulated counties in the world. I'm sick of people bashing North America over this stuff with nary a mention of Russia, China, South America, Mexico and other various turd world developing shiznit holes.
End of rant...
Agreed, the Earth has been warming since the ice age. Hence global warming, so it is real, but blaming human activity is rediculous... it's the aliens fault.:hick:
I think it's just the natural cycle of the Earth. We don't have enough recorded history to verify it so everyone thinks all of the sudden in the past hundred years or so, we are rapidly changing the Earth's climate. Do we have some affect and control on it, maybe, but extremely limited.
Remember the people that would be horrified when there was an eclipse and thought they were being punished? I can't remember which group and from what time period. Basically, they didn't know any better at the time so they were very afraid. Hmm, sounds like the global warming issue to me. Nobody knows anything about it so they all get scared and boom, industry and human activity is to blame.
By 'we', I mean humanity, not just Canada and the US.
5.0willgo, you're giving modern science far less credit than it deserves. We do know quite a lot about climate trends from the past few thousand years (and beyond), not just the last century. There HAS been a dramatic climate change since the Industrial Revolution. We can stick our fingers in our ears and sing all we want, but it won't stop global warming. Most people on this board have seen the winters get milder and milder, since their childhood.
I see your Eclipse buttstuffogy and raise you a Halifax Explosion buttstuffogy. ;)
"It's gonna BLOW!"
"Nah, it's just a boat on fire."
*KABLOOEY*
I'm not doubting modern science. From what I've learned throughout college, modern science says the Earth has been warming for a very long time and it has a cycle that we don't know too much about.
I believe that.
Now I'm not necessarily sticking my fingers in my ears either. I haven't been around that long, almost 22 years but I really don't see too much difference in this winter compared to winters past. It started out pretty much the same. Granted it was much warmer this past December than last December, but this January has been the coldest I've felt in a long time. Plus we had on and off snow showers for over 2 weeks which is more than we've had in a long while.
Saying that, shouldn't it also apply to summer months? I can't see "global warming" only affecting winter months. Summers have been mild lately, not nearly as hot as they've been in the past.
Of course, I can only really speak for the area where I live, so things could surely be different elsewhere. Maybe that blinds me of the issue?
About the whole greenhouse gases thing...I always have to wonder how it is that scientists can talk about how when a volcano erupts, it sends more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than humans have in their entire existence...and then they turn around and say that the use of fossil fuels by humans is directly to blame for global warming. WTF?
W00t i f(*%ing hate Toledo, too cold.
i wouldnt mind as much the whole "GLOBAL warming" prevention movement if indeed is was GLOBAL. thats not fair to expect us to do all the work to remove our part of the emissions when so many other nations dont do THEIR part.
heres a great example--i read that in india or something they STILL manufacture R-12 for crying out loud!!! and the units arent well built so they leak it into the atmosphere!
I'm almost positive you can still get R12 here. You do have to pay out the ass in taxes on it, but you can still get it.
Kinda like you can own fully automatic rifles, silencers..etc Just have to pay a whole lot (in taxes) for them.
I'll try to find some more on this.
No explanation? Yeah, thought so.
I guess it must be that the sun is getting too hot and heating our planet too much. I could give a shiznit about this anyway. I pray for nuclear holocaust every minute.
i've been around almost 22 years, and all i remember of the weather that wasnt very common were a couple blizards in georgia (we're licky to get 1 night of flurries that stick, there were 2 blizzards where we got 2 or 3 feet of slow.) but other than that, nothing sticks out in my mind. my dad who's almost 55 says he thinks its all dumb that people that are my age or a bit older in thier late 80's try to say b/c of a warm day in janurary jesus is coming to town soon are retarded. he remembers winters when he was younger that wasnt cold except 1 day out of the year, and he remembers the blizzards. if this was such a huge scale thing wouldnt you think meteorolgists would get on tv and really try to drill the message into everyone's heads if it truely was so bad? i'd think the whole nation would go to emmission standards like california... i mean hell i can run my car without cats and delete all smog off the engine and still get a tag and registration b/c in the county of ga where its registered there is no emmission testing what so ever.
As I child I remember 10 foot piles of snow after plowing the lot at the farm. We used to dig tunnels inside of them.. havn't done that since I was 6.
what i think,,,,,
something is going on and from what ive read up on and absorbed like you guys have from various points of view, is the "feed back effect".
I agree with this process but im not sure i know the source. What i can go buy are military data from naviagation charts for submarines during the cold war to avoid hitting ice burgs which dont exist today, satalite images, photos of over a hundred years, HI and LOW temps with records also going back just as far and see a major change happening within the past 100 years. These temps reported have various spikes and they confuse me but its really wierd the amount of spikes in the last 20.
I have ran across so many "mentions" of how much the polar ice caps are melting with as much as 8% a year.
Conclusion,,
if the polar ice caps melted,,refroze,,melted,,refroze as a natural cycle, this is the 8% we are dealing with or 92% its original size during this natural heating and cooling effect during the winter and summer seasons. We are all smart folks here and if you look at 8% of something degrading over time, this number is not linear, its a curve.,,,its exponential.
