View Poll Results: Is Global Warming real?

Voters
34. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes.

    17 50.00%
  • Yes, but not as critical as most people believe.

    7 20.59%
  • No.

    10 29.41%
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 68

Thread: Global Warming

  1. #1

    Global Warming

    We've been hearing this term for a while. Is it caused by too much CO2? Is it real? Is it fake?

    What are the statistics? If the Icecaps melt, does the ocean necessarily rise?

    Does global warming exist when our wasatch front still has snow on the peaks after the first week of June?

    Here's the place to hash out the details on why, or why not you believe GW exists.

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Location
    Advertising world
    Posts
    Many
     

  3. #2
    There's no doubt that global temperatures have gotten warmer since the ice age (duh), but I don't think anybody can reliably prove that humans are responsible for it. Hell, there was a time when the earth didn't even have polar ice caps, and there were no humans around to be blamed. It's obvious that climate changes are always occurring on this planet, so who cares if global temperatures go up or down by a few degrees? In the grand scheme of things, none of it matters.

  4. #3
    As i understand it there are two types of warming.

    (1) Clearly we are exiting the ice age and there has been a natural trend of warming for 10,000 years. Scientists are NOT suggesting that THIS is our fault.

    (2) There is a TREND which shows a marked increase in average tempurature RISE over the past 100 years, especially the last 50. What this is demonstrating is that there is an ACCELERATION of the warming. Furthermore that this acceleration in average temp. is correlated with a related increase in the amount of carbon dioxide released during that period. it is THIS which scientists believe WE are responsible for.


    it's actually dramatically impressive the amount of CO2 we can put into the atmostphere. most folks wouldn't really believe it, then again, it's hard for humans to really grasp the scope of anything large scale.

    what bothers me most is that WE as humans only choose to deal with issues when they are a crisis. Rather than entertain the possibility that we are responsible and try to change it, we'd rather deny it and wait until it's a much more difficult problem.

    Now i totally disagree with Udink. Who cares about a couple of degrees? Sheesh. What do you know about a couple of degrees. You and I have no concept of the implications of a couple of degrees. Now i will say that no one knows precisely what the implications are, but it's short-sighted to suggest that a couple of degrees means NOTHING, it's also very short-sighted to expect that it'll only be a couple of degrees. Plus you cannot base what happens over the course of a few years on what can happen in many years from the same result. The surface of the earth and it's atmosphere form a very complex system, for %&$#'s sake we cannot even predict the weather more than 3 days out. Tinkering with our atmosphere *potentially* can lead to dramatic consequences. I don't think this should be taken so lightly.


    It's better to err on the side of caution in this case, i would think.

    "Grand scheme of things", this arguement is a way to cop out of responsibility and moreover, it's absurdly in alignment with, "well, eventually, i'll be dead, so who cares about what i do in life and the value of my decisions."

  5. #4
    I certainly believe in global warming, in the fact that the globe is warming. But global waming is such a loosely used term. Technically the Earth is warming but there is no proof whatsoever that humans are the cause. It has been proven that throughout mankind, and before that, the earth's temperature has abruptly changed, sometimes hotter, sometimes colder. I'm not saying that humans don't need to clean up their act, but I can't stand it when humans, especially Americans, get blamed for everything "bad" that happens on this planet. I can't wait until we start getting blamed for earthquakes and volcanos. I work with a guy that really believes the government caused Katrina. He also believes the gov. blew up the World Trade Center. But that's a whole other topic.

  6. #5
    I step outside yesterday, and start sweating immediately because of the heat this early in June. Even May had record high temps.

    And then I still see snow on Mt Ogden approaching mid-June. Maybe I'll start a theory called "valley warming".

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Udink
    There's no doubt that global temperatures have gotten warmer since the ice age (duh), but I don't think anybody can reliably prove that humans are responsible for it. Hell, there was a time when the earth didn't even have polar ice caps, and there were no humans around to be blamed. It's obvious that climate changes are always occurring on this planet, so who cares if global temperatures go up or down by a few degrees? In the grand scheme of things, none of it matters.
    You are right that the planet is and has been getting warmer for last ~200,000yrs. I don

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Sombeech
    I step outside yesterday, and start sweating immediately because of the heat this early in June. Even May had record high temps.

