OT: Changes in Australia

Voted Worlds #1 Most Loonatic Fanbase

Moderator: Andrew

Postby Rockindeano » Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:20 am

7 Wishes wrote:U.N.: Greenhouse gases hit high in 2006

By ELIANE ENGELER, Associated Press Writer Fri Nov 23, 11:11 AM ET

GENEVA - Two of the most important Greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere reached a record high in 2006, and measurements show that one — carbon dioxide — is playing an increasingly important role in global warming, the U.N. weather agency said Friday.

The global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and nitrous oxide, or N2O, in the atmosphere were higher than ever in measurements coordinated by the World Meteorological Organization, said Geir Braathen, a climate specialist at the Geneva-based agency.

Methane, the third of the three important greenhouse gases, remained stable between 2005 and 2006, he said.

Braathen said measurements show that CO2 is contributing more to global warming than previously.

CO2 contributed 87 percent to the warming effect over the last decade, but in the last five years alone, its contribution was 91 percent, Braathen said. "This shows that CO2 is gaining importance as a greenhouse gas," Braathen said.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose by about half a percent last year to reach 381.2 parts per million, according to the agency. Nitrous oxide totaled 320.1 parts per billion, which is a quarter percent higher than in 2005.

The World Meteorological Organization's annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin provides widely accepted worldwide data on the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Studies have shown that human-produced carbon dioxide emissions heat the Earth's surface and cause greater water evaporation. That leads to more water vapor in the air, which contributes to higher air temperatures. CO2, methane and N2O are the most common greenhouse gases after water vapor, according to the meteorological organization.

There is 36.1 percent more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than there was in the late 18th century, primarily because of combustion of fossil fuels, the World Meteorological Organization bulletin said.

A report presented by a U.N. expert panel said last week that average temperatures have risen 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit in the last 100 years, and that 11 of the last 12 years have been among the warmest since 1850. Global Warming also led to a sea level increase by an average seven-hundredths of an inch per year since 1961, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The panel's report, which said human activity is largely responsible for global warming, noted that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is far higher than the natural range over the last 650,000 years.

The World Meteorological Organization also concluded that "Greenhouse gases are major drivers of global warming and climate change."

The World Meteorological Organization said it based its findings on readings from 44 countries.

The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change forecast that by 2020, 75 million to 250 million people in Africa will suffer water shortages, residents of Asia's large cities will be at great risk of river and coastal flooding, Europeans can expect extensive species loss, and North Americans will experience longer and hotter heat waves and greater competition for water.


Bah, this is all made up garbage. These scientists are paid by Clinton-Gore and those ridiculous Democrats. They don't know anything. This is all garbage. :roll: Why? Because people who won't listen to, or fuck-forbid, read anything that may put a damper on their posh life, are close minded cocksucking anal warts. Fuck all the heard headed conservatives who only know one way..their way. Well I got news for you dumbfucks. You better wake up and learn and listen to what scientists, non political scientists are saying. This world is everyones, not yours, and I have a newbirn son, and would like him to have an Earth to grow up on, not some smog infested, pile of oil tainted dirt ball.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby 7 Wishes » Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:23 am

Valid points, all of them, St. John. The terrorists - and the real enemy - were and are in Afghanistan. There was never any connection between Saddam and terrorists, let alone 9-11. I supported the invasion of Afghanistan 100%, and would gladly give my own life in exchange for ridding the world of Bin Laden. But the invasion of Iraq was, at best, a mistake of monumental proportions, and it cannot be undone; nor can the damage it has caused, or the chaos that has and will spread across the entire Middle East as a direct consequence.
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby Rockindeano » Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:25 am

Queue the GOP spin...

Here it comes.

My money says the first spinner says this:

"We are fighting in Iraq because we want to fight them over there." Haha
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Arkansas » Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:33 am

7 Wishes wrote:The only people in the world that still believe humankind has "little or no" effect on global warming are the 30% of Americans who are more than adequately represented on this board.