Its like what is 8% of 1000? (1000 being the ice caps size now hypthetical). The total is 80 witha remainder of 920.
Now what is 92% of 920?, its 846.
So on,, what is 92% of 846, its 778.
If you keep going and going,, you will never reach zero but the numbers decrease in a curve. If you take a step back, it would appear that by the math that the melting would not be that noticeable by now cause the amount of melting should be less and less each year just as you would never reach zero if you took 92%(size of ice caps) of a number forever.
I think what science is trying to say is "how much new sea was added" and if thats the case,, and they are right,,,,,,I have not really found a lot of data on "sea water added" as of yet but i think thats the increasing number globally we need to focus on,, not the ice caps. The methane trapped under the ice caps dont help matters either.
hold on to your pants,,,, If they are right, then england should have been under ICE completely 700-900 years ago. If that were the case,, we would definatly have record of it. Since there are no records indicating this,,, (england is on the same latitude as alaska but enjoys the warm water jetstream from the south to protect it) ,,,,,,,,,,
hold on to your pants again.........
with no record to support england being under ice 700 years ago gives you more reason to be curious as to why they are melting now!!!!
This is where my mind tends to go when hit up with an issue. Instead of listening to the problem and forcasted outcomes, i take all they have to offer in ideas but i reverse thier math to see what things looked like on earth in the past. No one that i know if is reversing their own math because there will be odd ball outcomes.
Folks,, they just started melting,, cut and dry. It may all just be natural, nevertheless, they are melting and whatever changes are in store will come.
Any takers?
All I know is that it's cold as hell in Chicago. It's so cold that my beard starts to freeze when I'm outside because of the moisture from my breath.
global warming has merely nothing to do with us. Besides if North America disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't make the slightest difference in temperature nor pollution.
China is producing 500 plus coal burning generating plants over the next 12 months... you think anything we do here is going to make the difference for china and India? not likely...
The sun has been extremely active as of late, ice caps have been melting away on mars, i suppose all the green Martians with there SUV's are to blame?
I have a 64 page PDF with real scientists (climatologists and such) with real data to back up there claims against global warming and the Kyoto deal.
I will email it to anyone if they are interested.Anyone watch Al Gore's crazy movie? talk about an idiot, There are over 90 false facts that Al Gore preached in his little laugh of a movie to the public that were lies or misrepresented with bias graphs.
Anyways its a very interesting topic, don't be listening to the mainstream media there about as corrupt as the UN.
Awsome ,, ice caps melting on mars?
Now consider one thing now,, if we dont know exactly why the ice is melting here on earth,,, how in the hell do you think we could ever come close to numerically representing real data from another planet?,,, we've been on the earth a lot longer than space my friend.
just thought id reverse your math on ya,, not picking,, just presenting you with another fact so you can better judge your sources.
I mean it when i say awsome cause ive never been exposed to data like you mention ,, so my emial is,,,,,,,,
revised@brier.net
you must be in a reeeeeeaaaaaaaaaallllllll bad mood today,,,
it kinda outof character for you. Keep saying things like that and i wont feel so bad for being and ahole all the time:D
I can probably count the number of white christmases we've had in Nova Scotia since my teens on half a hand. When I was a child we lived in the snow for the better part of the winter. I remember my Dad having to buy a snow blower for the tractor, which now spends pretty much all of its time sitting in the bushes. I had a Green lawn up until late December this year, and my Mother pulled carrots out of the garden for CHRISTMAS DINNER!
Call it bizarre, I'll call it disturbing.
We know the Greenhouse Effect is a reality in Urban Environments, due to smog. Why is it such a stretch to think the same thing can happen on a global scale?
And it begs the other question. If there is a chance we are killing our planet, do you really want to take that risk? I'd rather have cleaner air on false reasoning, than be red faced when half the world looks like Venice.
Yeah, I was in a real pissy mood (no sleep in 30+ hours and was heading in to work another shift) and just decided to take my already foiled argument one step further. My apologies, you guys. I don't know thing one about global warming, just arguing for the sake of argument. I take it all back. :toilet:
I need three weeks of nice global warming so I can finish my car,then we can go back to normal.
FYI, another thing I read was that global warming does not cause warmer winters...to the contrary, it causes winters to be worse with more storms and more snow.
The only thing i've noticed (this might be b/c i moved 2 states north) but i need a good whole week of consistant temps, humidity, and rain for my paint project to cure correctly... i've been waiting now for about a month, month and a half and i still dont feel like i have the chance yet. if its not raining its bitter ass cold, if its not humid its snowing, if its not snowing its raining... if its not cold its bitter ass cold. all fluxing during the week >.>
Fascinating article on accelerated temperature rise in Northeast - especially in wintertime...
Apparently the heating is occuring more in the northern hemisphere, and more in the northern parts of the northern hemisphere. 1 degree for the planet, 2 degrees for the northern hemisphere, 4 degrees for the northeast. The imbalance of the heating is something to think about.