    And then I still see snow on Mt Ogden approaching mid-June. Maybe I'll start a theory called "valley warming".
    snow takes a long time to melt, especially when there is a lot of it and the snow is dense. Snow reflects a lot of the sun's radiation too. Last year the snow was very very deep and it seemed as though we could ski forever. ah it was fantastic. but by my last week of june and first week of july skiing the wasatch, it was becoming clear to me that the snow was vanishing superrapidly.

    FYI alta measured 700" by the end of April last year, 150" above average, This year was very high too. Before last year, 1997 was the last comparable year. So the snow being around isn't a good indicator. it's the rate of melting of the snow of comparable years that, in the crudest of senses, would be marginally appropriate.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by stefan
    So the snow being around isn't a good indicator. it's the rate of melting of the snow of comparable years that, in the crudest of senses, would be marginally appropriate.
    So does this mean it's not consistently getting warmer, but comes and goes in waves?

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Sombeech
    Quote Originally Posted by stefan
    So the snow being around isn't a good indicator. it's the rate of melting of the snow of comparable years that, in the crudest of senses, would be marginally appropriate.
    So does this mean it's not consistently getting warmer, but comes and goes in waves?
    Well remember "warming" is in an averaged sense, there constantly are fluctuations due to rotation of earth about axis/sun, weather patterns, whatever. This means that it can be cold enough at a moment when a lot of moisture is passing through a region, i.e., enough to lay down tons of snow, but on average, be warmer from one year to the next.

    I guess my point is that none of this is really cut-and-dry. For example 1997-1998 was a HUGE snow year (alta 650-700+), yet January was the 3rd warmest on record. You need to look at averages over time in many different locations, i think, to get a real sense of "warming."

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by stefan
    Furthermore that this acceleration in average temp. is correlated with a related increase in the amount of carbon dioxide released during that period. it is THIS which scientists believe WE are responsible for.
    You should not confuse correllation with coincidence. A correllation has not been proven.

    Quote Originally Posted by stefan
    "Grand scheme of things", this arguement is a way to cop out of responsibility and moreover, it's absurdly in alignment with, "well, eventually, i'll be dead, so who cares about what i do in life and the value of my decisions."
    I agree that it's a cop-out. However, who's to say that humans have a responsibility to try to propagate themselves forever? It's a matter of when, not if we go out just like the dinosaurs and wooly mammoths.

    Quote Originally Posted by James_B_Wads2000
    Will human contributions to global warming wipe out all life on Earth? Hell no, not possible. Will it wipe out human life on Earth? Maybe, it would take thousands of years. Will it make human life more difficult on Earth? I would say yes there is a very good chance.
    I agree wholeheartedly, and this is about the most pragmatic answer we're likely to see on this board.

  12. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Udink
    You should not confuse correllation with coincidence. A correllation has not been proven.
    i DIDN'T confuse correlation with coincidence. Sure, correlation can be an indicatior of coincidence. i didn't suggest this wasn't a possibllity. i simply stated that there is a correlation and that this is one angle that scientists use to SUGGEST that we are responsible. No one's PROVING anything, mostly because it's too hard. THIS is why i would prefer the preventative approach to *potential* crises and to err on the side of caution. What is so wrong with the idea of acknowledging the possibility that we may be an influence and trying to apply measures to curb our carbon output? It has other beneficial effects also.


    Quote Originally Posted by Udink
    Quote Originally Posted by stefan
    "Grand scheme of things", this arguement is a way to cop out of responsibility and moreover, it's absurdly in alignment with, "well, eventually, i'll be dead, so who cares about what i do in life and the value of my decisions."
    I agree that it's a cop-out. However, who's to say that humans have a responsibility to try to propagate themselves forever? It's a matter of when, not if we go out just like the dinosaurs and wooly mammoths.
    I think in the grand scheme of things there is no such thing as responsibility, good or bad...everything just is or is not. But i think placing value is part of what is being human (not exclusively). I place high value on OUR livelihood and believe that it shouldn't be degraded by careless economic development. Oh and if it's a matter of when and not if, then why bother living at all? what's the point? i just don't understand the meaning of this argument.


    What is pragmatic is trying to analyze the effects our actions take, to evaluate the ramifications not on a purely economical basis, and try make more informed decision and changes to improve the manner in which we operate. We have a long time before we go extinct.

  13. #12

  14. #13
    I have absolute undeniable irrefutable photographic proof of Global Warming.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Have fun, ride safe, keepem wheels down, and see you at the Jamborees,
    Buy my book my poor Quad needs gas money

  15. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by ATVUtah
    I have absolute undeniable irrefutable photographic proof of Global Warming.
    Hahaha...in that case, bring on the global warming!

  16. #15
    I'm with Udink --- bring on the warming!!! It's not hot enough!!

    My supervisor went for a drive up on the La Sals a week ago. He drives a HUGE Ford F350, with an impressive lift kit. He said he got stuck in a really deep snow drift, and had to walk back for help to pull him out. Lots of snow still up there.

    Its a fact that the earth is warming, but whether or not we are responsible remains to be seen. Like was mentioned above, this earth goes through periods of dramatic temperature fluctuations. What caused those fluctuations before man was burning fossil fuels?

    Another thing to consider -- we only have reliable archived temperature data as far back as the mid-late 1800s. So we can only compare the current climate to that set of data. Who is to say that there weren't periods where temperatures spiked dramatically (a rapid acceleration of warming) BEFORE the 1800s? What was responsible for it then?

    A good read on this topic is "The Skeptical Environmentalist" by a former bigwig for Greenpeace, Bjorn Lomborg.
    Epstein did not kill himself...



  17. #16
    [quote]You are right that the planet is and has been getting warmer for last ~200,000yrs. I don
    Utah is a very special and unique place. There is no where else like it on earth. Please take care of it and keep the remaining wild areas in pristine condition. The world will be a better place if you do.

  18. #17
    Another thing to consider -- we only have reliable archived temperature data as far back as the mid-late 1800s. So we can only compare the current climate to that set of data.
    Bull crap. You have no knowlege of tree ring, coring, and biological dating, sea level data, and climatic study.

    Who is to say that there weren't periods where temperatures spiked dramatically (a rapid acceleration of warming) BEFORE the 1800s?
    Of course there were. You fail to know your climatological history.

    What was responsible for it then?
    Lot's of factors can be responsible. Volcanic eruptions is a big one. If the super volcano in Yellowstone goes off, no one is going to worry about global warming, but global cooling, and rapid. (Actually if it goes off people in the Salt Lake area might not after worry about anything, as it could be destroyed). Tambora caused a huge drop in temperature in the early 1800's. Sun spot activity is also a factor. Meteorites in the past have also caused great changes. The earth's ratation is a factor. There are many, many factors that can and will continue to be causes.
    Utah is a very special and unique place. There is no where else like it on earth. Please take care of it and keep the remaining wild areas in pristine condition. The world will be a better place if you do.

  19. #18
    You call tree rings RELIABLE temperature data?! I'm calling bullshit on that! So just by looking at tree rings you can tell within a few degrees accuracy what the temperature was way back when?

    Ya right.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott
    Lot's of factors can be responsible. Volcanic eruptions is a big one. If the super volcano in Yellowstone goes off, no one is going to worry about global warming, but global cooling, and rapid. (Actually if it goes off people in the Salt Lake area might not after worry about anything, as it could be destroyed). Tambora caused a huge drop in temperature in the early 1800's. Sun spot activity is also a factor. Meteorites in the past have also caused great changes. The earth's ratation is a factor. There are many, many factors that can and will continue to be causes.
    Thanks for validating my point. When man wasn't around to burn fossil fuels, the Earth still underwent periods of dramatic warming.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scott
    One can easily prove in a high school class room that more C02 in the atmosphere will cause warming.
    Huh? CO2 by itself isn't responsible for heating the classroom. The fact that the room is full of 98.6 degree bodies breathing out air at 98.6 degrees in close proximity is responsible for warming up the classroom. Don't you remember that from your Thermodynamics courses in college?
    Epstein did not kill himself...



