Fraud called "Global Warming"

[Dawnseeker]

Dawn you proved my point with this. Your right, that is how greenhouse gasses work. You have more molecules which mean that more energy is being trapped. Now Radiation comes into this though because that is how the Earth dissipates the energy so that the Energy doesn't keep building up (and surface area is a huge factor, shall I look up the equation for radiation for you?).

Also, if you saw, I was saying it emits the energy and just not aborbs. yet the amount of energy being emitted away from the Earth is fairly Constant (changes a bit do to a few variables) yet more energy is being stored on Earth because there is more mass to absorb it. To further explain all of this, I qould have to dwelve into Quatum Physics much more.


Now as for your it can't be proved argument. Prove to me that 2+2=4. You can't really do that because it is a Theory as well. Ultimately no science can really be proved. Really the only thing that can be proved is, "I think, therefore I am." We have humans have developed what we have to best explain things, but there is no guarantee that anything we have said is correct. Now, yes there are plenty of natural process in the world, and they more then likely have had a much greater effect on desert expansion then we humans have had. Yet, our involvement on the Earth should be noted, and it seems like the natural processes are accelerating then if humans haven't had an affect there.

And we are proving that we have more to lose then gain from Global Warming.

Overall, it becomes what do we humans have to lose if we treat this as being true? The giant corperations are hurt some, we begin to conserve more, We don't dump items where we want and make another Love Canal occur. I mean only the fact that large companies are hurt by believing it is the only downside I see to believing it, and that is where the political lines begin to be drawn.

So you're trying to say that predicting sea level rise is the same as doing simple arithmetic?

We are able to wager a wild guess at the amount of sea ice above Antarctica but we do not know how much submerged ice there is in all the oceans of the planet. The odds are there is nearly as much, which is why all the people predicting sea level rise for the past 30 years have been wrong.

The fact is that no one has any idea if the sea levels will rise and there is no data to indicate otherwise. What we have are a bunch of wild guesses from scientists who were just shown to be actively lying to forward their agenda. To me, that seems shaky.

Equally dubious is the premise of your argument. You are claiming that because something is difficult to prove, it must be true. By that same logic, I will claim that our universe is just one molecule of water on an alien planet called Buttville. Since, I can't prove my argument, it must be true.

[montedison]

Montedison, I was being facetious.

Which part of your original post?

[Wildor]

Agreed Wildor, we are no worse off than we have always been.

No. That is not what I meant.

I meant that we humans will find reasons to fear and loathe our own kind irrespective of the conditions of human life on our planet.

I am NOT making a judgement on those conditions, current or past, I am giving what I believe is an insight on human nature.

[A3Online]

Holocene Maximum

[0day]

I love it when I cause .....




ARMAGEDDON

[Lord Ken Deathmarr]

[Alusair]

2+2=4 is easy. Take two apples. Add two more apples to it. How many do you have? Twice the value of two. That is four. Tada. :P

Anyway, Dawnseeker is correct with the ice argument. Generally speaking, 90% of ice in the ocean is already submerged underwater, we only see the top 10%. Water also expands when it freezes (though I can't remember by what statistic increase), so if all ocean-bound ice were to melt, consider that most of it is already in the water, and that it would actually shrink the amount of space it occupies. And I doubt the ice above water could compensate for the size loss caused by the submerged ice melting.

Another fun trivia is the argument of how it's dangerous to let the ice caps melt because only 3% of the water on Earth is fresh water, and glaciers hold 67% of that fresh water. But, considering we actually never use water from the ice caps, and our water sources come from the hydrologic cycle, it's really an irrelevant argument. It can get some people in a hype, though.

[Rota]

The total volume of water expands when it goes from solid (ice) to liquid (water)

But as I said before, it would not flood the planet even if all the ice on both poles and greenland melted. It would just chew up a bit of the coastline.

[Alusair]

The total volume of water expands when it goes from solid (ice) to liquid (water)

The other way around. Water volume increases when it freezes.

Experiment with an aluminium or plastic container filled with water and put in a freezer. The ice will push against the container and cause it to swell or break.

[Smythe]

RE ocean rise:

besides the land ice melting
aren't you guys forgetting that as the water in the oceans heats up it expands also?