This is a real phenomenon that has resulted in temperatures increasing at a rapid rate since I was born (1961). I am not sugesting that I know what the cause is, but the CO2 data is hard to explain without looking at the human contribution. Read the personal accounts below - entire industries that depend on the cold and snow are drying up on the 45th parallel here in New England. Very interesting even if the causes are non completely understood (is it just a cycle?) ...
http://www.boston.com/news/weather/articles/2007/01/28/winter_warm_up_costing_ne_region/
MASON TOWNSHIP, Maine -- The eight Alaskan huskies strained against their dogsled harnesses, eager to pull two vacationing boys through the hilly woods of western Maine.
But there was no dogsled -- because there was only an inch or so of snow. Instead, the yipping dogs were tethered to a gray golf cart. Steve Crone, the owner of New England Dogsledding, eased into the cart next to the youngsters, then gave a yell. The dogs took off. On steep hills, Crone pressed the gas pedal to help the huskies haul the heavy cart.
"We'd rather have snow," said Crone, with an embarrassed smile. He needs about 6 to 12 inches of snow to run the sleds properly. "But the weather has changed over the years, and we have to get more creative."
Records show New England's climate, the catalyst behind fiery orange foliage and deep-woods Nordic ski treks, is dramatically warming -- and altering the region's character and economy as it does.
AUDIO SLIDESHOW: Ice fishing with no ice
GRAPHIC: Carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere
GRAPHIC: Warmer New England winters
GRAPHIC: Climate change -- heard along the 45th parallel
More from the series on climate change in New England
During the last century, the average annual temperature in New England increased 2 degrees Fahrenheit. And just since 1970, average winter temperatures have risen 4.4 degrees. The changes have meant less snow on the ground and thinner ice on lakes. Over the past 30-plus years, rising temperatures have pushed spring to begin a week or more earlier and the growing season to expand more than 10 days in some places.
For decades, scientists have studied the earth's polar regions to better understand global warming, the phenomenon that most climate scientists say is largely being caused by burning fossil fuels, which release heat-trapping gases into the atmosphere. Long vertical tubes of ice drilled from Antarctica's surface have revealed atmospheric conditions dating back 650,000 years. buttstuffysis of these ice cores and the rapid melting of Arctic sea ice and glaciers have provided strong evidence of warming in the past century -- and the serious long-term threat it presents.
Now, scientists are also documenting the effects of sustained warming in more temperate zones such as New England, where even subtle changes can have an enormous impact on the millions of people who live in the region.
Many of the observed changes in New England are consistent with computer models that project the response of the region's climate to global warming. Yet scientists are just beginning the complex study of how local regions are affected by the worldwide phenomenon. They have many unanswered questions, including why New England winters are warming so much faster than the other seasons.
Nowhere in New England are the winter time changes more evident than around the 45th parallel -- the latitude halfway between the equator and the North Pole. The line runs along the Vermont-Canada border and slices through the logging forests of Northern New Hampshire and Central Maine before heading into the Atlantic off Perry, Maine.
...
I sniped the pictures from the article - they are very telling:
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e360/Domeskull/NEwintertemphistory.jpg)
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e360/Domeskull/CO2inairrising.gif)
Here are comments from people who have been affected by the warming - this is serious stuff up here!!
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e360/Domeskull/45thparallelwinter.gif)
4 degree average rise in winter temperatures where I live in the past 36 years - that's a huge increase!
You can definitely see a difference in Nova Scotia - there were times that the temp hit almost 70 in January this year. I remember as recently as 1990 we had six snowmobiles and used them regularly. We sold 'em off in the early 90's after a few open winters (and had quite a job selling them). At least a full decade of open winters went by (I'd tell people "It doesn't snow in NS anymore), and the lakes even stopped freezing. Then we had a few snowy winters - 2001/02, 2002/03, 2003/04 and 2004/05 we had a whole bunch of snow on the ground all winter. 03/04 was particularly bad, as we had a major snowstorm in November 03 and an absolutely retarded snowstorm in Feb 04 (39" in 24 hours, driven by 70MPH wind, the storm was nicknamed "White Juan").
04/05 was almost as bad, with another major November storm and several back-to-back storms starting just after Christmas and adding up to almost "White Juan" levels but over a week instead of a day. We bought snowmobiles again, and for these few years the snow was actually sometimes too deep for snowmobiling (I got the Formula stuck one night at 2:00AM and took almost two hours to dig it out).
Now, last season (05/06) and this season there has been no snow. Actually, I lied - right now there is about 6" of snow on the ground that fell last night as the result of "Snow squalls" (cold air blowing over warm water and dumping the moisture over land - this was the first time I'd ever in my life seen Environment Canada issue a snowsquall warning on Mainland Nova Scotia), and it's the most snow we've had on the ground in two years. I have yet to use the snowmobiles this year, and have used the plow once (and even that was only because I wanted to play with it). Another odd thing about this year is the very warm and rainy early January, but very cold and dry February.