Or does that 30% have a greater understanding of science than the entire WMO, which is comprised of scientists with an average of 25 years of research and field experience?


Who financially supports the WMO? Who controls their budget? their purse strings?
I'm sure that any 'report' or 'study' can say whatever the fattest wallet wants it to say.


later~
Arkansas
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2565
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:23 am
Location: duh?

Postby jrnychick » Mon Nov 26, 2007 3:45 am

Rockindeano wrote:
7 Wishes wrote:U.N.: Greenhouse gases hit high in 2006

By ELIANE ENGELER, Associated Press Writer Fri Nov 23, 11:11 AM ET

GENEVA - Two of the most important Greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere reached a record high in 2006, and measurements show that one — carbon dioxide — is playing an increasingly important role in global warming, the U.N. weather agency said Friday.

The global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and nitrous oxide, or N2O, in the atmosphere were higher than ever in measurements coordinated by the World Meteorological Organization, said Geir Braathen, a climate specialist at the Geneva-based agency.

Methane, the third of the three important greenhouse gases, remained stable between 2005 and 2006, he said.

Braathen said measurements show that CO2 is contributing more to global warming than previously.

CO2 contributed 87 percent to the warming effect over the last decade, but in the last five years alone, its contribution was 91 percent, Braathen said. "This shows that CO2 is gaining importance as a greenhouse gas," Braathen said.

The concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere rose by about half a percent last year to reach 381.2 parts per million, according to the agency. Nitrous oxide totaled 320.1 parts per billion, which is a quarter percent higher than in 2005.

The World Meteorological Organization's annual Greenhouse Gas Bulletin provides widely accepted worldwide data on the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

Studies have shown that human-produced carbon dioxide emissions heat the Earth's surface and cause greater water evaporation. That leads to more water vapor in the air, which contributes to higher air temperatures. CO2, methane and N2O are the most common greenhouse gases after water vapor, according to the meteorological organization.

There is 36.1 percent more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than there was in the late 18th century, primarily because of combustion of fossil fuels, the World Meteorological Organization bulletin said.

A report presented by a U.N. expert panel said last week that average temperatures have risen 1.3 degrees Fahrenheit in the last 100 years, and that 11 of the last 12 years have been among the warmest since 1850. Global Warming also led to a sea level increase by an average seven-hundredths of an inch per year since 1961, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The panel's report, which said human activity is largely responsible for global warming, noted that the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is far higher than the natural range over the last 650,000 years.

The World Meteorological Organization also concluded that "Greenhouse gases are major drivers of global warming and climate change."

The World Meteorological Organization said it based its findings on readings from 44 countries.

The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change forecast that by 2020, 75 million to 250 million people in Africa will suffer water shortages, residents of Asia's large cities will be at great risk of river and coastal flooding, Europeans can expect extensive species loss, and North Americans will experience longer and hotter heat waves and greater competition for water.


Bah, this is all made up garbage. These scientists are paid by Clinton-Gore and those ridiculous Democrats. They don't know anything. This is all garbage. :roll: Why? Because people who won't listen to, or fuck-forbid, read anything that may put a damper on their posh life, are close minded cocksucking anal warts. Fuck all the heard headed conservatives who only know one way..their way. Well I got news for you dumbfucks. You better wake up and learn and listen to what scientists, non political scientists are saying. This world is everyones, not yours, and I have a newbirn son, and would like him to have an Earth to grow up on, not some smog infested, pile of oil tainted dirt ball.


