Global Warming- Fact or Fiction? -

magic9mushroom · #91 10-11-2006, 05:57 PM

:

I'm not saying all of the Cambrian CO2 is in our oil and coal reserves. But a lot is, and any change to the environment will cause mass extinction. This is just the first time it has been caused by a single species in such a short anount of time, and since we know about it, it is our duty to rememedy it as moral beings, instead of sticking our proverbial heads in the sand and hope it goes away by itself.

Or, of course, a small group could leave Earth and watch what happens, then use this as a warning for future generations.

Patrick Vykkers · #92 10-11-2006, 06:41 PM

Can you prove a lot of it (the Cambrian C02) didn't simply dissapate?

***Nate*** · #93 10-11-2006, 07:17 PM

Dissipate to where? Into space, to go and pollute Mercury instead?

It's not like it has anywhere to go...

magic9mushroom · #94 10-18-2006, 03:40 PM

:

Dissipate to where? Into space, to go and pollute Mercury instead?

It's not like it has anywhere to go...

"""""""""""""""""".

used:) · #95 10-18-2006, 08:32 PM

And what exactly does that mean?

magic9mushroom · #96 10-18-2006, 10:08 PM

Well, it means "the same as above", but I couldn't do just one because of the char limit.

BTW:Some may have gone into limestone, but I can't imagine there being a lot, as it had already had 3 billion years to get in equilibrium there.

Bullet Magnet · #97 10-18-2006, 11:52 PM

We've all said that it ends up in rocks. Limestone, chalk... but acid rain has a habit of dissolving it and releasing the resultant CO2 into the atmosphere. Is there no environmental effect we can have which doesn't lead to the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere?

magic9mushroom · #98 10-19-2006, 03:40 PM

But that was already in equilibrium by the Cambrian. The Cambrian CO2 nearly all went into plant matter.

Bullet Magnet · #99 10-19-2006, 03:57 PM

You are thinking of the Carboniferous. Some of which was fossilised, and is being released now. Much of the rest returned to the atmosphere as the dense forests receeded. There was no plant matter in the Cambrian.

magic9mushroom · #**100** 10-19-2006, 05:58 PM

I know. But that is where all the CO2 out of the Cambrian went. I didn't ever say this happened in the Cambrian.

Bullet Magnet · #**101** 10-20-2006, 03:57 AM

:

But that was already in equilibrium by the Cambrian. The Cambrian CO2 nearly all went into plant matter.

Then what were you trying to say by that?

Abeguy · #**102** 10-20-2006, 05:19 AM

Damn Ozone hole over Antartical...it's getting bigger...o.0
ah well, we're all gonna die soon enough. Why not be as warm as possible?
Sure were ruining the planet. but what can we do about it? Make something that pumps ozone back into the ozone layer? fat chance of them ever doing that. Even if we turned off everything that added to the holes in the ozone. We not only would be left with a very boring life. but also it would take ages for the ozone to fix itself...

Bullet Magnet · #**103** 10-20-2006, 06:00 AM

Is that a reason not to do it?

And what does ozone have to do with global warming?

Abeguy · #**104** 10-20-2006, 05:29 PM

...you got to be kidding me...

out of all the rays the sun emits. the ozone layer protects us from the "dangerous" ones. With the emission of all our crap into the sky, the ozone layer is depleting. Which lets more sun rays comethrough. and therefore, it gets hotter.

At least. That's what I understand.

But the ozone layer plays a huge part in Global warming

Bullet Magnet · #**105** 10-20-2006, 07:37 PM

Ozone absorbs ultra-violet light, reducing the amount we measley organisms on the gound have to deal with. The real nasty stuff is deflected by the megnetosphere, which is what gives us dem pretty northern fairy lights. While UV rays do carry energy, the amount of heat transferred is relatively negligable. Most heat is carried on longer wavelengths, such as infra-red, which carry on unempeded through O3.

The two effects are commonly confused. Depletion of ozone means less UV is absorbed, causing sunburns and cancer. The chlorofluorocarbons that are responsible for ozone depletion are not greenhouse gasses.

