Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [FOB] New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[FOB] New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Page 23

post #221 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by darknight670 View Post
I also do not understand why " ecologist " are persuaded cars and planes etc are soooo dangerous to the environment... Because they are "not natural" ? Well take goats for example.

Cute little goats. They are the children of mother nature right? They must be harmless or even good for earth right?


4000 Thousands years ago Africa ( and mostly Sahel/Sahara ) were huge tropical forests.
Then man imported goats.
Then goats ate everything
Now we have huge deserts, famine, war and diseases.

All. Because. Of. cellphones, cars nulcear generators, goats
While I understand what you are saying, I lol'd at 'Goats eat rainforests'
Webcrawler
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 3570k ASRock Z75 Pro3 Sapphire 7870 XT Boost Corsair Vengeance, DDR3 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
SpinPoint F1 1TB 64GB M4 SSD Windows 8.1 SyncMaster P2050 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
Dell U2312HM Sidewinder X4 Be Quiet! Pure Power CM L8 430w Zowie FK 
AudioAudio
Xonar DG Sennheiser HD 555 
  hide details  
Reply
Webcrawler
(17 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i5 3570k ASRock Z75 Pro3 Sapphire 7870 XT Boost Corsair Vengeance, DDR3 1600Mhz 
Hard DriveHard DriveOSMonitor
SpinPoint F1 1TB 64GB M4 SSD Windows 8.1 SyncMaster P2050 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
Dell U2312HM Sidewinder X4 Be Quiet! Pure Power CM L8 430w Zowie FK 
AudioAudio
Xonar DG Sennheiser HD 555 
  hide details  
Reply
post #222 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by .:hybrid:. View Post
While I understand what you are saying, I lol'd at 'Goats eat rainforests'
They obviously did not ate the trees ( though they could, goats eats everything, even wastes ) BUT overgrazing of drylands is one of the primary causes of desertification.
Store-IT
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 955 BE Gigabyte 880GA-UD3H v2.2 Integrated 8 x 2 Gio DDR3 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
6 x 2 To Samsung F4, 2 x 1 Tb F3 Openindiana 151b 430W Seasonic Fractal R3 
  hide details  
Reply
Store-IT
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Phenom II 955 BE Gigabyte 880GA-UD3H v2.2 Integrated 8 x 2 Gio DDR3 
Hard DriveOSPowerCase
6 x 2 To Samsung F4, 2 x 1 Tb F3 Openindiana 151b 430W Seasonic Fractal R3 
  hide details  
Reply
post #223 of 327
I thought we already knew this?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon L5640 Asus X58 Sabertooth MSI 560Ti 448 Twin Frozr III PE Samsung Green Power LP DDR3 1600  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Western Digital Velociraptor Samsung F1 1TB Corsair H70 CPU Cooling 3xCougar CF-V14H 140mm Case Fans 
CoolingMonitorKeyboardPower
3x Cougar CF-V12H 120mm Case Fans Dell S2440M 21.5" 1080P  Rosewill Mechanical RK-9000BRI Corsair HX750 
CaseMouse
Xigmatek Asgard Logitech M570 Trackball 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon L5640 Asus X58 Sabertooth MSI 560Ti 448 Twin Frozr III PE Samsung Green Power LP DDR3 1600  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Western Digital Velociraptor Samsung F1 1TB Corsair H70 CPU Cooling 3xCougar CF-V14H 140mm Case Fans 
CoolingMonitorKeyboardPower
3x Cougar CF-V12H 120mm Case Fans Dell S2440M 21.5" 1080P  Rosewill Mechanical RK-9000BRI Corsair HX750 
CaseMouse
Xigmatek Asgard Logitech M570 Trackball 
  hide details  
Reply
post #224 of 327
Everybody is thinking to small. Talking about decades, centuries, thousands of years, millions of years. To say anything about planet earth and be relevant, you have to talk in 10's of millions of years.

This graph is just plain embarrassing.



This one is even more embarrassing to the human race.





Why 650,000 years? Why can't I see 650,000,000 years? That would be more useful.

