# Random Thought on Global Warming



## The Hate Ape (Mar 16, 2017)

Consider removing a portion of ice from your freezer and placing it on the counter. The ice would melt but at how fast a rate? Logically the closer the room temperature is to replicating the freezer temperature - the slower the melting process would be on the counter.

As the ice loses volume, the faster the melting process would accelerate due to temperature instability. If you were to chart the stages of deterioration, the data representing acceleration in the later stages would increase drastically.

Question:
What if the dramatic depictions of global warming were really just inevitable scenarios of the Earth exiting the last major ice age nearly 12,000 years ago?
(As opposed to mankind being solely responsible)

Items to consider:
- University of Auburn's research satellite logged almost a decade's worth of surface temperature across the world and found a wavelike heat pattern. 1996 and 2016 were the hottest years respectively.

-https://ghrc.nsstc.nasa.gov/amsutemps/amsutemps.pl
Active global hydrology resource which supports University of Auburn's evidence when you work with the interactive data. You can chart multiple years, from the sea level to the near surface, to 130,000 feet. The evidence is clear that changes in temperature are actually relatively miniature at best.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 16, 2017)

A good many reputable scientists are backing away from the Global Warming hysteria.


----------



## R.Caerbannog (Mar 16, 2017)

From my understanding of prehistory and the movements and environments of the peoples in North America (14000 bp to 1492), the environmental shift seems to be more natural than anything else. People can be destructive, but for the most part I think it's silly for us to believe that we are the main cause for global warming. 

What I believe is the crux of this debate, is that people are scared of a shift in environmental factors that affect how and where they live. Essentially we are going to have to change the areas that we live in due to these shifts. Sea levels are going to rise,  weather patterns are going to change,  none of this is new. The Southwest is littered with the ruins of agrarian cultures that failed to adapt to their environment. 

People are scared, and fear makes them believe the weirdest stuff, which is why the rest of us have to figure out a way to adapt to this new environment, or figure out a way to get off the planet and leave the dum dums behind.


----------



## Lefty375 (Mar 16, 2017)

R.Caerbannog said:


> From my understanding of prehistory and the movements and environments of the peoples in North America (14000 bp to 1492), the environmental shift seems to be more natural than anything else. People can be destructive, but for the most part I think it's silly for us to believe that we are the main cause for global warming.
> 
> What I believe is the crux of this debate, is that people are scared of a shift in environmental factors that affect how and where they live. Essentially we are going to have to change the areas that we live in due to these shifts. Sea levels are going to rise,  weather patterns are going to change,  none of this is new. The Southwest is littered with the ruins of agrarian cultures that failed to adapt to their environment.
> 
> People are scared, and fear makes them believe the weirdest stuff, which is why the rest of us have to figure out a way to adapt to this new environment, or figure out a way to get off the planet and leave the dum dums behind.



I think most people are lost on the whole issue and instead just go with the scientific consensus. I find it hard to accept non-expert opinions on matters of hard science, and I imagine a lot of people are in the same boat. I don't think people are weird for believing in what Ph.D.'s in climate studies say is _probably true, _or at the least understand to be true and have evidence to back it up. I find the opposite weird, trusting in public heads who have a bachelor's in law or government. Then again, I don't hold "beliefs," just temporary positions until science informs us otherwise.

I would love someone to win a Nobel prize for disproving the whole thing so I don't have to worry about it though.


----------



## Devildoc (Mar 16, 2017)

Lefty375 said:


> I think most people are lost on the whole issue and instead just go with the scientific consensus. I find it hard to accept non-expert opinions on matters of hard science, and I imagine a lot of people are in the same boat. I don't think people are weird for believing in what Ph.D.'s in climate studies say is _probably true, _or at the least understand to be true and have evidence to back it up. I find the opposite weird, trusting in public heads who have a bachelor's in law or government. Then again, I don't hold "beliefs," just temporary positions until science informs us otherwise.



I generally agree.  I think the problem, or part of the problem, is when many of those PhDs recant their positions.  The consensus that seemed to be there a few years ago within that community, isn't there any longer.  Then the bigger problem is that the administration, _every _administration, uses whatever science they want to endorse certain policies.


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 19, 2017)

I think the bigger problem is the money tied to the research of climate change.  It's an multi billion dollar industry, and alot of "scientists" have been paying themselves a fat salary to "study" climate change, and give opinions as to the cause. Funded by the government,  to prove that Lil Johnny is the cause because he drives a big gas guzzling 4×4, now government says you have to pay a tax... Yeah color me stupid, I'm not buying that bullshit.

Does climate change? Every damn year. Are humans and our big bad machines the cause? Hardly, the natural environment of the world constantly changing, purging and repairing herself.  We're just a nat on a bulls ass, let's talk a major volcano eruption...

For those who are worried about climate change,  have a look at deforestation and desertification.  Maybe instead of putting up shit loads of solar and wind farms, that are literally killing off massive bird populations. We could focus on teraforming our deserts so that the earth can eat up that C02, naturally.