  20. #19
    You call tree rings RELIABLE temperature data?!
    No. It is just a part of it. You have to find several climatic data indicators and put them together to form a theory. Just one will not do, and is not at all reliable, just as you say. There are many more factors and experiments from which data must be compliled. Not just one.

    Thanks for validating my point. When man wasn't around to burn fossil fuels, the Earth still underwent periods of dramatic warming.
    Yes, this is true. I would never disagree with that. Nor would I ever disagree that the world couldn't even become colder in the future, regardless of what man does. I would say that man could add more to what nature would do regardless and that man could cause it to be warmer than what ever mother nature (God) decides to dish out.

    Scott wrote:
    One can easily prove in a high school class room that more C02 in the atmosphere will cause warming.

    Huh? CO2 by itself isn't responsible for heating the classroom. The fact that the room is full of 98.6 degree bodies breathing out air at 98.6 degrees in close proximity is responsible for warming up the classroom. Don't you remember that from your Thermodynamics courses in college?
    Huh? That's not what I meant at all. What I meant is that you can set up experiments in a high school lab that would prove having more CO2 in the atmosphere will cause heating.

    What you cannot prove is how much (some argue miniscule and other's great and the affect). It would be impossible to prove how much the earth would warm, or if it would even be small or large, at least in this stage in time. Too many factors are involved that are impossible to replicate in any laboritory. The oceans absorb a huge amount of CO2, and the amount isn't even known. Forest absorb it too, though this is a bit easier to calculate. There are hundreds of other factors as well.

    Also, I actually don't have any problem with anyone disagreeing with anything about global warming, and this is true even of my own writtings and experiements. I would never make any claims as to I know that much about global warming. If people with to disagree and share data and ideas I'm open.

    What I do not like is people making decisions based on personal beliefs or politics. This should not be the scientific way. I believe those whom do wish to express their opinions on whether or not (and especially not) it
    would at least be willing to at least do their own research, experiements, writting and verification of equasions, and comparing several data sources before thinking they can make a decision on the matter. What is wrong with that?

    PS, I would be more than happy (seriously, no sarcasm) to compare yours and mine knowlege of thermodynamics. It would be fun to discuss, because I seldom find anyone whom is interested in discussing the subject

    Anyone voting "no", could you please show me some of your data (not Googled data-yours), experiments, and equasions that you used to come up with your conclusions that it does not exist. I won't disagree. I would even be interested in the data.
    Utah is a very special and unique place. There is no where else like it on earth. Please take care of it and keep the remaining wild areas in pristine condition. The world will be a better place if you do.

  21. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by Scott Patterson
    Anyone voting "no", could you please show me some of your data (not Googled data-yours), experiments, and equasions that you used to come up with your conclusions that it does not exist. I won't disagree. I would even be interested in the data.
    I voted "No," but not necessarily because I don't belive in global warming. Obviously, the earth's climate can warm or chill based on any number of factors. Rather, I don't believe in this whole "the sky is falling" crap that I keep hearing about global warming. Like this:

    [quote]

Similar Threads

  1. the seriousness of global warming
    By greyhair biker in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 11-24-2009, 07:53 AM
  2. The truth about global warming
    By chickenlicken in forum The Political Arena
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12-08-2007, 08:25 AM
  3. With Regards to Global Warming
    By Iceaxe in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-22-2007, 07:46 AM
  4. Why don't you believe in Global Warming?
    By DiscGo in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 05-24-2007, 07:09 AM
  5. hooray for global warming !
    By goofball in forum Hiking, Scrambling & Peak Bagging
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-19-2007, 02:35 PM

Visitors found this page by searching for:

Outdoor Forum

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •