So there's this poll in the poll section with the same name. I was posting in there, and it was brought to my attention that I was debating, so here this is!

What do you think about global warming? Why?

I'll repost somethign I said in the poll:



This post has been edited by Jman: Feb 16 2008, 07:38 PM

Delta, I completely agree. It is arguably one of the planet's biggest concerns now. We are releasing carbon emissions into the planet's atmosphere, which we cannot deny is increasing the planet's temperature. As Delta has already pointed out, there is plenty of physical evidence of this happening, e.g. glaciers melting, the rate of the polar ice caps melting, global sea levels rising, etc. It is estimated that in the next century that the planet's temperature will increase between 1C / 33.8F and 6C / 42.8F, and this is enough to trigger a large melting of both polar ice caps.

It certainly is a problem. I don't see how people can deny it's happening. I see the effects of it everyday. The winters aren't as cold, the summers are getting hotter, animals are coming out of hibernation earlier - it all points to global warming.

I don't think there is any way we can "fix" it without finding a reliable clean energy source which is very unlikely. We're all so used to modern conveniences that it's almost impossible to get the world to cut down on the harmful gasses it's producing enough to cause any real effect. So I really don't see that - in the near future at least - there is any way to stop it.

I say we eliminate EVERY SINGLE internal combustion engine from the planet. Get all the cars/trucks/vans/SUVs/planes/boats/etc. and launch them to Pluto or something.

Then we can all drive cars that run off spit.

Have you ever heard of biofuel?

Actually...if we were smart about it, we could probably phase out combustion engines in like...20 years or something.

I already own a car that can run E85 Ethonol, which is made from a mix of gas and corn byproducts. The car uses less gas, and it is slightly more inexpensive.

When a huge company pleads with the government (GE) to [bold]enforce[/bold] stricter emissions guidlines, you know something's up.

It isn't just the carbon emissions that are destroying the atmosphere, it is also due to the cutting of forests and destroying wetlands. Katrina's destruction of New Orleans was due to humans. The destruction of the wetlands caused the hurricane to maintain force and reach New Orleans instead of dying out over the marshes.

Obviously the earth has natural weather changes. We're just speeding up the process, and not in a good way.

This post has been edited by Tylerdurden: Feb 3 2007, 06:19 PM

Behold! THE SOLUTION:

Sure, cars produce a ton of air pollution. So switching to more environmentally friendly vehicles is certainly a good idea. But a lot of air pollution is made by power plants, especially oil and coal burning plants. Power plants probably produce more air pollution then cars. If all coal and oil plants were replaced with environmentally friendly power plants, like solar power, wind power, or hydroelectric power, then we'd have much less air pollution, and therefore less global warming. But solar, wind, and hydroelectric power plants don't produce anywhere near as much electricity as oil and coal power plants, which is why these environmentally friendly alternatives are rarely used.

The solution is nuclear power. One gram of uranium in a nuclear plant can produce more electricity than thousands of barrels of oil. Nuclear power produces no air pollution, only steam is released into the air. People complain about the radioactive waste that is produced, but all we have to do is store the waste underground for a few decades and it'll naturally decay, without polluting the environment like waste from oil and gas plants (which produce more waste than nuclear plants). In my opinion, people worry way too much about the safety of nuclear power plants. The number of people that have died in nuclear power plant accidents is far less than the number of people that have died in collapsing coal mines or oil rig accidents. Nuclear power is by far the best choice, at least until they finally get fusion power figured out.

I agree, there have been many huge advancements in reactor design over the past 20 years that haven't been used in the US.

Our reactors are old and need to be replaced by the newer, cleaner burning reactors.

I agree. Global warming is a problem. And when we reached Christmas time this past year without any snow on the ground I was quick to jump to the conclusion that it was indeed, Global warming.

But then, I asked my dad, and he said, "Yea, Global warming is a problem, but I don't htink that global warming is the cause for no snow this year."

When I asked "why" he said, "because the temperatures aren't drastically far away from normal. it's just a cycle. And that in 5 years we would have so much snow during hte winter again."

I'm not sure what I think. But right now, we have quite a bit of snow, and there's a windchill of -28 (celcius)

Maybe it is just a cycle. Maybe not. All I know is that if we changed what we are doing now drastically, cut down emissions.. get better cars etc. that in 20 years or so... everything would be back to normal..