I mean they will spend eleventeen billion dollars to study if Mars could be teraformed, but will not even consider our own fucking planet, that is turning to desert at an unbelievable speed. But fuck the earth is a tenth of a degree hotter over the last 40 years, tax the people...


----------



## pardus (Mar 19, 2017)

I'm still on the fence about the whole issue, because I don't have the education to weigh into it. I hope the predictions of global catastrophe  are found to be untrue. That said, I'm not buying a house near the water just in case.
There is clear evidence of massive destruction/chaos due to climate change in the past, and if this one happens it will be the single worst thing to happen in human history. 
It is also clear that we are not in an ice age presently and to my unscientific mind that proves global warming happens naturally. 
Also in pre-history The entire planet was once entirely covered in ice a mile thick, it was volcanoes that pumped the earth so full of greenhouse gases that the ice melted and life abounded. CO2 levels have also been far higher in the past on this planet. 
All of this is puzzling to me... :-/


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 19, 2017)

The Alarming Cost Of Climate Change Hysteria

Bit long, but dives into the money aspect fairly well. 

I've never said climate change is BS or that it's not going to happen, I just don't buy the aspect that humans are causing it. Even the climate change bandwagon addmit's that warming would happen regardless of humans, the issue is the speed and to what level we as humans have increased the speed. I think urbanization (concrete and asphalt) deforestation and desertification through mass farming and ranching, has caused more to the speed than, cars, machines or coal ever has or ever will.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Mar 20, 2017)

Diamondback 2/2 said:


> I've never said climate change is BS or that it's not going to happen, I just don't buy the aspect that humans are causing it. Even the climate change bandwagon addmit's that warming would happen regardless of humans, the issue is the speed and to what level we as humans have increased the speed. I think urbanization (concrete and asphalt) deforestation and desertification through mass farming and ranching, has caused more to the speed than, cars, machines or coal ever has or ever will.



Doing nothing helps whatever is happening, in my opinion.  That said, everyone I know who gets their climate change opinion from the left leaning politician or actor of choice does absolutely nothing to positively impact the environment.  On the flip side, every right leaning turd I know who refuses to admit that the climate is changing, manmade or otherwise, continues to do everything those on the other side of the house does.  Just keeping bulldozing and building...


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Mar 20, 2017)

RustyShackleford said:


> Doing nothing helps whatever is happening, in my opinion.  That said, everyone I know who gets their climate change opinion from the left leaning politician or actor of choice does absolutely nothing to positively impact the environment.  On the flip side, every right leaning turd I know who refuses to admit that the climate is changing, manmade or otherwise, continues to do everything those on the other side of the house does.  Just keeping bulldozing and building...




Couldn't agree more. My dad wasn't a tree hugging liberal,  but he did believe that for every tree you cut down, you should plant two in replacement.  I follow that as a rule of thumb as well.

The same people who get upset about climate change,  are also the fools wanting to expand the cities and spread urbanization. The liberal fools running San Antonio right now want to double the size of the city in 30 years. Why? Why in the fuck would they do that? Taxes, more fucking taxes. I'm really getting tired of the bullshit lies and games. It has absolutely nothing to do with ideology and everything to do with money...


----------



## Dienekes (Mar 20, 2017)

Cheap fix to Global Warming
I read about this about a month ago and looked into it a little more in depth. Climate change appears to be easily fixed and some scientists believe that cleaner emissions beginning in the 80s have been a contributing cause of warming because there is nothing to stop the rays coming through. Then the rays hit the ground and the world gets hotter. It's good to see people considering the governance and world implications of doing something like this, but it's also comforting to know that yea, this scare tactic bullshit is just that and we can fix it if shit hits the fan.

Also this from the independent in 2006 is quite interesting:



> The 400-page report by the Food and Agricultural Organisation, entitled Livestock's Long Shadow, also surveys the damage done by sheep, chickens, pigs and goats. But in almost every case, the world's 1.5 billion cattle are most to blame. Livestock are responsible for 18 per cent of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming, more than cars, planes and all other forms of transport put together.


----------



## pardus (Mar 20, 2017)

Dienekes said:


> Cheap fix to Global Warming
> I read about this about a month ago and looked into it a little more in depth. Climate change appears to be easily fixed and some scientists believe that cleaner emissions beginning in the 80s have been a contributing cause of warming because there is nothing to stop the rays coming through. Then the rays hit the ground and the world gets hotter. It's good to see people considering the governance and world implications of doing something like this, but it's also comforting to know that yea, this scare tactic bullshit is just that and we can fix it if shit hits the fan.
> 
> Also this from the independent in 2006 is quite interesting:



Which is a nice temporary fix _if_ it works as theorized. We would have to then ensure that _real  _measures were undertaken to reduce CO2 emissions drastically if we got to the point of needing this.


----------

