without launching into a confusing and controversial statement, I will just say I think it is a natural cycle of the earth's environment.

 

So you aren't too worried about it?

 

QUOTE(Capt'n Mike @ Feb 25 2004, 11:54 PM)So you aren't too worried about it?
naaa, I do my best to not worry about things that I have no control over. That is not to say that it will not affect our lives, just that I am not worried about it at this point and when adaptation is needed, we'll adapt.

 

The sooner it gets warmer, the sooner we can go boating!!!

 

about as serious as y2k <_<

 

What ever happens happens, before it was another ice age. now its global warming.

 

As cold as this winter was!! Are they still talking about global warming?

My gut feeling says it is a cycle and not man made. I remember having the crap scared out of me as a kid in the early 70's when "the science community" was proclaiming that another ice age was on it's way and we could all go the way of the dinosaur when the next ice age hits. <_< <_< Yeah, technology has come a long way since then but man is just as panicky as ever. Scientist are also prone to making bold claims to keep the grant money coming in, "for further study".

 

Funny you mention the ice age. That's what has me asking this. Scientists sat that global warming is contributing to the next ice age that is virtually right around the corner. Changes are occuring that suggest Europe could freeze over as early as 2020!

 

Are these the same meteorologists that can't get tomorrows weather right?

 

Ice age in 2020? I heard they'll be catastrophic flooding around that time that will affect the whole planet. As long as we continue using fossil fuels, and eroding the upper layers of the atmosphere, we're all going to pay the price, somehow. All this reprocution business could take decades, or centuries to materialize. The fate of the planet, in a small way, is in our hands. Mars anyone?

 

QUOTE(Mr. Big @ Feb 26 2004, 08:40 AM)The fate of the planet, in a small way, is in our hands. Mars anyone?
Ya, lets go screw up that planet too.

 

QUOTE(Capt'n Mike @ Feb 26 2004, 12:46 AM)Funny you mention the ice age. That's what has me asking this. Scientists sat that global warming is contributing to the next ice age that is virtually right around the corner. Changes are occuring that suggest Europe could freeze over as early as 2020!

yes, supposedly global warming is causing ice caps to melt altering weather patterns and water depth (flooding) to where europe is supposed to freeze soon. Talk to a European scientist though and they say we're on our way to extinctio by these very same forces.

The earth will do what the earth wants to do and all we can do is sit back and watch the show.

 

Funny this topic came up.......Last night I watch an old movie named ....

"Time Machine".......It show the earth having several ice ages .........Way I see it

if it happens while I`m alive i get in my boat to avoid the floods.....

<_<

 

QUOTE(Focker @ Feb 26 2004, 12:27 AM)The sooner it gets warmer, the sooner we can go boating!!!

true
We don`t need Winter in Michigan

 

The earth may be getting warmer, but not at any greater rate than it was 500 years ago.

The theory that we're messing up the ozone layer is total BS. The earth naturally emits more "greenhouse gases" in one year than man-made objects have in all of our existance.

 

MYTH: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predicts an increase in the global average temperature of only 2.5°F (1.4°C) to 10.4°F (5.8°C) over the coming century. This small change, less than the current daily temperature range for most major cities, is hardly cause for concern.

FACT: Global average temperature is calculated from temperature readings around the Earth. While temperature does vary considerably at a daily level in any one place, global average temperature is remarkably constant. According to analyses of ice cores, tree rings, pollen and other "climate proxies," the average temperature of the Northern Hemisphere had varied up or down by only a few tenths of a degree Celsius between 1000 AD and about 1900, when a rapid warming began. A global average temperature change ranging from 2.5°F (1.4°C) to 10.4°F (5.8°C) would translate into climate-related impacts that are much larger and faster than any that have occurred during the 10,000-year history of civilization.

From scientific analyses of past ages, we know that even small global average temperature changes can lead to large climate shifts. For example, the average global temperature difference between the end of the last ice age (when much of the Northern Hemisphere was buried under thousands of feet of ice) and today's interglacial climate is only about 5°C (10°F).

More info at this link Global Warming: Fact vs. Myth

 

I don't know a ton about it to comment, but I can say that I think it is a problem for many nations and communities. Isn't Amsterdam like under sea level? There is a island off of Alaska that will be underwater if it happens too I believe.

 

QUOTE(sleeper @ Feb 26 2004, 11:11 AM)The earth may be getting warmer, but not at any greater rate than it was 500 years ago.
Yes and no.
It's interesting that prior to the most recent ice age (13,000 years ago), there weren't factories around to pollute the air, fossil fuels beng burnt, etc., etc. But a gradual change in climate was found.

The crazy thing now, is that they don't expect this to be a gradual change. There's factors in the oceanic system that could cause it to change as quick as flipping a light switch.

 

If Global Warming creates the next ice age in our lifetime just think about following:

It's easier to create heat for warmth than it is to get cool when it's too hot. We can use coal, gas, wood, electricity, man made fabrics, each other.

