"Greatest scam ever"- John Coleman on Global Warming

Oil prices are a good indicator of how much oil governments think they're going to be able to access in the future. Rising prices are not a good sign.

Even in places we can't drill for environmental reasons, we still know how much is there and those are calculated in reserve estimates. We've already hit the peak and are slipping as we speak.

Here is a scientific paper on the topic..

http://www.dieoff.com/page224.pdf

image004.jpg
 
Fellow newschoolers.com members, I would like to introduce SkitheB-East, one of the few people that have commented in this thread without their HEAD COMPLETELY UP THEIR ASS.

MY GOD

The sheer ignorance and stupidity of so many of you is so blatently obvious, I want to throw up.  This is just as bad as arguments created from the fucking FLAT EARTH SOCIETY.  "That's just what science tells us"  I recommend people should go back to square one and learn what SCIENCE actually is before they start throwing around such moronic statements.  What will it take to get the truth through your thick fucking skulls.
 
Man this thread has everything; anger, misinformation, smart ass responses. This is why I get on NS getting out all my anger here makes me a remarkably docile person.

Anywhere here are some indisputable facts.

1) We reached peak oil PRODUCTION some time in the 80's. Keep in mind this is production not Original Oil in Place or OOIP.

2) There is still a lot of oil on this planet but it is hard to get at. Saudi Arabia has by far the largest and most prolific field. The US has very little oil and is drilled like swiss cheese. There are still some pretty good gas fields but not that much. We don't really know how much oil is in Alaska for sure but don't hold your breath.

3) Oil is 100 dollars a barrel for several reasons. Shortages are one of these reasons. As is the falling price of the dollar.

4) The earth is warming and over history the amount of carbon dioxide has a direct relationship with the temperature of the earth. Look at glaciers for example of global warming.

5) The earth is a delicate balance and temperature changes can and have disturbed this delicate balance. No creature in earths history has had the ability to change the climate.

And now my thoughts

Why?

Why the argument?

As it has been said in this thread, why are people so against doing something to limit the amount of hazardous gases released into the environment? In almost every case it stream lines production and creates a greater revenue in the long run. So where is the debate? both "sides" win if global warming is taken seriously.

Someone said something about electric engines not being able to power tank. This is pretty funny to me. Electric engines per pound are far more powerful than internal combustion engines. Think about trains, cruise ships, naval vessels. The vast majority diesel electric. The problem is not the engines its the batteries. That is why there are not more electric engines.

Global warming is being used for political reasons on both sides and it saddens me that our great race that has built so much will be destroyed by bickering.

Oil is not the future everyone knows this. We could easily run this country on 100% nuclear power. We would have to build several hundred nuclear plants and redesign cities but it is completely possible. The problem is that per unit energy oil is extremely powerful and cheep. 3 dollars a gallon for gasoline is a bargain. People in Europe have been paying twice this amount for years.

So whats the solution?

Use local energy. If you live in a sunny place like California or Colorado put solar panels on your roof. If you live where its windy how about some wind energy. Tidal area? no problem install some tidal generators. All this technology is available but its expensive because no one uses it because oil is cheaper.

If anyone wants to talk about oil ask me some question I am a petroleum engineer and most likely know more than the people in this thread.
 
I love how this guy spews a bunch of bullshit and doesn't offer any proof.

do you believe this guy? if you do, youre a fucking moron. the scientists of this world are generally pretty impartial, we count on them to be this way. and somehow they have all banded together to trick us all so that...

they can all become rich! how exactly? through new alternative energy technology, or energy saving technology? thats already profitable because of the rising price of oil.

this guy is a nutjob.
 
global warming is not a huge threat, Even if the levels of the oceans rose 100 feet then the rich people can afford to move and the poor people didnt have expensive houses anyways.

 
congrats on yer little oregon problem...meanwhile the east is cold as hell for this time of year and more mtns have opened early than in the pasts years. on a side note, the state directly north of you just got like a few feet of snow
 
think about how much this has stimulated the economy all these enviormentally friendly cars and such where people wouldnt buy cars for another 3-4 years they buy them now
 
Think about all the cities that would disappear. New York, Boston, Much of Florida and Japan get the picture. The world would end as we know it. Not to mention the ocean currents changing.

hope you were kidding.
 