(that doesn't excuse that there is a problem with global warming tho)

The o-zone layer can't be repaired as far as I know.

Anyway, what can a civilian do to help. I mean, all the changes that need to be made are from big businesses aren't they?

I'm not really sure what I think right now. I've heard it is just a cycle, and that makes sense to me because if we look back about 50 years or so the temps equal the temps we have now. It would make sense if it's just a cycle...but I think we have to expect the worst if we want our planet to going as long as it can.

The fact is, is that we are indeed killing off the ozone layer, emitting chemicals and such into our atmosphere, and to top it off--we're killing off trees which act as coolers to our atmosphere. They help defend the warming of our planet.

Even if it is just a cycle, with every cycle that we have here on earth they will get worse if we don't resort to environment-healthy things and if each cycle gets worse with every 50 years or so then yes--it is indeed considered Global Warming.

The o-zone layer can be repaired . The o-zone layer has healed itself a bit since refrigerators have changed - I don't think they use CFCs anymore like they used to .



Big businesses changing will obviously make a difference. Putting filters on chimneys that will trap damaging gases into the atmosphere such as sulphur dioxide can be done and things like that, but who are the ones travelling around in cars? Us. We can limit the amount we travel in our cars by using public transport more, etc. Also, if we don't leave electrical things on such as the television or the computer.

You could buy a hybrid car, that would work.

It's actually not the ozone layer they're worried about any more, they pretty much took care of that problem (proof that we can do something). The issue now is that of greenhouse gases.


Also, just something to think about - if you believe that the earth is only 6000 years old, then the "natural cycle" idea contradicts you. The earth's cycles take tens of thousands of years, so it just doesn't work.

Ack, don't start that again. It's a debate I'd rather not be dragged into.

I wouldn't mind buying a hybrid...aside from the fact they're so darn ugly.

Fuel cells, if we could build the membranes cheaper, would take care of this problem in an instant. Fuel cells run off of distilled water. GM already has a car out called the "Hiwire". It uses fuel cells.

^^GO GM!!! I'm a serious General Motors guy. I don't really know why.

Anyway, my main problem with the alternative fuels and vehicles they've developed now is their cost. They better get a lot cheaper to buy, run, and make before they're used to seriously help with global warming/pollution issues, because as it sits right now an average person like me (who happens to drive a 14 year old vehicle) CANNOT afford a hydrogen or fuel cell or even a hybrid vehicle.

So yes, in theory these type of cars will work and fix many problems. But what about the mass of people that can't afford them? Will they still drive Satanic polluting internal combustion engine cars?

This post has been edited by back in St.Olaf: Feb 5 2007, 07:19 PM

Eh, they're not all that bad.






Economically, as more people buy them and demand increases, the companies that make them will increase output and lower their prices, and new auto companies will enter the business as well. It'll be alright.

Delta, is there any specific reason those pictures came from IGN?

No, what's that? I just searched for them on Google.

Well I was just wondering because IGN is a gaming website and an image from there isn't very credible as reality. =P

Ahh, gotcha. Well I can confirm that the one on top is perfectly accurate, my mom owns a hybrid Camry.

Anywho, topic!

So here it is. The global warming debate that we've talked much about in the News section, but haven't bothered to create.

Does global warming exist?

And if not, how do you get around all the evidene that points to the fact that it is real? If so, is man responsible?

If not, how do you get around allllll the evidence that points to the fact that we are responsible?

If you manage to do that, why do you want to deny that we're responsible?

Debate away!

Does global warming exist? Yes. But, not at the rate that people claim it exists. If global warming is going to kill us all in the next hundred years, why hasn't it killed us already? What 'started' it to happen just now, rather than when the earth was first created?

Is man responsible? Yes, and no. If you think about it, God is responsible, he created the earth in such a way that the ozone layer would deteriorate the way it does. But, man made inventions has supposedly caused the process to 'start'. Also, supposedly, a normal 60 watt lightbulb is known to cause global warming, we can trace that back to Thomas Edison and pin it on him if we have too

Just an FYI, I don't know a whole lot on the subject, but I've read/googled it to some extent, but yeah, I don't know a lot.

I think my brain shrunk after reading the opening post to this topic. Way to claim all sorts of evidence and attack the other side without actually making any points or citing any evidences of global warming!