[mir]

I feel the sceptics of Climate Change caused by Humans, is growing very strong now. A friend of mine is hanging a lot on prisonplanet.com and finds all sorts of conspiracy, like secret plans for a "world government", he gave some sources, this is one of them:

Alex Jones is interviewing Paul Watson about global warming:
http://prisonplanet.com/audio/110308watson.mp3

You might also find the famous BBC documentary from 2004 on Google Video, "The Power of Nightmares" or download it here:
http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares
Wikipedia about the documentary:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmares

I am curious, is it possible to use ordinary logic about global warming which is independent of IPCC and Al Gore? Some simple concentration calculations, maybe on gases. A simple scenario in a closed container maybe?

[Borek]

Problem is, climate is an extremely complex system. As far as I know - but I am not tracing it closely - so far we have no appropriate model able to predict climate changes. Heck, we don't have models to reliably predict 48 hours of weather Thus, while many observations point to climate change occuring, and many observations point to the fact that they can be caused by us, I don't expect anything conclusive in the near future, although climate models are getting better and better. Could be they will be never able to give any conclusive answers.

And ordinary logic/common reasoning are just to weak to answer these questions. Note that other side of the conflict already uses common reasoning and ordinary logic bent into their favor. You can bend it other way, but it will not mean you know the truth.

[FeLiXe]

I would say it makes sense not to pollute the world all that much no matter if there is climate change or not

[enahs]

While I do not believe in the whole global warming thing as they claim; and I am mostly against the concept because the science behind is is very bad, regardless if it is correct or not (you can be correct by mistake, happens all the time).

Logically, I like cheap plastics and polymers, and I like the cheap fertilizers and pesticides which are required to support as large of a population as we have. I also like the beauty of mother nature.

Therefor, logically, it would make sense not to waste fossil fuels when we do not have to. To not waste other materials so less mining is required, etc etc.


I personally do not see global warming as an issue; because I can list you 20 other reason to stop wasing resources that are not questioned by anybody.

[mir]

...
Therefor, logically, it would make sense not to waste fossil fuels when we do not have to. To not waste other materials so less mining is required, etc etc...

Do you have some references or is this purely your own opinion?
May I quote you in my article?

I like your reasoning! A damn good argument!

[FeLiXe]

yes, I like your idea. I think global warming is the catchy phrase but environmental protection is about much more. the problem is that there is so much political power behind both sides of the debate that it's difficult to know what is true.

I would say unless it is proven that blowing so much CO2 into the air is harmless, it should not be done. earth is a pretty nice place right now and every significant change in the environment might be harmful, be it climate change or something we haven't thought about yet

[pantone159]

I haven't studied the science/evidence, but I'm thinking the following:

1) The Earth is definitely getting warmer.  AFAIK there is little/no serious debate about this.
2) Whether or not Homo Sapiens is causing this, is a much more difficult question to answer, and I personally don't know enough to be sure this is the case.

However, it seems like a good idea to err on the side of making sure we aren't messing things up.

[azmanam]

AFAIK there is little/no serious debate about this.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/125236.html
http://acuf.org/issues/issue62/060624cul.asp

[Yggdrasil]

AFAIK there is little/no serious debate about this.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20071219/COMMENTARY/10575140
http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/january-2008-4-sources-say-globally-cooler-in-the-past-12-months/
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/125236.html
http://acuf.org/issues/issue62/060624cul.asp

One data point does not break a trend.  Global warming/climate change does not predict that every year will show higher global temperatures than the previous year.  Global warming/climate change predicts that on average (on the scale of decades), the global temperatures will rise.

Now, if this cooling trend continues for a few years, then yes, I think you may have a valid point.  But as it stands, the recent colder than average temperatures do not provide sufficient evidence to substantiate a claim that global warming has ended.

[azmanam]

One data point does not break a trend.

Quite True. 

Here's a guy who tackles what, exactly, makes a trend.  It's a 4 parter, but the relevent section starts about 3:30 into part 1.

Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI
Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN06JSi-SW8
Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCXDISLXTaY
Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpQQGFZHSno

The beginning of part 4 is also an interesting watch

[Valdorod]

While not empirical by any means, every semester, while teaching general chemistry, I always demonstrate the solubility of CO2 in water by taking a fresh sample of DI water, cooled to room temperature and measuring the pH after several hours of exposure to the atmosphere, and show then how a fresh sample has a pH close to 7, while a sample that is a couple of days old has a pH below seven.

I have noticed the pH of the days old sample dropping slightly every year for the past ten years.  I know it is now due to the DI machine, since the fresh sample has always been close to seven.

Like I said, not empirical, but it certainly makes me wonder, where the extra acidity is coming from.

Valdo

[agrobert]

^Can you really correlate several experiments done years apart?  Same glassware, same temperature, same dilution?  This is interesting but not a very strong argument.  An interesting approach to this concept would be to gather data from different locations (cities, states) using the same DI water source. 

[Valdorod]

The comparison is not necesarily between the samples from different years or semesters, the comparison is the gap between the fresh DI water and the exposed DI water for each semester.  If that gap increases then there is something to look at.  The pH of the DI water is not changing within the error of the pH meter, however, the pH of the air exposed DI does change, and that change is the one that is getting larger.

Nonetheless, as I said not empirical by any means, purely observational and as you said, summer, winter semesters would have expexted changes, humidity levels, none of that being taken into account since I do not keep track of it.

An interesting approach to this concept would be to gather data from different locations (cities, states) using the same DI water source.

Perhaps an idea for a grant proposal,

Valdo

[Borek]

I wonder... CO₂ concentration in air depends on so many factors, that pH of water (especially hold in bulding full of people) is probably meaningless. It is probably enough that more people is in the class for the pH to go down. Add to that ventillation, seasonal changes due to vegetation, effect of room temperature on the speed of metabolism (the colder it is the more CO₂ you produce per hour, just to keep body temperature) and so on. If such trend really exist it would be very interesting.

[eugenedakin]

I honestly am not sure about global warming.... Here are some thoughts...

The earth is spinning around the sun...spiralling closer to the sun. Would our closer proximity to the sun increase the earths temperature?

Most temperature readings used to be made back in the days when airports were out of the major cities and the landing strips were not made of black (heat absorbing) asphalt.  Now, most cities have grown around the airports (or have become closer), and airports are surrounded by black asphalt. Could this cause an error in our readings?

Just some thoughts to ponder...

Sincerely,

Eugene