When it's too hot, sure you can use electricity until the power drain knocks out the grid all across the nation (remember last year), and there is always boating, swimming etc. but too hot for too long = less water or no water.

Besides, I'm sure you've all heard of Ice Boats!!!

 

If the "green house effect" is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Then I guess power boaters are a huge part of the problem. Averaging only about 1 mile per gallon. Maybe we should leave the lake to the sail boaters this year and see what the effects are.

Interesting subject Mike. It would be nice to know what the absolute truth is. It just gets a little old hearing all of the doomsayers. "Eggs will kill you". "No wait now their not that bad." "Second hand smoke is worse for you then smoking yourself." "OK it's not really that bad." For EVERY scientist that clams one thing there is one that counters it. I don't have the time or patience to try and keep up it. <_<

 

yeah I'm more worried that it'll stop spinning first...or get hit by meateor....but sure we'll all kill oursleves off long before that.

 

All,

I wish I had the time to really reply to this. Just a couple of points:

Capt'n Mike - The oceans actually act as a buffer across the global system which balances change. That's why you see the temperature shifts from the average that are high in one place and low in another when you study historical data. The "experts" who are saying otherwise are the doom and gloomers using scare tactics when reporting their junk science. Follow their affilliations to understand their agenda.

Boater2be - you should have stated that "the theory of the alleged green house effect blames the burning of fossil fuels as the cause of global warming". Junk science any way you cut it. All of this doom and gloom is predicted using immeasurably flawed computer models. Their models normally do not include the oceanic buffer effects, the cooling counter-effects of increased cloud cover and decreased light penetration that would occur with atmospheric warming, as well as other factors. They show you what they want you to see and back it up with flawed data. Would you trust your heart surgeon if he did that?

Sleeper - Bravo! You're paying attention. Now add eruptions at Mount Pinatuao, St. Helens, take your pick. Heck, why didn't we see a drastic warming after Mount Vesuvious wiped out a good portion of the Roman Empire in Italy way back when. By the doom and gloomers predictions we shouldn't even be here. Many singular eruptions have introduced more hydro flourocarbons, chlorine, sulfer, and a host of other "ozone destroying" and "green house gases" than produced by mankind since the beginning of the industrial age. Besides, volcanic gases are superheated and introduced into the higher atmosphere.

Unlike underarm deodorants and air fresheners.

Sorry for the long post but this tweaked a nerve. Please, don't get me started on asbestos or freon.

Regards,

Dave

 

QUOTE(DMisaras @ Feb 26 2004, 01:20 PM)Capt'n Mike - The oceans actually act as a buffer across the global system which balances change. That's why you see the temperature shifts from the average that are high in one place and low in another when you study historical data.
The ocean in more than a buffer. It's mostly responsible for the climates around it. The fluctuation of the saline levels plays a big part in the climate even. Read up on the Great Conveyor Belt, and what would happen if that system stopped.

 

QUOTE(DMisaras @ Feb 26 2004, 01:20 PM)...don't get me started on asbestos or freon.
whats wrong with asbestos or freon? I love my new asbestos comforter it keeps me warm when I got freon leaking into my house in the summer from my central air.

i keed, i keed...

 

Cpt'n Mike,

I'm well aware of the Great Ocean Conveyor but I refuse to buy-in to the scare tactics that the junk scientists use to foment debate. It sound like you are aquainted with the latest rantings from Wallace Broecker of Columbia University. He has linked a collapse of the conveyor to manmade global warming. Again, using computer models, he determined that freshwater injections from Arctic rivers could cause the shutdown of thermohaline circulation. The result would be violent temperature swings of up to 10 degrees in just a few years. His study has serious shortcomings however. Broecker's model assumes, for example, that the "excess of precipitation plus runoff over evaporation" will increase by 50 percent. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change only predicts an increase of precipitation of 5 to 10 percent. Furthermore, these same Artic rivers draw their waters from the interior of the Asian continent which is supposed to get drier as a result of global warming. Additionally, the North Atlantic is in the midst of a long-term cooling trend. Broecker himself admits that current knowledge concerning ocean circulation is incomplete, which is why he has said "there's nothing to do but guess" about the chances of a climate flip- flop. He sounded the alarm anyway citing; precisely because of the climate's capricious nature.

Sound science? I think not!

The "polar ice is melting" doomsayers spout that only a few degrees of warming is enough to flood coastal cities. These folks omit important facts: A "few" degrees of warming will still leave polar areas well below freezing. But assuming their predictions have some truth to them, evidence exists that warmer polar temperatures actually increases the snowfall which creates the ice pack. Ocean levels have been increasing 7 inches per century for several centuries, and nobody knows why. But it is certainly not due to climate changes or any human influences. The current body of data actually shows that if the climate was to warm, for any reason, it is likely to depress sea level rise due to a transfer of water from the ocean to polar ice.

Which way do they want it?

Regards,

Dave