| Author
|
Ecology - A trend
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Oct 22, 2009 22:01
|
|
TimeTraveller
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
80
Posts :
3207
Posted : Oct 22, 2009 22:03
|
I'm insomniac by nature. No I observe the planties for more or last fifteen years.They have changed with their sleep.I have not really  I always have too much to do maybe that's it.
  https://soundcloud.com/shivagarden |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Oct 22, 2009 23:07
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 21:17, Djones wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 14:50, TimeTraveller wrote:
I believe there is gloabal warming.Since I had and still have from time to time something with nature to do ,I observed it over the years that it really changed,even befor they started to blablaing about it all.
The weather changed atleast here in europe.Really crazy changed.
If you count on weahter you have to act different than a decade ago.
|
|
How would you know if that's not just part of the normal climate change, instead of the 'global warming' issue?
|
|
It has been proven several times, and again in more detail just a couple of days ago, that at no examinable point in history the climate has changed this much in such a SHORT time. Similar changes have taken hundreds of years.
The fact that we are burning Carbon (in form of oil and cole) that has been stored over THOUSANDS of years into CO2 within just a CENTURY and the well proven property of CO2 in the atmosphere reflecting the long wave warmth back to earth, highly correlates with the raise of earth temperature in such a short time... The CO2 raise in the atmosphere is a FACT. There simply are not enough plants to bring it back into the circle. It's a fact, no point in discussing it, it has been proven.
There are few people left who say that the raise of CO2 and the climate change are not related to each other... Beside to some (mostly to oil industry related) scientists these are mostly people who do not understand the CO2 circle or that the earth transforms incoming highfrequency light into lowfrequency light (infrared) which is then reflected by the CO2.
And even if that all is not true. There is soo much going wrong BESIDE the climatechange which is after all just one aspect.
It's still obvious that we are using more energy and resources than the planet can give us. There is no doubt that we eat too many fish, poison the water, cut too many trees, throw trash into the nature and do not recycle where we can but only where it is convinient.
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Oct 22, 2009 23:40
|
SCM, you're not clear on some things. Yes the climate is changing, but is it man's fault? There isn't conclusive evidence to back this up completely. The percentage of CO2 released in the atmosphere from man-made things is less than 1%. There keeps being mounting evidence against global warming. Look at what I posted too about the PDO. There are also several links between the sun/sunspots and the cause of the raise in temperature we are now past. There are also many graphs that show huge fluctuations in temperature in the planet over the last several hundred years ( http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm and http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gh19/b1510/f2004.gif ) .
Again, I think we should do everything we can to become a society that runs on renewable fuels, but people should get their facts straight.
http://soundcloud.com/ascensionsound
www.chilluminati.org - Midwest based psytrance group |
|
|
|
saintcarl
Started Topics :
2
Posts :
209
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 01:52
|
Ascension, I take it you are not familiar with the hole in the ozone layer?
http://www.theozonehole.com/
I am quite aware of this problem first hand as I spent the first 25 years of my life in New Zealand where one half a hour in the sun will let you know whats up.
Pretty hard to deny that humans are not effecting the environment one way or the other. I think this planet will remain for some time but we are still responsible for leaving it in good shape for future generations.
so don't forget to take your reusable bags to the store.
In other news the City of San Jose proposes to ban plastic and paper bags: http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_13397798 |
|
|
|
Basilisk
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
168
Posts :
2984
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 06:42
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 23:40, Ascension wrote:
SCM, you're not clear on some things. Yes the climate is changing, but is it man's fault? There isn't conclusive evidence to back this up completely. The percentage of CO2 released in the atmosphere from man-made things is less than 1%. There keeps being mounting evidence against global warming. Look at what I posted too about the PDO. There are also several links between the sun/sunspots and the cause of the raise in temperature we are now past. There are also many graphs that show huge fluctuations in temperature in the planet over the last several hundred years ( http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm and http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gh19/b1510/f2004.gif ) . |
|
Hold on a minute.
Prior to the industrial revolution CO2 levels in the atmosphere were approximately 284 ppmv.
Now we're at 384 ppmv.
We're responsible for roughly 25% of the CO2 in the atmosphere right now--not 1%.
Interesting side note: we can estimate the amount of CO2 that should be present in the atmosphere based on industrial productivity over the last 200 years. It turns out there is a huge chunk of "missing carbon" that has been sucked out of the atmosphere by one process or another. Regrowth of deforested areas has large role to play in this feedback loop. Plant life naturally sequesters carbon.
Anyway, sure enough, the Earth has gone through many different climate regimes in the past. But this is a bad argument to make: a rapid switch to any of those previous climate regimes would spell the end of human civilization and usher in an era of mass extinctions and ecological catastrophe. Yes, the system would settle into a new stable equilibrium for a time, but the effects would be devastating.
There is abundant evidence that human civilization is altering the environment. Do I really need to list things off? The real debate is about ONE environmental effect: whether the anthropogenic input of greenhouse gases is having any effect on global climate. Am I right? Is this the focus of the debate? Because if I'm discussing things with people that don't think we're altering the environment in serious ways we might as well stop here. And you can go for a nice swim in what's left of the Aral Sea.
Back on track: we know for a FACT that the additional CO2 in the atmosphere is the result of human activity. We know for a FACT what sort of physical effects CO2 gas has in the atmosphere. Anyone care to deny this stuff?
The ambiguity lies solely with the question of whether observed changes in global climate (not regional) can be attributed to the increase in CO2 (and other GHG) concentration. And yes, there is some ambiguity here. Observed global temperature changes remain within a reasonable margin of error calculated on the scale of centuries. But that doesn't mean there isn't anything going on. We have multiple, converging lines of evidence to suggest this situation is a serious concern. What we don't have is the smoking gun. Maybe when an ice cap or two melts we won't be having these cyclical discussions anymore
Let's turn back to the ozone hole and learn a lesson from the past. Actually, I suggest you just read about the Montreal Protocol on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol
We all know about CFCs, right? Undeniably manmade, highly destructive to the ozone layer, obviously threatening to life on Earth. Well, if you read the history section you'll see a microcosm of the current climate debate with one exception: the nations of the world actually took action!
Alarmism aside, there is a lot of sound science behind the anthropogenic global warming theory. I sincerely hope we aren't sitting around watching civilization crumble just so global capitalism can continue its relentless march for slightly longer than it would otherwise be able to given the finite availability of resources.
|
|
|
|
Login
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
65
Posts :
1707
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 06:52
|
|
And thats just the trouble of atmosphere, now lets start talking about water stress to have some fun.
"The dedication to repetition — the search for nirvana in a single held tone or an endlessly cycling rhythm — is one of electronic music's noblest gestures." |
|
|
|
sure_smoke_alot
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
45
Posts :
6874
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 07:45
|
if i live long enough till my grandchildren are born & they come & ask me that why did our genration decided to use carbon fuels against saving fresh water! i wonder wot my ans. will be
maybe i'll give them link to this tread!
p.s. yes the climate has kept changing from thousands of years & carbon levels have crept up in the past & tempratures to have gone up but it's the speed of this current climate change that worries most scientists & if ur not ignorant or dumb u sud know wot has caused this 'sudden change'
the problem with valuing art is, till u dont understand it, it's worthless but wen u do understand it, it's priceless!! |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 08:08
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 23:40, Ascension wrote:
SCM, you're not clear on some things. Yes the climate is changing, but is it man's fault? There isn't conclusive evidence to back this up completely. The percentage of CO2 released in the atmosphere from man-made things is less than 1%. There keeps being mounting evidence against global warming. Look at what I posted too about the PDO. There are also several links between the sun/sunspots and the cause of the raise in temperature we are now past. There are also many graphs that show huge fluctuations in temperature in the planet over the last several hundred years ( http://www.scotese.com/climate.htm and http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gh19/b1510/f2004.gif ) .
Again, I think we should do everything we can to become a society that runs on renewable fuels, but people should get their facts straight.
|
|
please read my post again. You didn't understand what I said.
Get yourself updated on facts please and learn the basics of the carbon circle. The discussion you are into is as if I say 2+2=4 and you say 2+2=5. You are simply not onto the proven facts sorry.
Your links are good examples how people try to mislead people. These climate changes mentioned there DID NOT HAPPEN IN SUCH A SHORT TIME AS THEY DO TODAY. you are falling for that? inform yourself. Look at the numbers next to the graf we are talking millions of years there. today we have the change within 100years. Again, read my post again. I already said all this.
see basilisk post too.
