Must see global warming argument

Discussion in 'General Conversation' started by PeZ, Jun 14, 2007.

  1. PeZ

    PeZ New Member

    Messages:
    757
    State:
    Oklahoma
  2. Big Eli

    Big Eli New Member

    Messages:
    185
    State:
    Ohio, Clifton
    Ineresting point of veiw,
     

  3. Phil Washburn

    Phil Washburn New Member

    Messages:
    7,680
    State:
    Shawnee OK
    one of the first things he said was that "no one i've shown it to so far has been able to poke a hole in it"....well, i am here to poke a hole in it:big_smile:

    his whole presentation is based on the SPECUALTION that man is causing global warming, and that man has the ability to affect global weather. people that believe that make no effort to explain the effect that volcanos, sunspots, and other natural phenomenon have on warming. those events are beyond our control. and they have a much bigger influence on warming than man does.

    there can be no doubt that man can contribute to it, but if that contribution is negligible, then his ability to help is also negligible....that, in turn, makes his whole argument meritless.
     
  4. JAinSC

    JAinSC Active Member

    Messages:
    1,514
    State:
    South Carolina
    But Phil, do you dismiss the data that show the historic levels for thousands of years and the fact that recent trends are completely off the chart? The only thing that has changed in those recent years is the human presence on earth. Have you seen the nightime images of earth from space? I for one have absolutely no problem that we, as a species, have effected global climate. Heck, we have effected pretty much everything else on a global level.

    Just my opinion, of course.
     
  5. SubnetZero

    SubnetZero New Member

    Messages:
    1,619
    State:
    Sherman IL
    I like his little Chart...

    Here is one I did up. Can you poke holes in my Logic? If not, Please send Cash (no checks)...

    ........................A Action B
    Tim needs $ |....Yes....|.........No............................|
    ......False....|Wasted $ |....................:big_smile:................|
    .................|Tim Got ..| .......................................|
    .................|Free $$ ..| .......................................|
    ......True.....|...:big_smile:......| Tim Starves.......................|
    .................|.............|Turns To crime....................|
    .................|..............|Turns to Drugs to ...............|
    .................|..............|fight Depression...................|
    .................|..............|Wasted $ supporting Tim.......|
    .................|..............|Tim gets Free $ after............|
    .................|..............|Losing Job and getting Pub Aid|


    As The Chart Clearly shows, If I don't need $, but you send it anyways, you get Wasted $ and I get free Cash, but if I DO need money and you DONT send it, You going to Wast money and I get cash Anyways. So may as well Send the cash to me, Right?
    PM me for Address to send the $$ to :big_smile::big_smile::cool2:
     
  6. GaryF

    GaryF New Member

    Messages:
    3,649
    State:
    O.P., KS
    I’m going to hold my opinions on global warming, as it’s been debated to death here before, and folks still disagree. I will comment on the video, though, as I feel the guy challenged us to poke some holes and was kind of arrogant..

    Problem: IMO, a very real risk is that we will invest heavily in prevention, yet the warming will still occur. The worst of both worlds, but it wasn’t on his chart of possible outcomes?

    Problem: He presented a risk of global depression should we expend resources to fight GW and be wrong about it. Yet the outcome of expending the resources and actually being successful in preventing GW was all smiley face... Think about it - exactly the same money being spent, with exactly the same climactic outcome.

    That's 2 holes without even trying.
     
  7. ryang

    ryang Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,338
    State:
    Blacklick, Ohio
    Name:
    Gary
    If Im not mistaken I think the holes he was talking about was if you dont do or say anyting then nothing will get done regardless. I think what he is trying to say is all we as a nation to do is speak up to start things off. I think he is saying that doing something is alot better than doing nothing at all.

    I cant say as I totaly agree with him but there is some merit to it. I belive that Global warming will happen anyway regardless of Human intervention, mainly because its happened before there was human intervention. Is there something we can do to slow it down, hard to say IMHO.
     
  8. JenJen

    JenJen New Member

    Messages:
    59
    State:
    South Carolina
    I think that this guy's point may be getting missed, based on some of your replies. I'm not going to go into whether or not I agree with him, but I just wanted to try and boil down the essence of what he was saying.

    The global warming situation is debatable. Period - and obviously, it is being debated. But this guy's point is that we have no control over that issue. No matter what we do or say, that reality, no matter which one it turns out to be, is what it is. And we can't change it.

    The ONLY thing we have any control over is our actions. We have what comes down to two choices - 1) Do something to try and fix the problem, or 2) Do nothing or fail to act due to hesitation.

    And since we can not know for certian what the truth is about the issue (even those who have gone to school for this topic, studied the issue daily for years and believe they know the answer have to admit that there is a possiblity that they are wrong, that's simply the way it works) we have to decide on our course of action based on what the possible outcomes could be.