I agree with you, Dean, but I don't see this as a political issue at all. I think people in the US try and spin the issue to fit their agenda. I think there are plenty of Democrats AND Republicans who are just too lazy to do anything to fix the problem. None of us want to give up our conveniences. I see it every day, and I'm sure you do, too. We recycle everything that we possibly can. We have a big recycling bin on wheels that is overflowing every week. We know darn well that Waste Management probably throws out half of the stuff anyways, but at least we make the effort. When I walk over to school to pick up my daughter every day, I see the line of minivans sitting out there with engines running, because the moms don't want to get too cold or too hot. When I pack my kid's lunch, everything goes into a reusable container that she brings back home. The only waste is from the milk carton she gets at school. Don't get me started on bottled water. My daughter is supposed to bring bottled water to school every day so she doesn't have to make trips to the water fountain. She has a reusable bottle that she brings home every day so she's not throwing out the bottles at school. They don't do ANY recycling there. Most of the kids bring a disposable water bottle that they throw out at the end of the day, because their parents don't want to give the child the responsibility of carting something back and forth, and they don't want to have one more thing to wash.

My husband designs, builds, and repairs recycling systems. The technology is there to recycle much of the household/everyday waste that we produce. It's not done because there is no money in it. Plus, people will still be too lazy to do it.
jrnychick
8 Track
 
Posts: 618
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2006 9:52 am

Postby 7 Wishes » Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:15 am

Arkansas wrote:Who financially supports the WMO? Who controls their budget? their purse strings?
I'm sure that any 'report' or 'study' can say whatever the fattest wallet wants it to say.

later~


What? They're not controlled by anyone! This is an independent panel of the world's top scientists, who have jointly (albeit separately) reached a unanimous, consensus agreement about the cause/effect relationship of humankind's fossil fuel emissions.
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby Marc S » Mon Nov 26, 2007 4:40 am

Rockindeano wrote:
conversationpc wrote:
Rick wrote:
conversationpc wrote:Too bad for Australia. They'll probably be complaining about whoever was just elected in the next year or so, if not sooner.


I'm not sure how you see this as a bad thing Dave, but we never agree on politics do we? :lol:


It would be like people here celebrating if Hillary gets elected. You're simply trading one bad thing for another.


Speak for yourself. Bill Clinton didn't turn America into a hated joke. Your beloved GOP did. The GOP owes America and the World, a sincere apology.

Good for Australia. Bring your troops home asap.


Yeah, great news for Australia at last Andrew - Howard managed to take the plucky, cheeky spirit out of Oz which it seems has been run by a Murdoch puppet for god knows how long. Looks like a trend, maybe Hillary will hopefully do it in the US next year... Bush, Blair and Howard consigned to the tip at last.
User avatar
Marc S
LP
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: UK

Postby Rockindeano » Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:57 am

Marc S wrote:Bush, Blair and Howard consigned to the tip at last.


Those three should be taken out and dropped into a fuckin volcano.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby Marc S » Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:26 am

Rockindeano wrote:
Marc S wrote:Bush, Blair and Howard consigned to the tip at last.


Those three should be taken out and dropped into a fuckin volcano.


Just take em all for a trip on a Nimrod or British Army Apache, one of them is bound to crash sooner or later, that would be poetic justice
User avatar
Marc S
LP
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: UK

Postby Rockindeano » Mon Nov 26, 2007 9:56 am

We in America need to be careful talking about leaders and "accidents." I would never cheer or advocate an accident on President Bush. Regardless of party, there is no place for that shit.

The Secret Service will be at your crib faster than Fyre taking Rolie's or Santana's cock in his mouth.
User avatar
Rockindeano
Forever Deano
 
Posts: 25864
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 2:52 am
Location: At Peace

Postby AR » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:07 am

The only people in the world that still believe humankind has "little or no" effect on global warming are the 30% of Americans who are more than adequately represented on this board.

Or does that 30% have a greater understanding of science than the entire WMO, which is comprised of scientists with an average of 25 years of research and field experience?


Scientists disagree about this so much it isn't funny.