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
JohnTaramas
Inactive User
Started Topics :
9
Posts :
772
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 09:04
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 12:18, subconsciousmind wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 11:33, JohnTaramas wrote:
.... that practically almost nothing effective will be done to save the environment and that is because there is no profit out of that..
and now, that more people talk about ecology did you see anything changing??
|
|
of course, didn't you?
There is so much more going on, I don't even know where to start. wind, sun energy powerplants as never before etc. hybrid cars on almost every car brand from 2011. There is so much more going on since there is more talk. Maybe it depends where you live and if you read a lot of newspaper. its a TREND and its not just talk. Its not enough, but its more.
I'm actually really glad that some sharks found out that there actually IS a lot of money in ecology. For once their exploit can cause good.
|
|
yes good point, but what slowly changes is because of the profit, the people's talk has nothing to do with it.Also there's a huge pollution problem that nobody will earn something fixing it. What we are talking about imho, is an ecologic business, not a common goal or effort |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 09:32
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-23 09:04, JohnTaramas wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 12:18, subconsciousmind wrote:
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-22 11:33, JohnTaramas wrote:
.... that practically almost nothing effective will be done to save the environment and that is because there is no profit out of that..
and now, that more people talk about ecology did you see anything changing??
|
|
of course, didn't you?
There is so much more going on, I don't even know where to start. wind, sun energy powerplants as never before etc. hybrid cars on almost every car brand from 2011. There is so much more going on since there is more talk. Maybe it depends where you live and if you read a lot of newspaper. its a TREND and its not just talk. Its not enough, but its more.
I'm actually really glad that some sharks found out that there actually IS a lot of money in ecology. For once their exploit can cause good.
|
|
yes good point, but what slowly changes is because of the profit, the people's talk has nothing to do with it.Also there's a huge pollution problem that nobody will earn something fixing it. What we are talking about imho, is an ecologic business, not a common goal or effort
|
|
I do not fully agree on the details, but I know what you mean. It would be nice if more people were being ecologic out of the right intentions
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
Dogon
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
50
Posts :
8779
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 09:57
|
Quote:
|
It would be nice if more people were being ecologic out of the right intentions
|
|
yea, that's exactly the point of this thread!
We were born naked & grow up to become wicked. |
|
|
|
Xolvexs
IsraTrance Senior Member
Started Topics :
241
Posts :
2848
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 14:38
|
|
if you cut the loose threads that results in deforestation. if you keep the loose threads alive they become like banyan trees..and if you have a banyan tree it morphs into an apple tree and then when the bird eats the apple and takes a dump on a coffee plant you get apple flavored coffee...which gets served at coffee conventions as a delicacy..$5000 for 1gram
When death comes to your doorstep, make sure you are alive |
|
|
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 14:42
|
Everyone overestimates the affect CO2 has on the atmosphere. It has the least impact on the ozone of any greenhouse gas.
Read the pdf on this webpage: http://www.petitionproject.org/review_article.php . I know most of you won't read it, but at least look at the graphs and what they mean.
31,478 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs. No one here is more versed in this subject than these individuals. Just look when the trends start, there is NO correlation to man's increased greenhouse gas emissions. http://soundcloud.com/ascensionsound
www.chilluminati.org - Midwest based psytrance group |
|
|
|
subconsciousmind
SCM
Started Topics :
37
Posts :
1033
Posted : Oct 23, 2009 15:14
|
Quote:
|
On 2009-10-23 14:42, Ascension wrote:
Everyone overestimates the affect CO2 has on the atmosphere. It has the least impact on the ozone of any greenhouse gas.
Read the pdf on this webpage: http://www.petitionproject.org/review_article.php . I know most of you won't read it, but at least look at the graphs and what they mean.
31,478 American scientists have signed this petition, including 9,029 with PhDs. No one here is more versed in this subject than these individuals. Just look when the trends start, there is NO correlation to man's increased greenhouse gas emissions.
|
|
The article is not peer reviewed, meaning it's by no means sure that most of it isn't just lies. There are lots of studies and papers outthere who claim the opposite. In the end this article proves nothing, its who do you trust? or WANT to trust?
The Petition is primairly against the kyoto which has massive influence of BIG companies... think about it. Which conspiracy is more plausible? The obama-eco-conspiracy or the bush-oil-conspiracy?
Read this too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition
Most of my music for you to download at:
http://www.subconsciousmind.ch |
|
|
|
