Global warming - the consequences can be VERY GRAVE! Please examine the proof.

Discussion in 'General Science & Technology' started by Captain Planet, Aug 31, 2001.


What do you think of the content of: ?

  1. This is very important - as many people as possible need to know!

    2 vote(s)
  2. This guy's a nut

    4 vote(s)
  3. People cannot be changed

    1 vote(s)
  4. If this is true, the situation is VERY SERIOUS

    1 vote(s)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. kmguru Staff Member

    I assume you want me to congratulate you on your 1000th post. So here it is. I am glad you made it with such quality postings.

  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. thecurly1 Registered Senior Member

    Good idea about filters, but its not just the cars.

    Then again this is a start.

    I'm wondering, why don't we build large air scrubbing plants outside of industral factories or major cities to reduce smog? We just build a huge air purifyer and spread 'em out.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Maybe I said this the wrong way. The cars do not use filters for this job. They use a special blend of metals and electricity to do some kind of ion exchange. You do not have to refill the raditators with anything. This occurs as you drive and the air passes through the raditator.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. HOWARDSTERN HOWARDSTERN has logged out.... Registered Senior Member


    By the way wet!!!!!!!1, <font color="red"> Congratulations on the Big KiloPost. </font color> <i>"May your future postings at this refuge of literary communication be even more creative and informative with each new day". Well done.

    Actually I don't remember when I crossed the thousand mark.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    So many different many deleted posts.......

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    It has been brought up by several different ones, that the satellites for recording the ozone levels haven't been up long enough for scientists to really know what is normal for the artic pole areas. The main contention being that ozone holes may have been forming on a regular basis long before man's industrial era. That the technology of recent decades (satellites) does not take into account the possibility that ozone holes may have been forming over the artic poles on a semi-regular basis throughout the Earth's history and that satellite data has no decent historical comparison to base the present theories upon.

    There has also been a lot of argument going on about the amounts of ozone destroying chemicals that are spewed out by volcanoes. Over the past couple of decades, there has been an increase in volcanic activity. I have heard that only a few erupting volcanoes can do more damage to the ozone than all of the chemicals produced by mankind.

    I think that there are good arguments about the ozone layer on both side of the fence. Personally, I would rather err on the safe side, just in case man made chemicals really are responsible for the ozone hole, but I still have to question the majority view. I always question the viewpoints held by the majority.

    O' GOD!!!!! Another one of those FORD ideas that I'll have figure a way to bypass to make my HotRod run right!!!! Just when I got good at ripping those damned catalytic converters off the exhaust system, they throw something else at me

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


  8. Eve Registered Member

    And I read that volcanoes, ocean salt, etc., are not main causes for depletion of the ozone. The largest contributors to this depletion is human use of fossil fuels. Although there are some who would argue any depletion at all, citing how the ozone regenerates itself at a steady pace.

    Some scientists say that although volcanoes are capable of injecting HCl into the atmosphere, volcanic eruptions are too weak to reach the stratosphere. And they argue that HCl is extremely water soluble. The HCl from volcanoes would have to be airborne from 2-5 years before it could reach the stratosphere. Since it is water soluble, rain removes HCl from the air quickly. They also cite how there have been no records of significant increases in stratospheric HCl after the most major volcanic eruptions.

    Volcanoes can emit aerosol particles, mostly sulfur, but they, too, are quickly eliminated from the atmosphere.

    But look out for those cow burps, man.

    "Heathcare Professional"

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  9. wet1 Wanderer Registered Senior Member

    Welcome to Sciforums, Eve,

    Methane produced by cows is a large contributor to green house gases. Even a larger contributor than cows is termites. They are all over the world, including in our cities and dwellings. Cows can not match the population of termites.

    Anytime a volcano can blow several kilotonnes of material into the atmosphere, then you have a good chance of it reaching the airborne as it will linger in the air for some time. We have picked up and detected kerosene above Cailfornia. It is thought that this came from Russian Space launches. There are many other examples that can be citied to support the evidence. But the important thing here is volume. Especially if you have an active year globally for volcanoes.
  10. Stryder Keeper of "good" ideas. Valued Senior Member

    I have come to my own conclusions about the problems the planet faces of course some of them will be different form what you have heard and will possibly make peple look from new perspectives.

    Firstly I use to work for a company that has developed a method for Efficent combustion of certain combustable and ozone gases like Methane.

    We would build equipment that would burn landfill gas off at between 1000 and 1200 ÂșC, our equipment was specifically built to try and maintain a combustion rate that would burn high enough not to cause toxins and low enough not to cause toxins.

    Any higher a temperature and an inefficient combustion occurs with nearby gases, any lower and some of those toxins get pumped out into the atmosphere.

    This all might sound tricky, but in reality it was far better than what could have occured if the equipment wasn't used at Landfills, large petroleum storage tanks, Petroleum Barges, Mine shafts and even Sewerage treatment.

    each of those location might output those fumes through "venting" just because it's cheap... that would me absolutely no destruction of the harmful gases.

    The next system that people might use for their cheapness was the "open ended pipe flare" which would burn gases but only at a set velocity, if the landfill tip or tank's back pressure wasn't high enough then the open ended pipe flare would be shut down and the fumes left to build up a back pressure or vented.

    This let me know that the thousands of rubbish tips, Old mine shafts and sewerage treatment plants vent or inefficiently combust gases into the atmosphere, and the only reason why they don't upgrade their systems to a better combustion system or a power regeneration system is "...because of the Cost."

    Next I noticed that people seem to neglect something about the ozone layer holes, the fact that they are directly over a polar region and an ice cap.

    For instance the magnetic poles would force all the atoms/molecules into a particular alignment. Since it's cold at the poles there would be no convection keeping the particles up and you must know of snow blindness, the reality is that the radiation that beams down upon the polar surface is reflected back up, so the ozone isn't just hit by radiation on it's way down but on it's way back up.

    What can also be added to the ozone equation is the increase in Frequency equipment i.e. Mobile phones, Digital analogue system etc

    All those frequency can attack the ozone from below as the sun attacks it from the top, meaning it's fighting a double battle. So if it thins out we are in trouble left open to radiation and if it thickens we are going to suffer a major climatic change through global warming. (To which some of you have already noted the changes)

    As for things we can do... How about catalytic converters in Aircraft to stop them polution at altitude (I noted the experiment that was used to remove a rain cloud, isn't their some way of placing those polymere pellets into the exhaust of a craft?)

    I hope thats opend some eyes

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  11. 01001010 ... unique ... Registered Senior Member

    you guys are worrying about global warming for nothing. Yes, it has been getting a small amount higher in temperature, but if you compare it to the last 500 years, you will actually see that it has gone down quite significantly. Sorry for my lack of pictures and graphs, but i got this information from 20/20 a couple of months ago.
  12. some_guy01 Registered Senior Member

    I don't beileve the earth will ever just blow-up or even lose its atomsphere due to solar wind. solarwind Howard is probably our lest concern only if we were to start exploring space then it would become a problem. solar wind has been around for quite a bit of time and still haven't demolshed Venus which is smaller than the earth, so that is nothing to be worried about. About the eath just blowing up i don't beleive it will happen. if massive volcanic activity occurs it will darken our skys blocking the sun and cooling the earth it has hppened beore it will happen again.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page