There has been some mighty strange weather the past half decade. This is what you missed while out west, Oldraven:
- November 2002: Rainstorm, 4" of rain in 12 hours washed out many roads
- November 2003: early November snowstorm, a foot of wet, heavy snow fell on trees that still had their leaves, causing major power outages
- March 2003: Another rainstorm, this time combining 8" of rain, very warm temperatures, and the melting of about a foot of snow. This caused several bridges to wash out, flooded the towns of Truro and Bedford, and widespread other flooding - I actually bought my T-Bird the day after this storm and had to drive it through a flooded roadway to get it home
- September 2003: Hurricane Juan, a category 2 hurricane with 100MPH (gusting to almost 160) winds slammed into Halifax, killing eight people and causing millions in damage. Power was out for up to three weeks as countless trees fell on wires - Point Pleasant Park alone lost 60,000 of its 80,000 trees
- February 2004: White Juan, a snowstorm packing 70MPH sustained winds dumped 95.5 cm (39") of snow on Halifax in less than 24 hours. The city was shut down for almost a week
- November 2004: Another early November storm, this one dumping almost two feet of wet, heavy snow. Several major power transmission towers collapsed under the weight, resulting in more widespread power outages (Nova Scotia Power is on everyone's shiznitlist by now). I was in the woods hunting during this storm and almost got trapped back there by fallen trees - I just drove the Cherokee through and/or over them. Didn't do the paint much good and broke a headlight and the grille, but I got home
- January 2005: Several moderate snowstormshiznit within days of each other, resulting in almost three feet of snow on the ground
And since then... nothing of note, except a very warm January this year.
I dunno what or who is causing it, but there is something going on with this weather...
Here, last year in October we got a snowstorm with a bunch of wet snow that caught all the trees with leaves on them, knocked down lots of branches, caused widespread power outages. After that it snowed maybe two more times the whole winter.
Couple months later, it was in the 60s in December and January- I remember one evening that I was working over christmas break and I left work at 9 PM, and drove home with my window down on my car.
This year it was unseasonably warm through the end of November...however, through January/Feb we got probably more snow than we had the two previous winters combined.
:dunno:
Over the last three days we've had the coldest temps in Chicago in almost 10 years. It's been below zero for three days and today we got 3 inches of snow. A *big* snow storm in Chicago is about 12" which isn't much for Canada but for here it's alot. We haven't had one of those since 2005 but this winter has been odd. It snowed here in October which was unseasonably cold. Then November was kinda warm. The first week of December sucked. We got 6" of snow and below 20* temps. Then from the middle of December to the Middle of January it was hard pressed to get below 32*. Sometimes we had highs near 50* in late December. Then all of a sudden around the 16th of january it got cold. The last 4 weeks in a row we've gotten between 1-2" of snow each week and it's been cold especially this past few days. What ever is causing it I still hate winter:hick:
I can't wait till I'm able to grow pineapples at my house and go deep sea fishing from central Iowa when all the ice caps melt. its going to be great.
heres a lil more to think about the temps are raising thats a fact what ever they may be caused by but are you really scared bout the 2-3 degree avg. that they have? I'm not. Would you really give up those 2-3 degrees to go back to living with out all the moden convinces we have. I wouldn't. It does amaze me how alot of the people talking bout global warming say"in 100 years the world will be like this". they can say whatever they want cuz most of us won't be around in 100 years.
yes I do have kids and I think bout there future but I also think bout all the propoganda too. Al Gore preaches that we should all stop useing fossil fuels yet he rides in a private jet to take him any where he owns 4 differnt homes 2 in tenn 1 in va 1 in san fran how much fossil fuel is he and his wife useing to heat cool and light those props.
THe other thing I heard yesterday was that Hillary wants to divert most of the profits that oil companys make towards gobal warming research. why? so they can charge us more crazy
ok all I can say I good luck to every one
The oceans rose 7" in the last century and will likely rise quite a bit more in this century - making political references to people whose politics you disagree with isn't going to change the fact that this is an issue we probably should be concerned about. But whatever, people are going to make this political until something really bizzare actually happens, then it will surely be too late to do anything. If folks understood anything about the amount of thermal mass that the earth has and how much energy it takes to create a 1 degree average rise, we might set the politics aside and actually think about the future of our children. Right now it's only a few tropical islands dissapearing that nobody really cares about - when there are 500,000,000 refugees from a low-lying area looking for a place to live, then we get the slap in the face.
congress has made the first move to decrease carbon emissions.,,,, They will introduce a bill to ban smoking in your car while driving or sitting inside it. Not healthy for kids,, i smoke but even with the window down, you will still go to jail.,, yep jail. So remember what you say when you talk about "doing something" about a problem.
Congress will always find a stupid solution.
Clearly since we can all think of examples where the government does something stupid - then we shouldn't ever try to do anything about any possibly earth changing issue right???
C'mon people - let's at least try to be considerate of a real issue versus one of those political issues we all like to bring up when we don't agree about an issue. Clearly smoking in a car has no bearing on the rising of oceans and possible changing of world climate patterns. I could spend all day insulting your favorite politician - so we leave the future of the planet up to chance because we were too ed cynical and lazy to use our god-ed brains. WTF?
Well one thought that struck me about 10 years ago by a scientist was "we buy insurance for a lot of different things in our personal lives that have a less likelihood of happening than Global Climate change given the data."
If you look at programs today, National Geographic for example. They now, not only have the data from Ice core buttstuffysis and atmospheric records from Hawaii on CO2 concentration, for like 67 years or more But, actual Greenland and Antarctic ice recession over the course of years from satellite photos. What's worse, is that they don't know for sure which way the coin will fall; I.E., global freezing from the Atlantic conveyor stopping, as it did in the last ice age. This due to fresh water dilution of the north Atlantic or global warming, because the conveyor stops which draws excess carbon out of the atmosphere. Meanwhile, carbon emissions are continually being increased by human activity.
When the way is unclear its hard to execute a plan. Should we go crazy and plant more trees to soak up extra CO2 or burn way more fossil fuels increasing the CO2 to some tipping point to avert an ice age? One other thing that has been recently discovered, is that the Earths orbit is changing and the poles are slowly flip/flopping. So the beginning of this century is even more uncertain than the last one.
All we need now is another World War. If that happens, I'm just going to dig a hole and drive my Cougar in!! :bricks1:
I guess You joke????, I guess YES, if NOT, the human is than crazy I never expected...
Regards,
Dom.
It all comes down to this, people: Waiting for government to act will likely end up in increased emissions as those windbags spew vast amounts of oral pollution in Washington (and Ottawa, for us Canucks). We can grumble about reduced this and mandated that until we're all choking on our own flatulence, but at the end of the day it's our OWN choices that will make a difference.
Everything we buy, everything we do, every choice we make, has an effect on emissions, and only when we are prepared to make better choices will a difference be made. We can't expect "big money" to shoulder all the burden. Some examples:
We all expect power companies to pollute less. They can do so by adding expensive emissions controls, burning expensive fuels, using expensive renewable sources, or simply producing less electricity. The only one of those choices that is surefire happens to be the only one we as individuals can do anything about: Burn less electricity. Simple things like using CFL light bulbs (for the record, every single bulb in my house AND my garage is CFL, except the diningroom chandelier because it uses small bulbs - not because I'm a bunnyhugger, but because I'm too cheap to pay high electric bills) make a difference. So does washing your clothes in cold water, only running the dishwasher/clothes washer when they're full, using the clothesline whenever possible, turning off TV's and computers when they're not in use, turning the thermostat down to 68 instead of 72, use air conditions only when it's unbearable (not "inconvenient") to do so, unplugging unused appliances (especially things like deep freezes), showering instead of bathing, and so on. These are all ways that individuals can save energy AND money with little or no inconvenience and without spending a bunch of money upfront. If everybody did this we'd save a ton of energy (and reduce emissions by a substantial amount). These are all things I happen to do myself, but for strictly financial reasons - a result of buying a house and having to pay for my own energy for the first time - it was quite an eye opener.
Another way I, personally, could cut down on emissions while saving money is to replace all my 100-year-old windows. I re-insulated the house when I did the renovations, but the original windows still sit there passing my expensive heat out into the atmosphere. They are so drafty that on windy days my curtains move. I can't afford to replace them yet, though, so that's one earth-saving method I can't use just now.
So there's several methods we, as individuals, could save the earth, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and save money just by making simple and not very painful lifestyle changes. I'm not saying sit in the dark with a candle and a book every night - just turn the TV and Playstation off when you're finished with them, and turn out the lights when you leave the room.
Then there's our automotive choices. This is probably one of the worst areas for environmentalists, and it causes a great deal of political silliness, but at the end of the day the environmentalists are correct: We burn far, far more fuel than we have to. Environmentalists try to use government to mandate cleaner air, but again, it is individual choices that will make a difference. Everything from what we drive, to how we drive it, to when we drive it, to where we drive it, makes a huge difference. The obvious one is the "what we drive" - WE, as a society, drive vehicles that are much larger, heavier, and harder on fuel than they need to be. Unless you tow a trailer or routinely travel through woods trails nobody, and I mean NOBODY, needs an SUV. If you don't regularly haul firewood, construction equipment/materials, etc, you don't need a pickup truck. And I mean doing these things regularly, as in daily. If you only do such activities occasionally it would be cheaper for you and better for the environment to rent a truck when you need one, and drive a car for day-to-day requirements. Hell, few people even need midsize cars. My parents, for example, have two vehicles - a 2005 Dodge Dakota V8 4X4 extended cab and a 2002 Hyundai Sonata 4cyl. For a while the Dak was their only vehicle. They drove it back and forth to work every day, spending $75-$100 a week on gas. My father's justification for buying it was that he needs it to haul stuff back & forth to the cottage. Once, maybe twice a year he'd actually use his truck for "truck stuff". The rest of the year it's a very inefficient daily driver. Then gashiznit $1.25 a liter (nearly $5/gallon) and he bought the Hyundai. Now he burns WAY less gas (he says that the savings of fuel from driving the Dakota alone, even at our current 95 cents/liter, make the payments on the Hyundai). Problem is, now he's got a driveway ornament sucking $1000/month out of his bank account that's too expensive to drive, and too undesirable to sell. This is a classic example of people making stupid automotive decisions.
The "How we drive" portion is another fuel burner. Ditch the remote start (cars get 0 MPG when idling for 15 minutes). Drive the speed limit instead of 15MPH over. Avoid jackrabbit starts and sudden/frequent stops. Run all your errands at one go, instead of making several trips (this one applies especially to me, as living in the country makes my "errands" an 80-mile round trip all day affair). Take someone with you when commuting to work (you can even split gas costs, helping both of you save money). In other words, do all that stuff they taught you in driver's ed.
"When and Where" we drive can make a difference too. Running errands during busy traffic times results in excessive sitting around idling and stop/go driving. Driving two towns over because a quart of milk is cheaper there may save a few pennies in your grocery budget but will waste money from your fuel budget, as well as create excessive pollution. And, as mentioned above, running several errands at once is far more efficient than making several trips.
I'm nearly as bad. I drive an AWD, turbocharged Volvo station wagon every day. (don't even ask me about the converterless, smog-pumpless, V8 T-Bird, but at least that only gets driven about 1000 miles/year). It's not quite as bad as an SUV, and I do use it for "wagon" things quite often, and even use it for "truck" things when I attach my utility trailer to it, but as an everyday driver it's very inefficient - it gets about 22-23MPG highway. I could be just as well served by a Hyundai Accent.
Thing is, I don't want an Accent. My personal choice is that I want a big car with all the luxury goodies (and a smog-belching, 20-year-old T-Bird for a mistress). And that is what it all boils down to. Everybody agrees pollution is bad but nobody is willing to make personal sacrifices to reduce it.
Something MUST be done, just so long as somebody else is doing it.
THATS me right there. i do believe that the things we spew out are bad but I CANNOT give up my v8 car. i JUST CANT. nothing anyone says will ever change that about me. if people think im an insenstive selfish turd then so be it. thats how i feel. im going to live out in the f-in boonies anyway when im older, ive made up my mind. the further you are from a densely populated area the less likely you are to inhale all kinds of pollutants. thats my solution.
if there were lots of people that didnt mind driving smaller, less-polluting cars thats fine. i dont need everyone to be like me and drive big v8 cars. but I HAVE TO. call it what you want, insecurity in my manliness or whatever but i have to big, loud, and powerful when im on the road. i drive like my grandmother but i want the car to be that way.
Well, we don't have have anything to worry about right now because it'll take a couple hundred more years to really have an effect globally ( not like "the day after tomorrow") but to think about your great great grand kids lives and how they probably will all have asthma. I'm sure science will be much more advanced by then and will be easier to deal w/. =:)..so why not splurge!!!!???lol
i was just being sarcastic,, and trying to make a point. Watch out if this takes hold (belief in global warming) because if it does, only the common man will have the realisic solutions while goverment will pork barrel the thing to death wheeling and dealing with industry for the deeper pockets benefit.
Just so everyone knows where i stand, i believe that something bad started happening just after we and other nations tested nuclear and atom bombs. The data points to it but,, i am yet still confussed by history books and farming history that points to similar trends in weather during the 1800's. Even our history points to a painting of george washington enduring an anbearable weather trend during the revolution.
Farmers almenacs keep pretty good records of trends like this. I honestly think our weather has something to do with the 1940's on forward.
Can anyone tell me what is the byproduct of one attom bomb by comparrison to the equal amount of automobiles or coal fired power plants?
as for the polar shifts,, talk to someone in the navy in the avation job class,,, they will just as myself tell you ,, there is one place in Rota Spain that is ideal for calibration of navigation systems. This place in Rota has been used by the Military for decades to do this task and these records show true north always changing.
Sadly, I think your sarcasm is appropriate here. I was trying to make a point about the dismissive tendencies of so many (nothing personal of course) - yet it is true that the "system" will not allow for practical and creative solutions. :flame: Well, I guess it's time to pray for the best. On a positive note, a 4 degree rise in average winter temperatures is quite nice up here in NE :D (the recent cold snap aside).
According to the CO2 rise timeline, something did start happening after WW2. Whether is was just the post war boom or a one time event triggered change (atom bomb?) is anyone's guess at this point.
(http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e360/Domeskull/CO2inairrising.gif)
Pic reinserted for emphasis...
Sure, "green house gases" could be part of "global warming," but the earth has already been through tons of climate changes before we ever even stepped foot on this planet. So while we may be 'contributing,' I seriously doubt it's the biggest reason for it. I'm sure earth's previous climate changes didnt happen overnight.
Could someone please tell me what the vertical scale is? I'm not calling b.s., but I can tell you anyone can make a graph that can show "preferred results".
I've though about that too. How much heat/gases/radiation do these things spew out when they go off? I know we blew up a HELL of a lot of them in the late 40's-early 50's "testing" them. I know that if enough of them go off that you'd get a "nuclear winter" because the sun would be blocked out. Maybe the effects from the tests are causing the debre from the explosions to trap heat.
I'm not a scientist I'm just guessing on this one :hick:
i do care,, more than i present myself im sure. I get pissed when some people find it prefectly ok to say we dont really have to worry about that stuff right now.
