OT - Let's Talk Global Warming Again

[Cyclonepride]

However, we can readily see man's negative impact all over nature due to pollution. In the seas, in rivers, on land. Complete ecosystems have been devastated by our actions, and in the recent past.

I agree with this part. That is, in part, why I so strongly oppose the global warming crowd. If we are going to spend a lot of money fixing our mistakes, let's make sure that it goes to something that can actually be fixed, or needs fixed in the first place. I am convinced that environmentalists got tired of everyone ignoring the plight of some odd butterfly in South America, so they are pushing an agenda screaming the end of mankind, in hopes that someone listens.

[alaskaguy]

Whoops, I forgot to insert the link to the article I referenced.

link: SpringerLink - Journal Article

[DaddyMac]

Well, that's not exactly where I was going with that statement. But I don't necessarily disagree with you regardless.

And although I don't think it's our place to arbitrarily wipe out species around the world - I would be rather upset to "rob Peter to pay Paul" in any sort of reverse global warming effort. Tasks must be more localized and specific, to prevent such skepticism as to which you allude.

Speaking of which, the Central Iowa Paddlers are teaming up with a larger effort of the Army Corps of Engineers, DNR and not sure who all else - to do a clean up of the Des Moines river and trails this coming Saturday. More Info.

[CTAClone]

Again, I for one believe that mankind IS having a negative impact on the environment. But as to the actual, proveable reasons - there seem to be very little. Hence any reasons for warming on either side is pure theory.

I actually believe exactly what you wrote above. I'm just for thinking about it before making an assumption, which I think the majority of the population doesn't. Which is why I give out reasons why Global Warming may not be for real.

To Clarify my urban temp comment I previously made, is that some of the oldest temp. readings used to support Global Warming aren't an accurate way to figure out averages. Most of the oldest temp. readings are from cities like Chicago, New York, London, etc. What they don't take into account is as a city gets bigger, it creates and traps more heat. So as a city grows so does it average temparature, hence looking at Chicago's temp 50 years ago is going to be cooler than it is now, just because it's a larger city today.

One other thing to think about. The worlds largest pollutant is Methane Gas, not CO2. Stop Eating Beans People!!!! Too many cattle/pigs polluting the air.

[JRE1975]

All we need are a few of really big volcanos somewhere in the world that will put more particles in the air than man has since he started on this earth, and it would cool down pretty fast!

I am into the reduction of the use of petroleum based fuels, not because of the global warming aspects, but because we need to find a cheaper more efficient source of power and not be beholden to interests outside of our own country.

Just like after the oil spill in Alaska, mother nature has a remarkable ability to correct the stupid mistakes man makes.

Man, I can not wait for football to start!!!

[HILLCYD]

Bad job outta me even starting this thread....

[DaddyMac]

Just like after the oil spill in Alaska, mother nature has a remarkable ability to correct the stupid mistakes man makes.

Man, I can not wait for football to start!!!

Mother nature had ALOT of help in those spills

Ditto your second thought.

[DaddyMac]

That was a Marty reference, wasn't it???

must .... resist ..... urge.....to ..... neg ..... rep.......

At least we have something to talk about on the drive up and during the tailgate in 2 weeks!!!!

[alaskaguy]

Again - boy I hope so!!

This heat wave has been sucking! How's the weather up there?

The weather sucks in Nome since it is right next to the coast; right now it is drizzling and is 62 degrees. However, I live inland 12 miles and it is sunny at my house and 10 degrees warmer.