Discussion in 'Earth Science' started by river, Dec 27, 2012.
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Why are you steering your own thread off topic? We've been down this whole electric universe mess before.
It is getting off topic , I keep trying to get back on topic , my fault
So from now on billvon lets continue on the sun fusion thread , started by me
In Alternative Theory forum
The answer to ALL of that is actually quite simple; it's because you, and the people like you, don't understand what's INSIDE the box. Therefore, you are ready and willing to accept any goshawful thing that comes along without even realizing it goes against some of the most basic principles of science and/or logic. And it's THAT lack of understanding and knowledge that let's you believe in things like Bigfoot, space aliens flying all around over us, negative energy, free energy, ant-gravity, etc.
And there is NO knowledge give to us who think so far outside the box that they ignore established and proven facts.
And I still say you only believe in all this nonsense simply because you want to. Most likely, it's because you did so poorly in school (before dropping out early) that you decided to rebel against all authority - including science.
Would one of the administrators move this response by read-only to in Free Thoughts forum , to " About alternative media " thread
Why? Because the truth hurts?
Anyone know if any Peruvian glaciers are expanding? I know that Quelccaya's deglaciation is actually accelerating, but was wondering if this is offset by a gain elsewhere in Peru.
This article about Peruvian glaciers in Nature is titled Goodbye Glaciers....
One needs to separate earth warming ,which is real, from man-made global warming which is only a theory made by man; it is made made in that sense. The first is real and based on hard data, and the second is based on assumptions and simulation.
There is historic data for the earth warming and cooling, without man. We know for a fact that this has and can occur using only the earth. On the other hand, there is no historic data and no precdedent that shows that man can actually do this. This assumption has no precedent, so how do you know it is possible and not just a boon doggle?
I would like to see a prototype, since nobody has ever shown me that the concept is possible other than with simulation. Something that has never done before, needs more than faith, unless one's religion has this as a central dogma.
Real science and engineering needs proof of concept. lMaybe we can man made global warm a small town. Or does the concept only work with huge objects like planets?
If I said my computer simulation allows me to leviate, do you want to invest in this without any real demonstration in reality?
The reason I suspect scam and want a demonstration is green credits. If this was real, why would we laterally buy and sell carbon and give the worse countries exemptions? Would not real doom and gloom mean no money games and all hands on deck? Obviously nobody is all that worried.
We are entitled to a demonstration before we have to buy.
Wellwisher, have you ever been in an actual greenhouse? That's a prototype.
You can't deny that years and years of pumping pollutants and known green house gases into the atmosphere, as well as other impacts such as deforestation, would have some affect on the overall global change. Your argument could be, how much is us vs. natural, certainly, but it's not realistic to pretend that we didn't contribute to some degree.
And from there, we can discuss where to go from here. A common sense approach would be to assume the worst, hope for the best, and try to stop doing what we know is environmentally damaging, at whatever we can handle economically. A full stop is obviously impossible, since we're so dependent on so much we do.
Next step is to prepare to adapt. Mother Earth is going to do what she's going to do, and if we assume things won't change, then it's our loss, because environments DO change. That's one of the things that has driven evolution, and those that don't adapt, disappear. The only difference is that we have technology and our brains to aid us in our survival, if we use them.
No, it's based on direct measurement, math and experimentation. For example, we know CO2 levels are rising (direct measurement) and we know we are responsible for them (math based on tons of CO2 released by man.) We know CO2 is a greenhouse gas through experimentation with tanks of CO2 and spectrometers. We know that the upper atmosphere is cooling while the lower atmosphere is warming, which is what we'd predict as a result of AGW.
Well, there's no precedent for the Hiroshima or Nagasaki bombings either, but it would be silly to deny that they happened.
Direct measurement, math and experimentation.
If your computer said you could levitate with your gadget - and the science supported that - and then you demonstrated yourself actually levitating with your gadget - then yes, that might be a good investment. Deniers could, of course, claim "hey, other things levitate, so it's all a fake!"
Yeah but that pretty much says they are all loosing ice...=/
Which is why the article is titled Goodbye Glaciers....
Exactly. There is another prototype called Venus.
It seems that while some parts of the planet are warming up , the Arctic is a good example
Other parts of the planet are cooling
And that is the mystery
See largest ever recorded glacier break up at: http://www.youtube.com/embed/hC3VTgIPoGU?rel=0
The glacier retreated a full mile across a calving face three miles wide. The height of the ice is about 3,000 feet, 300-400 feet above water and the rest below water but The calving event lasted for 75 minutes, but video is time compressed to less than five. It is like most of Manhattan with buildings 3 or 4 times taller, fell into the ocean!
Separate names with a comma.