So I guess dinosaur farts brought us out of the last ice age? :lol:
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby 7 Wishes » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:15 am

Scientists DO NOT disagree about this. 98% of the industrialized world's scientists believe in human-caused global warming. Damn, this is NOT a political issue! It's a matter of life and death and the future of this planet!
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby AR » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:22 am

7 Wishes wrote:Scientists DO NOT disagree about this. 98% of the industrialized world's scientists believe in human-caused global warming. Damn, this is NOT a political issue! It's a matter of life and death and the future of this planet!


Yes scientists DO. Too tired to go find the articles, but whatever side you are on - saying there is no disagreement is wrong.

Big DLR fan though! 8)
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby ohsherrie » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:22 am

7 Wishes wrote:Scientists DO NOT disagree about this. 98% of the industrialized world's scientists believe in human-caused global warming. Damn, this is NOT a political issue! It's a matter of life and death and the future of this planet!


But the Republican party in this country make it a political issue because it's the corporations that buy the elections for them that don't want laws that stop the pollution.
User avatar
ohsherrie
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:42 pm

Postby AR » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:24 am

ohsherrie wrote:
7 Wishes wrote:Scientists DO NOT disagree about this. 98% of the industrialized world's scientists believe in human-caused global warming. Damn, this is NOT a political issue! It's a matter of life and death and the future of this planet!


But the Republican party in this country make it a political issue because it's the corporations that buy the elections for them that don't want laws that stop the pollution.


Corporations buy elections for both Repubs and Dems. FACT.
User avatar
AR
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 8530
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:21 am

Postby ohsherrie » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:36 am

AR wrote:
ohsherrie wrote:
7 Wishes wrote:Scientists DO NOT disagree about this. 98% of the industrialized world's scientists believe in human-caused global warming. Damn, this is NOT a political issue! It's a matter of life and death and the future of this planet!


But the Republican party in this country make it a political issue because it's the corporations that buy the elections for them that don't want laws that stop the pollution.


Corporations buy elections for both Repubs and Dems. FACT.


I don't think that's entirely true. Special interest groups buy the elections for both parties, but the BIG corporations (drug manufacturerers, gun manufacturers, tobacco companies, electronic manufacturers, all of which are corporations that head up huge congomorates that control many subsidiaries) are Republican.
User avatar
ohsherrie
Digital Audio Tape
 
Posts: 7601
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2003 12:42 pm

Postby 7 Wishes » Mon Nov 26, 2007 10:36 am

AR wrote:Corporations buy elections for both Repubs and Dems. FACT.


True.
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

One way to do it ...

Postby Arkansas » Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:29 am

Woman Aborts Child To Help Save the Planet
Sunday, November 25, 2007

Giving birth is a burden on the world. This is according to British born, Toni Vernelli, 35, who had an abortion 10 years ago to ensure her carbon footprint would be kept to a minimum, the U.K.'s Daily Mail reported Sunday.

Vernelli -- who works for an environmental charity -- was later sterilized to help "protect the planet", the Mail reported.

"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," Vernelli told the Daily Mail, adding she believes bringing new life into the world only adds to the problem.

The Mail also reported that Sara Irving, 31, also underwent sterilization to because she felt "a baby would pollute the planet".

Irving’s become an environmentalist as a teenager, it was reported, when she realized saving the environment was her top and foremost priority in life. After going through several boyfriends she finally found her now husband Mark Hudson who is also an advocate of the ‘no kid’s policy’, according to the Mail.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312779,00.html
###
Arkansas
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 2565
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 2:23 am
Location: duh?

Postby BobbyinTN » Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:34 am

Congrats Andrew. Hopefully Australia's good luck is a good omen for the U.S.
User avatar
BobbyinTN
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1431
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 2:12 am

Re: One way to do it ...

Postby 7 Wishes » Mon Nov 26, 2007 11:42 am



Anyone who gets his "news" from Fox "News" is a hero in my book. :roll:
User avatar
7 Wishes
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4305
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby Marc S » Mon Nov 26, 2007 5:47 pm

Rockindeano wrote:We in America need to be careful talking about leaders and "accidents." I would never cheer or advocate an accident on President Bush. Regardless of party, there is no place for that shit.