Edited by dham - 8/1/11 at 12:04pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 750 4.01ghz at 1.27v MSI P55 GD-80 Sapphire Radeon HD 5870 1GB + EVGA 9800GT Physx G.SKILL 4GB DDR3 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Crucial 128gb Real SSD, WD Black 500gb, 750gb LG DVD combo Windows 7 Ultimate 64 / Arch Linux x64 22" Acer 
PowerCase
Corsair HX750 Corsair 600t 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 750 4.01ghz at 1.27v MSI P55 GD-80 Sapphire Radeon HD 5870 1GB + EVGA 9800GT Physx G.SKILL 4GB DDR3 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Crucial 128gb Real SSD, WD Black 500gb, 750gb LG DVD combo Windows 7 Ultimate 64 / Arch Linux x64 22" Acer 
PowerCase
Corsair HX750 Corsair 600t 
  hide details  
Reply
post #225 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by dham View Post


Why 650,000 years? Why can't I see 650,000,000 years? That would be more useful.
It's cause the Ice Cores that scientist get these numbers from don't go back that far. That would be one HUGE piece of ice, think bigger than Mt. Everest from sea level, to go back that far, figuratively speaking.
post #226 of 327
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but 'global dimming' as a result of particulate release from fossil fuels has been functioning for several centuries as as mini nuclear winter type phenomenon, deflecting photons that would otherwise strike the Earth's surface and raise the temperature. Although the global temperature increase over the last century could be called marginal by some, when you factor in the amount of heat gain that global dimming has prevented, the extent of the greenhouse effect becomes much more obvious. Once we run out of the fossil fuels that generate these particulates, the effects of global warming should become far more apparent, if I am not mistaken.

I can't understand how global warming denialists can someone "close minded" or accuse them having a god complex for holding to the precautionary principle, but not think the same of themselves when they know that without a doubt, global warming is some sort of scam and all evidence is completely inadmissible. That seems like the ultimate hypocrisy to me, regardless of which side is employing that kind of thinking. The issue is complex, and more data is probably necessary for a conclusive judgement, but I don't see how that discounts either side. I would go as far to say that anyone who doesn't have formal education in the field of global climate mechanics (myself included) isn't qualified to make a judgment on the matter, as all the information we are basing our opinions on came from a secondary source that no doubt has a political or economic. The fact of the matter is that if global warming is such a complex and misunderstood issue that even the apparent authorities on it are wrong, it has no place being the political and therefore popular issue it is. It's pretty absurd to think that anyone on this thread (and the Heartland Institute as well) knows more about global weather systems than everyone mentioned here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

I feel that if the the 'alarmist' predictions have even the smallest chance of coming to fruition (which most experts suggests they more than do), shouldn't we take steps to avert the outcome, whether it is caused by humans or not? I never thought in a TECHNOLOGY forum, of all places, I would see so many anti-intellectual and anti-scientific arguments.
Edited by Panther Modern - 8/1/11 at 1:26pm
wu-tang forever
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K MSI P67A-C43 AMD 6950 (shader unlocked) x2 8 Gig GSKILL DDR3 1600 Mhz 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardPower
Samsung F3R 1 Tb Windows 7 Home Premium Compaq MX-11800 (Brown Cherry) Seasonic X Series 750w 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Cooler Master HAF 922 Steelseries Xai Razer Destructor 
  hide details  
Reply
wu-tang forever
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K MSI P67A-C43 AMD 6950 (shader unlocked) x2 8 Gig GSKILL DDR3 1600 Mhz 
Hard DriveOSKeyboardPower
Samsung F3R 1 Tb Windows 7 Home Premium Compaq MX-11800 (Brown Cherry) Seasonic X Series 750w 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Cooler Master HAF 922 Steelseries Xai Razer Destructor 
  hide details  
Reply
post #227 of 327
"As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism."

I Love this


and this:

"To assume that [global warming] is a problem is to assume that the state of Earth's climate today is the optimal climate, the best climate that we could have or ever have had and that we need to take steps to make sure that it doesn't change... I think that's a rather arrogant position for people to take."

by Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic.
E-Boney
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
intel 4790k Z97X-UD5H GTX970 G1 16GB GsKill 2400MHZ 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
2x 3TB HDD Raid 0 2x 240 GB SSD in Raid 0 NZXT X61 8.1 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VG248QE CMStorm Quickfire Pro Seasonic 1250W Corsair 750D 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Zowie FK-2 Monoprice Gigantic  HyperX Clouds 
  hide details  
Reply
E-Boney
(15 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
intel 4790k Z97X-UD5H GTX970 G1 16GB GsKill 2400MHZ 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
2x 3TB HDD Raid 0 2x 240 GB SSD in Raid 0 NZXT X61 8.1 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VG248QE CMStorm Quickfire Pro Seasonic 1250W Corsair 750D 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Zowie FK-2 Monoprice Gigantic  HyperX Clouds 
  hide details  
Reply
post #228 of 327
It IS the optimal climate, for civilization. Because we adjusted to live in the climate as it exists. Where we plant different crops, where we built our cities, where we built our dams and which rivers we built on - all depends on the current climate. Saying "lol idiots climate has changed in the past" is irrelevant. Human civilization didn't exist in these different climates, and if we were to change to them, human civilization would be heavily damaged.