"Global warming is real and going to start occuring rapidly. And if your have a problem with that ill brake your fucking knee with a fucking 2x4 then go rape your girl freind. Have a nice day"
 
1.REPOST USE THE SEARCH BAR

2.thank you for another pointless thread about politics than not many people on NS grasp

3.global warming as a conspiracy theory is just another conspiracy theory, period

 
oooohhh no you did not just go there......well scientology is...

and global warming is bullshit, and no gore did not create the internet, he created things like manbearapig
 
Global warming is happening. There is no debate about this. The average earth temperature is increasing. Ocean temperatures are increasing. Glaciers are melting, and the ice pack of the north and south pole are retreating. Gas hydrates deep in the ocean are melting and releasing methane and other carbon based gases. Carbon Dioxide levels are high and have a direct relationship with global temperature (we don't know which is the independent and dependent variable). And last but not least species that depend on a colder climate are dieing off.

This is fact I don't see how anyone can argue with this. There are cold hard facts that this is happening. Lets try that one more time. Global warming is happening.

The debate is whether or not humans have anything to do with this.
 
ooops sorry for the imprecision of point number 3, it was late.

I do think global warming is a fact and we are only partially responsible, I already stated my point in the previous threads.
 
why the fuck did my post get deleted all i said was that i was gunna brake sum knee caps and rape girlfreinds
 
manbearpig returns!!!!!! we should contact websters and have that put into the dictionary as, Al Gore's picture.
 
its not a scam. out of all the peer reviewed articles (written by scientists with other scientists as the audience, not the mass medie) on warming 99. something % say that humans are causing global warming. so there is a bias created only by the media that we arent causing warming, because the only articles that support this are directed at mass media
 
Globing warming has NOT been the accepted scientific theory since WWII. I'm too lazy to actually check who up there postulated that particularly tasty piece of bullshit, but... you're wrong. During the 70's the fad environmental scare was global cooling. I'm serious, look it up. A lot of prominent global warming fear mongerers were out there warning people of a coming ice age 30 years ago.

I'm not exactly a non-believer in global warming, I'm just incredibly skeptical of any cause that's pursued with such crusade like zeal.

Excelsior!
 
Maybe not accepted but it was a theory. Data supports global warming dating back to well before WWII. This can be seen in ice cores taken from the arctic. The global cooling theories were based on la nina trends noticed in the gulf. No other real data supported this and real climatologist never agreed with this theory. Plus data was not available on the scale and quantity it is today.

Global warming is happening. Make no mistake it is happening. It is probably not as severe as some make it out to be but it is happening.

This is scientific fact it is proven. It is undisputed with in the global scientific scientific community. It is happening. There is no doubt about this. Look at the data. Look at picture of glaciers from the 50's. Look at ocean current trends.

It is not a conspiracy in any way shape or form and the fact that some people think it is boggles my mind. Look at the data for yourself. Its happening

Whats being debated is the cause.

 
Show me the data. I'm not asking that in a confrontational way. I just really want to resolve whether to believe or not. I've never actually seen pure stats that prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Once again, I'm not being confrontational, I'm not denying their existence, I just haven't stumbled across them.

I've seen An Inconvenient Truth and nothing Gore pointed out was solid enough for me. One of his pivotal presentations, the one with the something like 8 of the 10 hottest years on record occurring in the 90's ended up being wrong. He got the info from NASA who found a flaw in their data a couple months ago. It turns out most of the hottest years on record happened in the 50's I think.

Anyway, help me out man.
 
_38185705_glacier_ap300.jpg


upsala-glacier.jpg


World%20Temperature%201979-2006%20MSU.gif


There are numerous papers on the topic but I thought these images show global warming the best.
 
less ice = more sun is absorbed by the earth = higher temperatures = oceanic cycles move further south = north freezes and south becomes a desert.

Its happened before. There was mini ice age that was a direct cause of the black plague and at the same time a massive drought that killed the Myans.

Given that the temperature change was not the major factor but it was defintally the tipping point.

Our society has thrived and out live the carrying capacity of the land and a slight temperature change could change this carrying capacity and kill millions.

Our age has been one of the most constant temperate climates compared to the past and all it will take is a slight change to completely change our world.

Imagine five Katrina's a year. Maybe not in our life time but eventually this delicate balance will change and we will cease to exist as we do now.

 
but aren't glaciers merely the final remainders of the last ice age? do they even belong here and we've just been taking their existence for granted?

so if all the glaciers melt and all the water returns to its normal liquid state.......we would not have a "global warming panic event" but merely earth returning to its equilibrium?

 
There is no equilibrium. If you want to go with earth most constant surface temperature it would be about 500 degf in the sun and -100 in the shade. Our planet is constantly changing. With the loss of ice pack on earth more sun is absorbed. hotter temperature.

Thats whats happening you are right the glaciers are melting and the earth is warming. Thus global warming is happening. Fuck I cant say it any more. Are humans causing it? Probably not the cause, but definitely a catalyst.
 
Satellite shows Greenland's ice sheets getting thicker

All down to more snow falling, it seems

By Lucy Sherriff → More by this author

Published Monday 7th November 2005 16:46 GMT

if (rand%4==0) {document.write('\x3Ca href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;159082749;13533154;j?http://forms.theregister.co.uk/signup/webinar200712/?td=toptext1">The Register Desktop Support Seminar . Live & Online 11th December (10am PST)\x3C/a>');}

else if (rand%5==1) {document.write('\x3Ca href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;159082769;13533154;l?http://forms.theregister.co.uk/signup/webinar200712/?td=toptext2">Join us for our Desktop Support Online Seminar, sign yourself up today\x3C/a>');}

else if (rand%5==2) {document.write('\x3Ca href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;159082777;13533154;k?http://forms.theregister.co.uk/signup/webinar200712/?td=toptext3">Desktop Support under the spotlight, have your say on the 11th December\x3C/a>');}

else {document.write('\x3Ca href="http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;159082787;13533154;l?http://forms.theregister.co.uk/signup/webinar200712/?td=toptext4">Learn & contribute at our Desktop Support Seminar, find out more here\x3C/a>');}

Join us for our Desktop Support Online Seminar, sign yourself up today

The

Register Desktop Support Seminar . Live & Online 11th December

(10am PST)



While the edges of the glaciers are melting, the ice

sheets in Greenland's interior are getting thicker, according to

satellite data collected over the last 11 years. On average the ice

sheets have got thicker by about six centimetres each year, the

researchers say.

The researchers, based at Norway's Nansen Environmental and Remote

Sensing Center (NERSC), say that this is probably because snowfall in

the region has increased, due to a weather pattern known as the North

Atlantic Oscillation (NAO).

The research was conducted using the European Space Agency's ERS

satellites. These carry radar altimeters that send 1800 radar pulses to

Earth each second, and record how long they take to return to the

satellite. The sensor can time this journey down to the nanosecond, ESA

says, meaning that the instrument is accurate to within two centimetres.

In total tens of millions of data points were collected. The results

were then compared to the known fluctuations in the NAO over the

period. The researchers found a strong relationship between changes in

the height of the ice sheet and the strong positive and negative phases

of the NAO.

Professor Ola Johannessen of NERSC says that the results suggest

that the role of the NAO in ice thickness is more significant than

previously thought, making it something of a wildcard in climate

modelling.

"There is clearly a need for continued monitoring using new

satellite altimeters and other observations, together with numerical

models to calculate the Greenland Ice Sheet mass budget," Johannessen

commented.

It is just the kind of work that the CryoSat mission would have taken on, had it not been lost during its launch.

The NAO was first identified in the 1920's, and is an imbalance in

atmospheric masses between the high pressure of the subtropicals the

low pressure of the northern polar regions. The size of the difference

influences the weather across the whole of the northern hemisphere, and

is much more important in the winter months.

Finding out whether or not the Greenland ice sheet is shrinking

overall is important because it is so large. While plenty of data has

been collected on the retreating glaciers and thinning edges of the ice

sheets, much less in known about the interior.

If the Greenland ice sheet were to melt entirely, it would raise

global sea levels by seven metres. The addition of such a large

quantity of fresh water to the oceans would also disrupt familiar ocean

currents, such as the gulf stream, which could have a huge knock on

effect on weather systems.

The research was published in Science Express late last month. ®

 
Those are pictures and not statistics. Also, how do we know global warming is caused by humans and not a regular cyclical occurrence?

Also, if the amount of carbon dioxide in the air really does create a "greenhouse effect" and increase temperatures world wide, it's inevitable. The human population is growing at an exponential rate. Human beings exhale carbon dioxide. A shit ton more babies are born ever year than new cars are made or factories put in to production.
 
yea but on the east coast side of things, we had a mountain in pennsylvania open november 10th...just becasue you guys arent skiing in october liek everyother year doesnt mean its becasue of global warming
 
This is exactly right. Its not an issue of mass its an issue of surface area. Less ice more heat absorbed higher global temperatures.

Global warming is happening. Its a proven and accepted scientific fact. The question is are humans the primary cause and is there anything we can do about it.

I can't say that any more.
 
there is a reason for the 70s cooling trend. In teh 70s, the use of CFCs, chlorofluorocarbons skyrocketed. So many of these were released into the atmosphere that they actually reflected sunlight back into space. This is not to say that CO2 will do the same. It is dependent on the complex structure of the atoms and molecules. What happened at the end of the 70s? CFCs were banned in nearly ALL countries because of the vast harm they were causing the environment. Thats why the cooling effect disappeared. This is not an argument about why scientists and global warming is a hoax. The US is the ONLY country where people dispute climate change. Every other country has at least accepted that climate change is occuring right now. The main question is how big hte human influence is on it. I for one believe that humans are having a significant effect on teh envi. Yes volcanos emit a ton of CO2, but they have been for billions of years. Humans have really only started emitting lots of CO2 in the past 100 years, which is 1/40000000 of the earths history. This is NOTHING in the history of time. Thus, such a big change in a little time is significant in my opinion. I'm currently studying as an environmental studieis major, and this is obviously a very important topic.