Greenhouse gasses are a natural component of Earth's upper atmosphere. Most of the heat reflected off of the surface of the Earth escapes into space, but greenhous gasses reflect some of it back. Human activity is now known to be increasing the amount of greehouse gasses in the atmosphere, reflecting more heat back to earth, and causing global temperatures to rise.

That is the difference.

Abeguy · #**106** 10-20-2006, 09:21 PM

you just answered your own question.

congratulations, kudos to you!

***Nate*** · #**107** 10-21-2006, 12:00 AM

Current estimations has the Ozone hole healing in approximately 50 years. This year's record hole notwithstanding, it has been shrinking for the last 5-10 years due to the reduction of ozone-depleting chemicals in industry and household use - probably the greatest environmental success of the last couple of decades. This year's record hole is attributed to unusually cold temperatures above Antartica this year (yay, climate change!).

But we must not rest on our laurels - we should go out there and lobby like we did in the '80s and early '90s. We must build awareness of the issues of greenhouse gases and stop purchasing products that wreck the environment. The CFC issue is the perfect example - it's happened before so we can fight and win this thing again!

Bullet Magnet · #**108** 10-21-2006, 05:07 AM

:

you just answered your own question.

congratulations, kudos to you!

Actually, I was asking if you know. Both are atmospheric effects, but are unrelated (apart from the people causing them).

One chlorine molecule broken down by UV light from CFCs can destroy 100,000 ozone molecules, and have a very stable presence in the atmosphere. And CFCs are stil being released- by the developing countries who still use them, and from our fridge dumps.

Interestingly, the people who put CFCs into fidges and aerosol cans were the same people who put lead into petrol.

Even more interestingly, 1000th post!

magic9mushroom · #**109** 10-22-2006, 10:14 PM

:

Ozone absorbs ultra-violet light, reducing the amount we measley organisms on the gound have to deal with. The real nasty stuff is deflected by the megnetosphere, which is what gives us dem pretty northern fairy lights. While UV rays do carry energy, the amount of heat transferred is relatively negligable. Most heat is carried on longer wavelengths, such as infra-red, which carry on unempeded through O3.

The two effects are commonly confused. Depletion of ozone means less UV is absorbed, causing sunburns and cancer. The chlorofluorocarbons that are responsible for ozone depletion are not greenhouse gasses.

Greenhouse gasses are a natural component of Earth's upper atmosphere. Most of the heat reflected off of the surface of the Earth escapes into space, but greenhous gasses reflect some of it back. Human activity is now known to be increasing the amount of greehouse gasses in the atmosphere, reflecting more heat back to earth, and causing global temperatures to rise.

That is the difference.

CFC's are actually very potent greenhouse gases, but the concentration is low enough that they don't really make a difference.

Bullet Magnet · #**110** 10-23-2006, 09:59 AM

I have just been informed that Ozone is also radiatively active. That is, it's a greenhouse gas.

magic9mushroom · #**111** 10-25-2006, 07:22 PM

:

I have just been informed that Ozone is also radiatively active. That is, it's a greenhouse gas.

All things absorb IR. O3 does not absorb much however compared to even modest GGs such as CO2 or H2O

***Nate*** · #**112** 10-31-2006, 12:11 AM

A report by former World Bank chief economist Sir Nicholas Stern that was just released states that the cost of fixing global warming will be negligible if it happens now. But in 50 years the problems caused by inaction today will be a third of the planet's wealth.

magic9mushroom · #**113** 10-31-2006, 01:34 PM

:

A report by former World Bank chief economist Sir Nicholas Stern that was just released states that the cost of fixing global warming will be negligible if it happens now. But in 50 years the problems caused by inaction today will be a third of the planet's wealth.

Exactly why certain people need to forget the polls and do some good, not keep pulling wool over people's eyes.

Bullet Magnet · #**114** 10-31-2006, 06:52 PM

Vote Democratic, apparently.

magic9mushroom · #**115** 11-02-2006, 03:53 PM

Umm... in Australia, politics are a bit different. Our Democrats is a minor party: The Liberals are the right wing conservative party and Labor is the liberal left-wing party, but even the Liberals would be considered left-wing by American standards.