By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
megaman79 on 19 February 2010
Edit Thread
Kasz216 said:
vlad321 said:
Kasz216 said:
vlad321 said:
kowenicki said:
Now everybody (all scientists) accept that we had a very warm period in the middles ages.. vineyards in england.. etc etc. and that was followed by a very cold period round about 1600(little ice age).

So if those extreme climate conditions werent caused by man then why does this one have to be caused by man?

There are various explanations, I think having read all of them that "man made" is the least compelling.

We can neither stop it nor cause it imo..... only learn to live with it.

Are you saying CO2 in the air doesn't affect the climate, or that there is no CO2 in the air?

The CO2 in the air effects the climate... however the effect it has on the climate is very tiny I think appears to be the most llikely case.

With Global Warming being a mostly natural effect.

I will just start off from here in the thread.

Ever hear of the straw that broke the camel's back? Because I think this is might be one of those amazing situations where that ridiculous statement may be true. Just as an example I came up with while I was writing the previous sentence, women have periods, they bleed at regular intervals. Now if you stick an IUD up in her, she bleeds worse. Yes, she will always bleed every month in a cycle, but the IUD also makes it worse, more blood, more pissy, you get the idea.

Basically what I am saying is that humans have caused SOME effect, we don't know what it is and since the planet does it every so often cyclically as well we don't really know what's normal or not. If there is indeed a balance between keeping the earth alive, and a destructive loop, and we don't know how much even a little more emissions effect the weather, and our small amount of added CO2 could compound results, and most mportantly the fact we don't have another planet to move to currently I say that we tread lightly until the risk (only habitableplanet we have could become uninhabitable) becomes smaller not to tread lightly, either by being pretty damn sure about our real effetcs, or by finding another accessible planet. Sorry I feel like that sentence turned out to be too long for its own good.

I understand what your saying... but there isn't anything that supports this. As such i'm going to have to go with the "null" until actual research is shown otherwise.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=frw&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&q=co2+absorption+rate+oceans&start=10&sa=N

 



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.