Here you go, direct facts about volcano vs human CO2 release, taken from the us geological survey
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volgas.html

Comparison of CO2 emissions from volcanoes vs. human activities.

Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)

The fact taht americans deny the affect is down right embarassing in my opinion
 
Just because we're the only nation that disputes Global Warming doesn't mean we're the only one damaging the environment. China either is or will soon be the word's greatest polluter. They don't debate it's validity, they just don't give a fuck. If the U.S. can cause so much damage with 300 million people, how much can China do with over a billion people?
 
thank you. so for all you people bringing up the global cooling scare, kindly shut up.

not only do I think anyone who doesn't believe its happening is mentally deficient, anyone who doesnt believe humans are the cause is too. sorry if this is harsh, but just think about all the pollution humans produce. you drive a car every day, so do a few billion more people. all over the world power plants burn coal. carbon emissions have increased exponentially in the last 100 years. and CO2 is proven to retain heat.

its not that fucking hard, get it through. this isn't even complex science, its common sense. its not some "scam," thats the dumbest thing I've heard. yes...all the world's scientists are conspiring to...what? what the fuck are they conspiring to do? scare us so the government pushes for cleaner energy? first, that would be good, but second, it isn't even working.

or is it a ploy to gain following and fame? I am sorry but disturbing the status quo of big business never makes you popular in america. people love to hate on al gore for no reason, thats proof right there.

maybe these lying, deceitful scientists are trying to get our money! that must be it! actually, "greener" sources of energy are profitable even without the concept of global warming because of peak oil.

believing global warming is a conspiracy is right on par with believing that 9/11 is a conspiracy. its happening, and as skiers I would think you all would have some sense to wake the fuck up to it. I mean, east coast skiing is gonna take a serious beating. but just think about it this way: we recognize its happening, invest in cleaner fuels, and it turns out to be greatly exaggerated. cool, whatever. but if we are wrong, we are fucked. so lets not find out the hard way.
 
I know and completely agree. This is one of the main reasons the US didnt join the kyoto protocol. China was not involved in kyoto, only first world countries. The US decided to flat out reject it instead of tryin gto retool it into a useful treaty. Way to go bush administration! But the main difference in China is that they are still developing. The US is already developed and has been for years and years. I agree that a HUGE problem the world has to deal with is getting china and india and developing countries in general to not just open as many coal plants as possible. The first world should help the third world with new technology, like wind and whatnot. Third world countries wont develop the tech on their own because they are struggling just to make money, our job should be to develop new technology 
 
You're exactly right. Every county's industrialization period has been devastating for the environment. Europe polluted so much that moths evolved to blend in with the soot. We strip mined countless beautiful mountains and burned ridiculous amounts of coal. Both Europe as a whole and America were small at the time and still are when compared to China. It's scary how much damage China can do once it starts industrializing fully.
 
you can't honestly have any faith in that statement. really, stop and think about the CO2 output of cars, planes, trains, and factories then compare that to the CO2 output of the human race.

regardless of what everyone else is saying i do believe in global warming and think that it's a very serious problem. there are facts on both sides but a lot of it's skewed.
 
I definitely believe that the climate in this world is going to change... but not exactly w

And I think Global Warming is true, I mean, we have already started to experience temperatures rising (barely any snow last year when there was supposed to be), the polar ice caps melting (there is a million vids of it), coastal flooding and bad storm patterns... the reason we are having a lot of snow up in canada this year is because I think it is the effect of global climate change and it is the *storm* effect. You guys may not agree with me but whatever I still think we should be more eco-friendly and see what happens.

Or you could prove me wrong, perhaps?
 
Which is exactly why you should stay out of it. "Pollution" doesn't cause global warming, CO2 does. Last time I checked, humans exhale CO2. If you think the combined breathing of over six billion humans isn't significant, go watch An Inconvenient Truth. In the presentation where Gore is showing the amount of carbon dioxide in the air, check out how much it fluctuates depending on which hemisphere's flora is blooming. If the difference in the amount of plant life scrubbing the air is enough to make the graph jump that much, I'm pretty sure our breathing has a noticeable effect.
 
i dont give a shit about global warming , ill move to antartica and jib the vinson massif with badass penguins
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top