The Secret Service will be at your crib faster than Fyre taking Rolie's or Santana's cock in his mouth.


What I was getting at was, if our leaders expect our servicemen/women to go to war in substandard and downright dangerous (eg. Nimrod) hardware, maybe if they were aboard such outdated piles of crap which routinely then crashed with them aboard they might just think twice. As has been previously mentioned, if it was mandatory for the Chief of Command to be aboard the first tank into battle, there wouldn't be any fighting...
User avatar
Marc S
LP
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: UK

Postby Little Lenny » Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:56 pm

hmmm...your politiicians sound a bit more in touch than ours , i wouldn't give ha'penny for the promises they keep over here, the wee man doesn't seem to count for a large majority of those people in the house of commons anymore...sort of makes a mockery of the 'house of commons' as that is what it's meant to represent... :shock:
User avatar
Little Lenny
8 Track
 
Posts: 644
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Kingston-upon-Hull City,East Yorkshire,ENGLAND

Postby conversationpc » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:15 am

Rockindeano wrote:Speak for yourself. Bill Clinton didn't turn America into a hated joke. Your beloved GOP did. The GOP owes America and the World, a sincere apology.


Beloved GOP? Are you joking? Do you even bother to read ANYTHING I write here? I have no love for the GOP.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby conversationpc » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:16 am

7 Wishes wrote:The only people in the world that still believe humankind has "little or no" effect on global warming are the 30% of Americans who are more than adequately represented on this board.

Or does that 30% have a greater understanding of science than the entire WMO, which is comprised of scientists with an average of 25 years of research and field experience?


Bullcrap. You man-maders still haven't answered most of the objections I brought up in that other thread awhile back.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Re: One way to do it ...

Postby Rhiannon » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:21 am

Arkansas wrote:This is according to British born, Toni Vernelli, 35, who had an abortion 10 years ago to ensure her carbon footprint would be kept to a minimum


If I could have one wish this Christmas, it would be to bump into this broad on the street and leave a carbon footprint on her face. This is the stupidest thing I've read, maybe ever.
Rhiannon
MP3
 
Posts: 10829
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 9:09 am

Re: One way to do it ...

Postby tj » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:22 am

Arkansas wrote:Woman Aborts Child To Help Save the Planet
Sunday, November 25, 2007

Giving birth is a burden on the world. This is according to British born, Toni Vernelli, 35, who had an abortion 10 years ago to ensure her carbon footprint would be kept to a minimum, the U.K.'s Daily Mail reported Sunday.

Vernelli -- who works for an environmental charity -- was later sterilized to help "protect the planet", the Mail reported.

"Having children is selfish. It's all about maintaining your genetic line at the expense of the planet," Vernelli told the Daily Mail, adding she believes bringing new life into the world only adds to the problem.

The Mail also reported that Sara Irving, 31, also underwent sterilization to because she felt "a baby would pollute the planet".

Irving’s become an environmentalist as a teenager, it was reported, when she realized saving the environment was her top and foremost priority in life. After going through several boyfriends she finally found her now husband Mark Hudson who is also an advocate of the ‘no kid’s policy’, according to the Mail.


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,312779,00.html
###


Following her reasoning to its logical end, she should kill herself because her mother didn't get sterilized. Somehow, SHE isn't polluting the planet, but a baby is? :shock:

She's just another who drank the "man is the world's worst enemy" koolaid. :?
User avatar
tj
Cassette Tape
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 2:55 am
Location: State of Confusion

Postby conversationpc » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:44 am

7 Wishes wrote:The global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and nitrous oxide, or N2O, in the atmosphere were higher than ever in measurements coordinated by the World Meteorological Organization, said Geir Braathen, a climate specialist at the Geneva-based agency.


The so-called greenhouse gases may contribute to some small degree but these scientists disagree that it is mostly a man-made phenomenon...

Reid Bryson, emeritus professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison wrote:Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.

http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/May2 ... rming.html


Robert M. Carter, geologist, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia wrote:The essence of the issue is this. Climate changes naturally all the time, partly in predictable cycles, and partly in unpredictable shorter rhythms and rapid episodic shifts, some of the causes of which remain unknown.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main ... do0907.xml


Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University wrote:...global warming since 1900 could well have happened without any effect of CO2. If the cycles continue as in the past, the current warm cycle should end soon and global temperatures should cool slightly until about 2035

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2006AM/finalp ... 108164.htm


William M. Gray, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University wrote:This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood. Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci ... 023334.stm

I am of the opinion that [global warming] is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 05_pf.html


George Kukla, retired Professor of Climatology at Columbia University and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory wrote:What I think is this: Man is responsible for a PART of global warming. MOST of it is still natural.

http://www.gelfmagazine.com/archives/an ... icator.php


Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology, The University of Adelaide wrote:We only have to have one volcano burping and we have changed the whole planetary climate... It looks as if carbon dioxide actually follows climate change rather than drives it.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s650126.htm
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Postby SteveForever » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:48 am

www.arborday.org

This is a real way to help with the environment if you want to make a difference. :D
SteveForever
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3177
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:37 am

Postby Little Lenny » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:42 am

SteveForever wrote:www.arborday.org

This is a real way to help with the environment if you want to make a difference. :D


Our council (Local government) In hull has a policy that for every baby born in the city, a tree is planted either by the parents of the baby who can collect it from the the parks & Gardens dept, or the council will plant it in a designated area they choose. Up to year or two back we also had a scheme called 'the woody appeal' this was the opposite where you could commemorate family members who had passed on by planting a tree, the tree would have a dedication on it, my dad has 6 trees in a small copse not far from where my mums home is.

This is one time when our local govt did something that could be seen as beneficial to the environment.
User avatar
Little Lenny
8 Track
 
Posts: 644
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:09 pm
Location: Kingston-upon-Hull City,East Yorkshire,ENGLAND

Postby Marc S » Tue Nov 27, 2007 5:24 am

conversationpc wrote:
7 Wishes wrote:The global average concentrations of carbon dioxide, or CO2, and nitrous oxide, or N2O, in the atmosphere were higher than ever in measurements coordinated by the World Meteorological Organization, said Geir Braathen, a climate specialist at the Geneva-based agency.


The so-called greenhouse gases may contribute to some small degree but these scientists disagree that it is mostly a man-made phenomenon...

Reid Bryson, emeritus professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison wrote:Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air.

http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/May2 ... rming.html


Robert M. Carter, geologist, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia wrote:The essence of the issue is this. Climate changes naturally all the time, partly in predictable cycles, and partly in unpredictable shorter rhythms and rapid episodic shifts, some of the causes of which remain unknown.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main ... do0907.xml


Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University wrote:...global warming since 1900 could well have happened without any effect of CO2. If the cycles continue as in the past, the current warm cycle should end soon and global temperatures should cool slightly until about 2035

http://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2006AM/finalp ... 108164.htm


William M. Gray, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University wrote:This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood. Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/sci ... 023334.stm

I am of the opinion that [global warming] is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 05_pf.html


George Kukla, retired Professor of Climatology at Columbia University and Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory wrote:What I think is this: Man is responsible for a PART of global warming. MOST of it is still natural.

http://www.gelfmagazine.com/archives/an ... icator.php


Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology, The University of Adelaide wrote:We only have to have one volcano burping and we have changed the whole planetary climate... It looks as if carbon dioxide actually follows climate change rather than drives it.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/stories/s650126.htm


There wouldn't be a forum large enough to post up 'quotes' from the vast majority of scientists that provide factual evidence we are responsible
User avatar
Marc S
LP
 
Posts: 404
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 9:13 pm
Location: UK

PreviousNext

Return to Journey

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests

cron