    And the outcomes are - very simplified - 1) We do something, turns out we didn't need to and the money spent causes ecomonic crisis. 2) We do something, it turns out we needed to, and we still have the ecomonic crisis, but we're ok with it because it saved our way of life. 3) We do nothing and it turned out to be right. Or 4) We do nothing and millions suffer and die and the world as we know it ends.

    Since we can't know in time if we do in fact need to make changes, you have to decide which possible action has results you can live with. The "Do Something" action has economic crisis as a possible bad result. The "Do Nothing" action has the end of life as we know it as a possible result.

    Nugh said.
     
  9. JenJen

    JenJen New Member

    Messages:
    59
    State:
    South Carolina
    Real quick - I would love to see a poll on here about this guy's argument. It would be neat to see how the people on here take what he says. The options could be like: *Agree with him, * Not sure if I agree, but he makes sense, and so on....
     
  10. GaryF

    GaryF New Member

    Messages:
    3,649
    State:
    O.P., KS
    Jen, You presented it much better than the guy in the video.
     
  11. ncfowler

    ncfowler Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,649
    State:
    NC
    Name:
    Jeff
    History showes that the earth has went through many diffrent stages of globla warming and iceages, heck the earth is 60 billion yrs old. We as the the domaniant spices has only been here a short time. Only in the last 100 yrs or so we just to began to become modern in tecnioligy.
    Are we warming up the earth most likely, what effect will it have, There are differnt camps, ones saying that the icecap will thaw and the world will flood. Others say that the fresh water form the icecaps in the sea will stop the artic conveaor and put us into a iceage.
    Lets look back some 25yrs ago when the hole in the ozone was discovered and the florcarbons and unchecked emmisions were to blame. We still have that hole. Is it just part of nature or is man made. Lets go back to the early 1900's when the use of coal and wood to heat houses and made industry run, burning these fules created sulpher oxside, mixed with rain created supher dioxside h2so4. Acid rain. Im sure that this has a affect on the enviorment.
    Now look at all the natural pollution volcanos, burning of forest due to lighting strikes, natural occurances of warm winters, elnino. All have the same affect on the eviorment, Lightning strikes create ozone. Volcanos and wildfires create sulpher oxside and co2, and warm water from elnino feeds ocean storms,
    Are we the cause? I can't say but what i can say is that we need to become more aware of our enviorment and our goverments and world nations need to think what effect our actions will have in the long run. I could go on but i'm at lunch break and it's almost over. Just food for thought.
     
  12. Phil Washburn

    Phil Washburn New Member

    Messages:
    7,680
    State:
    Shawnee OK

    checks in the mail, Tim:0a10:

    oh, by the way, you may need to hold it for a couple of weeks for it to clear:lol:
     
  13. bnorth

    bnorth New Member

    Messages:
    539
    State:
    Indiana
    Normally I try to stay away from these conversations, because it turns out that what they say about opinions is mostly true. But I am going to add to the smell.

    Whether we would like to acknowledge the truth or not, Global Warming is very real. Scientists have been backing this up with information they have been accumulating for years. While we cannot speak for climate changes before man started keeping records, and therefore cannot definitively say "Yes, the human race is single-handedly destroying the earth", we have been given the opportunity to possibly do something about it. A few have said that he leaves out variables, that he doesn't consider that we may not be to blame at all. Even so, his model covers those variables.

    Simplified, there are only 4 possibilities:
    A1-Assumption False, Significant Action = Possible Economic Problems
    A2-Assumption True, Significant Action = Save the World
    B1-Assumption False, No Significant Action = Never had to save it anyway
    B2-Assumption True, No Significant Action = Armageddon

    The possibility of the human race not being the cause of global warming would be covered under both A1 & B1 being that our assumptions about global climate change being attributed to humans is false—he says this specifically as he starts to label his diagram.

    Also his whole speculation is not geared toward humans being the cause of global warming. It is a perfectly un-biased example of our choices to fix global warming; by giving two examples per argument A1/B1 and A2/B2. It doesn’t get anymore even.

    Even if we are in no position to stop the progression of natural events (if that may be the case), we are not hurting ourselves by cleaning up our act.

    Sorry for the rambling, my feelings are only that problems that have been given little thought before or ones that seem too big to tackle are the ones that receive the most ridicule. Few people stop to think that just because it is new or overwhelming doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do anything about it. Just my 2 cents.
     
  14. Kat-tamer

    Kat-tamer New Member

    Messages:
    875
    State:
    Missouri
    I think that I get the point he was making.:roll_eyes: We may or may not be the cause, we may or may not be able to FIX the problem, but we COULD make the world a better place to live with even a few minor changes that each person on the planet can make. At home, in your own backyard. Each person making 1 little change can make a huge impact. Just imagine how much less pollution would be in the air if just 2 people car pooled to work. There would only be 1/2 the pollution. If each person started to recycle, if each person just cared enough to try. What have we got to loose? A little time? A little money? IF they are right and we do nothing, we won't need that money or time anyway. We probably won't be here.IMO.