That chart reminds me of something , the moutain behind my house got clear cut 4 years ago. I got kinda mad when the guy cutting said he wasnt gonna plant anything back because "brush grows back for free". Yep, thats what he said so i called the West Virginia Forestry office and tried to learn a few things.
THe forestry departement said that it really wasnt a problem because from records they have, we (west virginia) are under
70% tree cover to date by comparrison to
21% in 1900.
I was astonished but he explained that there had been over 150 years of cutting for wood heat and cooking, building, smelting, transportation, fencing,,,,, the list goes on and on.
Later on, this was confirmed with my sitting in the Roanoke Va hospital and i looked at a painting of this town and the artist did the work in the mid 1850's. As i looked at the painting, i noticed the lack of trees for as far as the eye could see. It occured to that the artist painted what he saw ,, and from this hillside/mountain he sat on, there must have been hardly any trees to be seen. Afterall, what benefit would this artist have in painting the wrong city?
Today, we are WWWWWAAAAAAYYYYYY less dependant on wood.
My point,,,
Carbon emissions should be going down. I cant believe for a moment that even the sickest of running car running for 1 stinking hour could produce the carbon emissions from my fireplace right now.
Forced air wood heaters dont produce the carbon like a regular fireplace but still.
See my comparrison? Whle in these days of a huge need for wood, we also belched filth in the air form steel mills cropping up all over the nation. The data in that chart should show the problem to be present waaayyy earlier than the point ploted around the 1950's.
Something is screwy with it especially since we were a SERIOUS carbon emissions producer for well into 100 years prior to 1950.
These thoughts are exactly why I just dont get it at all.
If the chart is correct,, and i hope it is, then the problem is obvious to be nuclear/atom bomb testing.
Greenhouse gases and global warming aside, whether you believe in it or not, that's no excuse to not save energy. Saving energy helps the environment, sure, but more importantly, it saves money. And reducing oil consumption reduces your nation's dependency on foreign oil (I say "Your" nation because I believe Canada is a net oil exporter). Nobody likes terrorism, but every gallon of middle eastern oil you burn supports it.
Again, it all boils down to individual choices. I try to save some energy because it saves me some money, but I certainly don't save as much as I should
this whole thread and your last reply TC was the very root reason why i posted a thread about Linear motors.
So how about that Crystal? She comes out of nowhere, drops a hot topic bomb, and hits the road. I bet she's got popcorn. What a little shiznit disturber. (;) jk)
I say we blame her for global warming. ;)
And for the record... I just farted, that should help speed things up a bit :D .
Holy we hit 20 today, global warming, heat wave, I am a HUGE conspiracy.
....fan.
yeah,, blame her,,
so what do all you buckeyes think about upstate NY's lake effect snow?
I wish i could get that much snow. We only got about 9 inches here.
Eh, we got all the cold... they can have the snow.
those friggin central-staters!!! lol im seriously pissed though, they got dumped on cuz theyre near lake Ontario, over here in the GOOD OLD HUDSON VALLEY, we got nuttin! this winter has been embarassing. but of course as i said (if you spotted the sarcasm) here in the valley we get nowhere near as much as EVERYWHERE AROUND US. so f-in boring.
The Earth has been going through these cycles forever. Heck if we are heating up the earth a little it might come in handy if the sun cools off a few degrees some day, might just save our asses. Any ways, you guys ever tried to heat a rock with a burning ball of gas 93,000,000 miles away supporting 6.5 billion people. It's bound to have a glitch here and there resulting in change now and then. You would have to be nuts to think for a second that with all of the variables that exist in the world/universe, with or without people, things are always going to remain exactly the same. It is important that pollution is minimized as much as possible though. Trashing mother earth is not in our best interest that's for sure. As far as "global warming", I just call it normal. So what does one do? Plant some trees once in a while, and build your house on high ground. Besides, long before global warming gets us, we'll get ourselves with nuclear war or one of them deadly viruses we keep locked up gets loose. Global warming probly doesn't even make the top ten list of things most likely to seriously compromise human survival. I like the statistical info some of you guys have posted. Jason.
^^ i agree, nucular holocost will kill us all before global warming... but from what scientists say about the life of a star (the sun) the next step for our sun is it will swell up large enough to swallow up mercery and maybe venus, which would have enough gravity to suck every planet up till prolly neptune.
It is irrational, irresponsible and highly negligent to think that humans are not affecting the earth and its climate. Nature evolved and survived for billions of years without us. Now things are radically and unexpectedly different with humans in the picture. The difference is, today we have the knowledge to measure what exactly is happening, where mankind never had that in years past. Knowledge = power = scary, sobering thoughts. Then again, it could all be part of a global cycle that we've never seen before.
In either case I'm all for warmer winters and summers. But not at the expense of the planet upon which I happen to be living. The majority of the pollution that is theoretically tied to global warming does NOT come from automobiles. This doesn't justify having a car that pollutes but it does show that we, as car fans, are not the black sheep we're sometimes made out to be. For every old car restored, probably 1,000 newer cars go to the salvage yard, and those 1,000 cars are going to pollute waaaayyyyy more than 1 car ever could. It's simple math...as time progresses, our emissions output gets smaller, and over a span of 20, 30, 50 years there will hardly be any majorly polluting vehicles left on the road, except for collectors and eccentrics. Essentially, auto pollution will cease to exist eventually. So that factor will one day be eliminated from the global warming 'hit list'.
