Quote:
Originally Posted by cfg83
Hmmm, I wouldn't call it "high-impact land-clearing". I think Coyote X was referring to "strip mining". Also, that doesn't sound true to what you wrote earlier :
|
And my previous statement was talking about the power plants themselves, not coal mines.
Coal is used for more than just fuel. The same is true with petroleum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
and there is no climatologist or head of state who would today argue against its reality,and its association to anthropogenic CO2.
|
The scientific community does not function on consensus. Theories require testing with a published methodology, and the results of the test have to be interpreted. Science is about testing and retesting. Not about arbitrarily deciding what is right or wrong.
There are PLENTY of scientists that disagree. Which is good considering it was only a handful that decided for the world that Global Warming was "a reality".
.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.
http://www.dailytech.com/Sea+Ice+End...ticle13834.htm
There's a prevalence towards fear-mongering and poorly conducted research that does nothing to increase understanding of climate science.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesqf
Do you have to wait around until it gets uncomfortably warm before you think you have "proof"?
|
No, but you would have to be measuring more variables than simply atmospheric temperatures and you would need to measure over a wider period of time.
While CO2 levels have increased between 1960 and 2005, we can't say with any certainty that we're the cause, because forests have also been increasing in size in the past 150 years.
Ocean temperatures disagree with atmospheric temperature records. But at the same time the acidity levels of the oceans has been increasing. And magnetic pole is shifting. And sun spot and solar wind activity have been increasing.
And cloud coverage percentages have a much more direct impact on global surface temperatures than greenhouse effects.
Global Warming is an oversimplification of what is a much more fascinatingly complicated system. While the greenhouse effect is real, there's presently no real certainty as to how directly anthropogenic CO2 production affects climate change over time.
Am I saying pollution is good? No.
I'm just not inclined to believe that the Global Ecosystem is so incredibly delicate that everything that happens within it is somehow our fault. It's wiped out entire populations without our intervention in the past, and is capable of doing so on it's own. It's adaptive and an extra few degrees won't bring the whole system crashing to a halt.
The world didn't end during the Holocene period. Nor did it end during the little ice age.