Global Warming

Originally Posted by Paper Crane

Vehicles are not the number 1 offender. That is held by manufacturing plants. Thats why it is more damaging to throw out an old fridge for an energy efficient one. The pollution not caused by the saving of energy is greatly outweighed by the pollution caused to make a new fridge. In fact you have to keep a refrigerator for at least 10 years for it to be environmentally more efficient than you previous one.

Yes, manufacturing plant do produce more greenhouse gases than vehicles, but I was comparing them to cows instead.

And we've had our fridge for a good 10 years, and it's still going strong. It's nice to know that i'm helping the environment a little.

Quote:

It was also thought that the methane emissions from cows was a major contributor to global warming, but that may be pushing it a bit. I'm sure the greenhouse gases from vehicles are far more prominent that cow flatulance.

Actually you're completely wrong. Livestock produce far more greenhouse gases then all the cars combined. You would be better off driving a hummer and being a vegetarian then driving a small toyota and eating lots of meat. Learn the facts first before you try to argue with common sense.

Originally Posted by xen0phobia

Actually you're completely wrong. Livestock produce far more greenhouse gases then all the cars combined. You would be better off driving a hummer and being a vegetarian then driving a small toyota and eating lots of meat. Don't go spouting things without knowing the facts.

But these are different chemicals. Where methane only clouds the sky, CO2 and CO3 cloud and rip apart the ozone. So driving a Hummer, although my produce less mass of gases, actually does more damage.

CO2 does not rip apart ozone, and I personally have never heard of carbonate gas.

Ozone is ripped apart by radicals, such as CFC's, nost often

Originally Posted by Paper Crane

But these are different chemicals. Where methane only clouds the sky, CO2 and CO3 cloud and rip apart the ozone. So driving a Hummer, although my produce less mass of gases, actually does more damage.

Methane does NOT only cloud the sky. It is a greenhouse gas that is over 20 times more effective than CO2. So... Those who believe in CO2 causing temperature climbs wet themselves over Methane. It only has a life of 10 years or so in the atmosphere, but it was present near several temperature climbs. If methane caused a haze or clouded up the sky, then farms and wetlands would look worse than LA.

Peruse this thread for a spell.

Originally Posted by Gechmir

Methane does NOT only cloud the sky. It is a greenhouse gas that is over 20 times more effective than CO2. So... Those who believe in CO2 causing temperature climbs wet themselves over Methane. It only has a life of 10 years or so in the atmosphere, but it was present near several temperature climbs. If methane caused a haze or clouded up the sky, then farms and wetlands would look worse than LA.

Peruse this thread for a spell.

CO2 is never a worry. CO3 is the killer. Cows do not produce CO3, only the burning of fossil fuels. Politicians don't talk about CO3, because it would mean their downfall. CO3 is an unstable molecule and the extra oxygen rips apart other stable molecules. It has the same effect as ozone (O3) except ozone wont rip apart other ozones. CO3 does rip apart ozones. It rips the extra O of an O3 and puts it on a CO2, making another CO3 and an Oxygen. This is what is responsible for the damage to the ozone and this alone.

But really, it's not what does the worst damage that counts, it's that nobody is doing anything useful about any of them.

Any sort of linkage to back up that claim? I can't manage to find anything that says CO3 can even exist as a gas. Not to mention I'm not quite sure when CO3 molecules will form in a combustion engine.

Also, oh god, read this page I got on Yahoo Answers while looking for stuff on CO3: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...1070335AAG4EK6

I agree...in that I've never heard of carbonate gas!

It disobeys valence rules, that's for sure

Originally Posted by Windsong

You can't stop climate change. The climate is always changing.

Actually it's weather that changes. Climate is the average of the weather in an area over a long period of time.

I do believe that humans have a significant effect on their environment, especially the United States which consumes more than its fair share of resources on this planet. I mean we could all do well with probably one car, take the bus and train now and again. Spend money on solar power which pays back after a certain amount of time.

But what gets me is that people are arguing whether it's humanity's fault or not. Umm....who cares? I don't like playing the Blame Game. But when OUR existence is in jeopardy, whether it's imagined or real, I would rather err on the side of caution than commit Type 1 errors by not doing something. If global warming is occurring, then using alcohol fuels instead of oil will help with the CO2 emissions. If global warming is not happening, then using alcohol fuels will clear up all this shit in the air that's getting into our lungs. Win- win anyone?

If it were that simple then there wouldn't be an argument.

Except that despite what the leftists would have you believe, there is no real conclusive evidence that Global Warming is man-made or as catastrophic as they claim it to be.

When you tell people to drastically alter the way they live their lives, you had better goddamn well prove the case. Thus far, that hasn't happened.

First of all, the Scientific Community has been looking into this for a LONG time. The only deniers are extremist neocons, not scientists.

Second, let's look at the options: One, global warming is fake and we try and prevent it. So we wasted a few billion bucks. Oh well, that's just another week of the war effort. Two, global warming is real and we ignore it. The world ends.

I don't know about you, but I'll pick erring on the safe side.

You don't know the world would end...this isn't nuclear winter we're talking about. The earth tends to be quite good at balancing itself, as per the entire science of chemistry.

By the way, I'm somewhat of a denier and well on the road to becoming a scientist.

And I'm not an extremist neo-con.

No one is gonna sit here and tell you that the Earth isn't warmer, but it's a single degree warmer over the last century.

It's the motherfuckas that sit here and tell us that the events of the movie The Day After Tomorrow are going to occur in short order that are full of shit. You don't have to be a neo-conservative to believe that, it's goddamn common sense.

I love how folks blow into the whole neo-con name-calling spiel if you don't buy into Global Warming being caused by man. Just goes to show their maturity on this matter...

This whole thing is science that has been politicized, bottom line. What I see on TV and with some folks around here falls into the "sheeples" category.

Global Warming and Cows.... link for those who haven't see this before, here

There are a bunch of websites that have this information, a simple Google search brought up 415,000 hits.

Does this mean that because I like Mexican food and it gives me loads of gas that I am responsible for global warming?!?

CO3?!? WTF... where do people get these "ideas", geez.

Neo-conz lol.

Also how is "global warming" going to cause the world to end? Is the planet going to metal away because it got too warm? Is it going to catch on fire because the animals were too fart happy?

Quote:

Second, let's look at the options: One, global warming is fake and we try and prevent it. So we wasted a few billion bucks. Two, global warming is real and we ignore it. The world ends.

I believe the official statistic is 18 trillion to prevent global warming. (do a google search if you don't believe me) Thats 45% of the worlds GDP. I'd rather not gamble that.

I doubt the world will end, but who the fuck cares? We'll all be dead regardless anyways.

Originally Posted by Arainach

Second, let's look at the options: One, global warming is fake and we try and prevent it. So we wasted a few billion bucks. Oh well, that's just another week of the war effort. Two, global warming is real and we ignore it. The world ends.

Another possibility: the increase in the earth's temperature is naturally caused. That leaves us with a number of sub-possibilities:
1) We spend money on abating CO2 emissions only to get our asses flooded out anyway.
2) We don't spend money abating CO2 emissions and get flooded.
3) We spend money on technologies to cope with a naturally warming earth and hopefully make a difference
4) We don't spend money on technologies to cope with a naturally warming earth and get our asses flooded.
5) We spend money on technologies to cope with a naturally warming earth, it turns out it was caused by CO2, and we're alright anyway because we're ready for the warming earth.

"One, global warming is fake and we try and prevent it. So we wasted a few billion bucks."

As xen0phobia alluded, you clearly need to read legitimate proposed budgets for such activities. Obviously, not everything on said budgets would need to be enacted, but anything truly substantial would cripple quite a few nations.

Originally Posted by xen0phobia

I believe the official statistic is 18 trillion to prevent global warming. (do a google search if you don't believe me) Thats 45% of the worlds GDP. I'd rather not gamble that.

I doubt the world will end, but who the fuck cares? We'll all be dead regardless anyways.

You've probably never read God Emperor of Dune by Frank Herbert then. It's not about people dying, it's about the rest of humanity surviving. I don't care if a few countries completely go bankrupt. But if people really don't care, even if there is a slight possiblity, then we deserve to be wiped out. And to the people who are saying that the earth will be wiped out, no it won't. The earth will still be here, we probably won't.