And now, the new Chevy Silverado can get over 20mpg. From a TRUCK. The impossible, it seems, can be accomplished like never before. We have the technology, the means, and now the experience to solve problems that have plagued the auto industry for many years. The only sticking point is the price as it trickles down to the consumer. The buying public is being asked to bear some of the burden, financially, to help solve the problems (hence the higher prices for hybrids). Eventually this will even out as well.
The point is, progress isn't stopping. Things WILL get better, as far as auto emissions. It's not reverting by any means. You can't fix the past but you can help with the future. So enjoy your rear-drive V8 American gas guzzler that sucks on dinosaur guts. We'll be a very small minority in the future. ;)
Yet things are definitely happening to the climate and some people, and a lot of scientists, are taking notice. I don't think that's such a bad thing. Are they correct, though? That's the debate. Assuming that they are, we could be in for a pretty rough century. But I've always believed that nature always finds a way to heal itself, to combat whatever is afflicting it. So...who knows. We'll all find out soon enough.
We have a much greater chance of getting extinguished by a meteor than death by car emissions. We should be concentrating more on looking out into space and trying to catch that errant rock before it hits us. But that's another issue. ;)
just like in that movie when ben aflack dies and aerosmiths daughter cries
you brought up a great point, which i have read about before. they say the power plants are the REAL BIG polluters. honestly, i could totally live without electricity in my home. ok maybe not LOL. more realistically, i could live on the amount of electricity a SMALL turbine in my backyard or solar panel coud generate(because anything big enough to actually power your house is $$$$$$$$$)
id still have my car, and thats all that matters. id just have to get out and pull open the garage door myself. :D and c'mon, everyone used to do that, before we had openers!
The thing is, if global warming is happening, it ain't gonna happen overnight. You're not gonna be sitting on a dock, fishing rod in hand, and all of a sudden be up to your ears in water. A tidal wave isn't gonna flood Manhattan in an instant (or at least one caused by global warming won't - earthquakes are a different matter).
In other words, as the water rises, we'll just get the hell out of its way - or at least if we're smart we will. Instead, though, we'll be stupid and build levies and dams and end up with a bunch of New Orleans. As one part of the world becomes "unfarmable" we'll move the farms to a different part of the world, and the "unfarmable" ones will be used to farm crops more suitable to the new climate. Florida may become too warm and dry to grow oranges, so we'll grow 'em in New York. Meanwhile we'll grow sugar cane in Florida.
I think the biggest problem with global warming would be that mankind would be too stubborn (or stupid) to get out of its way. As mentioned above, instead of moving back from the rising ocean we'd try to restrain it. Instead of growing corn in Northwest Territories we'd irrigate the hell out of the prairies (or deserts as they'd likely end up) and continually bail out the dirt farmers. Instead of abandoning beachfronts pr0ne to storm damage we'd keep rebuilding our big, stupid beach houses. Just like we do now.
But I love my big stupid beach house!
I don't have a big stupid beach house.
You hit on something there, humankinds adaptability. The question is how we choose to adapt. Do we do what other countries are doing in their major cities to places like NewYork and Miami or take another route? Do we take a step back from increased industrialization and see what effect that has or use that industrial might to make the globe fit our wishes and desires? Check out the second site.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/06/science/06tech.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5088&en=f2cbac85235230ad&ex=1283659200&adxnnl=0&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1125997239-x7iBtEFYvi7GgJq/LCqWwQ
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-517
:dunce:
Actually, Affleck lives...it's Bruce Willis who dies...bah...
The earth has been going through these cycles for countless millenia...but yet, i WILL subscribe to the theory that humankind has affected the cycle, too.
my only question: how to convince 150 trillion people to each cut down in some way to prove THAT theory...I don't think it would make much of a noticeable difference immediately.
So, I will continue to drive daily my gas-guzzling, V8 heavy-ass truck because: A. it's my only vehicle, and B. I pay for my gas, not you, or Donald Trump, or Bush...or anybody....
With that said...blah..who cares...we're NOT gonna be able to stop it, just slow it down slightly, even with a mass, collective effort.
That's not necessarily true because we can look at another atmospheric issue in the past that was resolved. That issue is
lead content in the air. For those who have forgotten, lead was on a radical rise just prior to WWI when manufacturing started producing more cars and products for public consumption. Between the 50's and the 60's atmospheric lead content skyrocketed. In the late 60's with data from scientific observation this rise could be easily graphed. When government started legislating the reduction of the use of lead in gas, paint, and emission control from manufacturing in the 70's, these lead levels dropped. These reductions were followed as well.
Check out the graphs at the bottom of this link page.
http://see-the-sea.org/topics/pollution/air/AirPol-body.htm
Air polution is still a problem in all its forms. How we meet those problems is up to us as a whole, world wide.