You could say "10 million years ago, the heartland of the US couldn't grow corn" - well, whoopdidoo. It does now, and do you realize how many people would starve if it couldn't?

We're not going to "destroy the Earth", but we can very much destroy civilization.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k @ 4.6 Extreme4 p67 1070 Gaming X 4x4 ripjaws X 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
850 EVO, 6TB Hitach/WD Xigmatek Aegir Win7 Shimian 27" 1440p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec TP650 HAF 922 G400s (RIP 518) Puretrak Stealth 
Audio
Soundblaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500k @ 4.6 Extreme4 p67 1070 Gaming X 4x4 ripjaws X 1600 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
850 EVO, 6TB Hitach/WD Xigmatek Aegir Win7 Shimian 27" 1440p 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec TP650 HAF 922 G400s (RIP 518) Puretrak Stealth 
Audio
Soundblaster Z 
  hide details  
Reply
post #229 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panther Modern View Post
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but 'global dimming' as a result of particulate release from fossil fuels has been functioning for several centuries as as mini nuclear winter type phenomenon, deflecting photons that would otherwise strike the Earth's surface and raise the temperature. Although the global temperature increase over the last century could be called marginal by some, when you factor in the amount of heat gain that global dimming has prevented, the extent of the greenhouse effect becomes much more obvious. Once we run out of the fossil fuels that generate these particulates, the effects of global warming should become far more apparent, if I am not mistaken.

I can't understand how global warming denialists can someone "close minded" or accuse them having a god complex for holding to the precautionary principle, but not think the same of themselves when they know that without a doubt, global warming is some sort of scam and all evidence is completely inadmissible. That seems like the ultimate hypocrisy to me, regardless of which side is employing that kind of thinking. The issue is complex, and more data is probably necessary for a conclusive judgement, but I don't see how that discounts either side. I would go as far to say that anyone who doesn't have formal education in the field of global climate mechanics (myself included) isn't qualified to make a judgment on the matter, as all the information we are basing our opinions on came from a secondary source that no doubt has a political or economic. The fact of the matter is that if global warming is such a complex and misunderstood issue that even the apparent authorities on it are wrong, it has no place being the political and therefore popular issue it is. It's pretty absurd to think that anyone on this thread (and the Heartland Institute as well) knows more about global weather systems than everyone mentioned here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change

I feel that if the the 'alarmist' predictions have even the smallest chance of coming to fruition (which most experts suggests they more than do), shouldn't we take steps to avert the outcome, whether it is caused by humans or not? I never thought in a TECHNOLOGY forum, of all places, I would see so many anti-intellectual and anti-scientific arguments.
You, sir, have earned it

fr0sty
(20 items)
 
SnowFlake
(5 items)
 
 
CPURAMHard DriveHard Drive
Intel Core i7 3520M  Corsair Vengeance DDR3 2x 8GB Samsung EVO SSD Hitachi Apple Hard Drive 5400RPM 
OS
macOS Sierra 
  hide details  
Reply
fr0sty
(20 items)
 
SnowFlake
(5 items)
 
 
CPURAMHard DriveHard Drive
Intel Core i7 3520M  Corsair Vengeance DDR3 2x 8GB Samsung EVO SSD Hitachi Apple Hard Drive 5400RPM 
OS
macOS Sierra 
  hide details  
Reply
post #230 of 327
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brutuz View Post
iirc the extremes (eg. Ice Age, Heat Age) tend to come and go faster than the normal cycles.

The cycle speeds up as it hits the extreme, in other words.
Ice Ages occur right after global heatings, as the quantity of O16 molecules (as oppose to a more balance O18/O16 ratio) cause massive amounts of precipitation. This, in turns, leads to the why the majority of the world freezes and thus cools down. This has no actual relation to CO2 emissions rather then we see a spike of CO2 ppm before an Ice Age occurs and or may contribute a significance to the heating (not as much as oppose to the sun directly). In reality, Ice Ages occur due to 3 main principles towards solar flux. If you take these 3 principles together, you actually see a direct relation to heatings, cooling, and known Ice Ages that have occur over the thousands of years when linked to O16/O18 ratios.
Edited by Domino - 8/1/11 at 2:34pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [FOB] New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism