The energy non crisis

[jcb]

We know that Global warming is real.

Probably so. Problem is, no one one has proved--frankly, CAN prove--that the recent rise in global temperatures is caused by man.

The Earth has always experienced periods of warming and cooling. 55,000,000 years ago, during what was known as the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM), global temps rose by over 40 degrees F in only 10,000 years. There were no automobiles or factories back then, to state the obvious.

Why are the polar ice caps melting?

Why are the Glaciers melting and leaving behind valleys that were once covered in tens of feet of ice?

The whole continent of North America was once covered in ice. This fact dismantles the correlation you're trying to make.

Can you explain why the core samples of ice taken from some of the glaciers before they vanished showed an increase in CO2 content in their gas bubbles that correlates with increased industrialization of the Earth?

Very easily. The Earth experiences natural rises and falls in CO2 atmospheric content. Has man contributed? Definitely. Can we say with any certainty that industrialization has caused global warming? Definitely not.

But here's where we might come together, Moose. Even though I doubt that global warming is man-made to the extent claimed, I think we should all act as if it is. Drive smaller vehicles. Carpool. Take public transportation. Use energy-efficient appliances.

The difference is, I want to choose to do it rather than have it forced upon me.

[Moose1am]

We know that Global warming is real.

Probably so. Problem is, no one one has proved--frankly, CAN prove--that the recent rise in global temperatures is caused by man.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are trying to confuse the facts again. I said that Global Warming Was Real not that it was caused by man. Two very different things.

The earth is warming up. That's easy to prove. Recorded temperatures taken though out the world over the last 30 year show increasing average global temperatures. And if you look around at the melting ice it shows that the earth is getting warmer. Ice won't melt if it's getting colder. Ice Caps melt when the Earth warms up. Duh!

But the latter is also true. Man's activities are directly correlated to the warming trend since the industrial revolution. Ice core samples taken from the Glacial ice have been analyzed and shown to have increasing CO2 gas in the ice core as you get nearer the surface. The core samples are like tree rings in a way. The ice cores allow scientist to look back though time at the CO2 levels in the ice cores. The deeper you go in the core sample the older that ice is. That's because the oldest ice was laid down first and covered up by the younger ice.

Atmospheric Scientists have good data to show that mankind is creating the greenhouse gases.

Do you deny that we are burning more and more fossil fuels. Do you deny that the human population is increasing. Do you deny that we are running out of oil becasue we are using it fasater than it can be made?

[Moose1am]

Why are the Glaciers melting and leaving behind valleys that were once covered in tens of feet of ice? [/QUOTE]

The whole continent of North America was once covered in ice. This fact dismantles the correlation you're trying to make
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

You are nuts if you think this statement dismantles what I was saying. That is plain nuts.

While the earth has been warming up over the last few thousand years you forget about the 1300 when the little ice age hit. That had a huge impact on human populations. I think that the plague wiped out 1/3 of the existing human population in that century.

Much of the ice that was in the glaciers was laid down during that last little ice age and that was only 700 years ago. Duh!

I am very much aware of the earth's historical cycles having studied the geological history of the earth from the Cambrian Time to present. I am aware of the fact of continental drift such. I spend an entire year studying the history of the earth. I am also aware of World History.

Your analysis is flawed in many ways. Your logic defies reasoning.

Bottom line if that during the Jurassic Period we didn't have 7 billion humans on this earth to protect. Yes the earth runs in cycles but it's also true that those time cycles are related to our orbit around the sun. Every ten thousands years the cycles has seemed to repeat itself. But the rate of change has never been so fast as it is to day. The rate of change in global average temperature was slow slow slow. It was not rapid like today.

The rate of change of temperature is the key. I am well aware that the ocean levels have risen and fallen by 100's of feet. I know that an inland sea formed over what is now the Midwestern USA.

And the vast majority of the Scientist on this planet are telling us that man's activities of burning thousands of tons of coal are effecting the atmosphere.

It's so obvious to anyone without a bias that it's like a giant zit sitting on your nose. It's impossible to not see the effects that man has on this planet.

And if that is not enough to convince you then I wish you could get a ride on the space shuttle and observe the earth from space. From there you can see the burning rain forests in South America.

It's only reasonable to figure out that if it took 200 million years to produce the coal and oil that's buried in the ground combined with the fact that we are burning up all that coal at an EVER INCREASING RATE that something has to give. Taking the trees down and planting more crops then burning them as fuel is going to increase the amount of Free CO2. You take all that Carbon that was tied up under the ground in the form of coal and then release it into the atmosphere in such a relatively short time period and there is no place for it to go. There's not enough algae in the waters or trees on the earth to use up all that excess CO2

And it's a PROVE SCIENTIFIC fast that CO2 gas in the air causes a green house warming effect.

To deny that scientific fast is not only a political mistake but it's fool hardy.

[Moose1am]

The whole continent of North America was once covered in ice. This fact dismantles the correlation you're trying to make.
------------------------------------------------------

Wrong.. A false statement. The glacial ice did not cover all of the USA. It only came down to the middle part of INDIANA.

All one has to do is look at the geology of IN to see this. Turkey Run State Park was near the edge of the Glacial Ice.

Go back and study your geological History or find a google source that's no so inaccurate.

If Southern Indiana were covered by glaciers there would be scares on the bedrock where the glaciers moved over the area. There would be glacial tillage at the end of the glaciers edge where they melted and left huge boulders that had been tied up in the glacial ice and moved along with the ice and then deposited at the end of the glacier when it melted and started to retreat back North.

And then one more thing. I am sure that you have heard about the Famous North West Passage that never existed in modern times. It was only recently opened up allowing ships to sail though it the last few years. That is a direct effect of mankind's global warming.

You have not even begun to answer my questions about why the ice is melting.

Well I am going to tell you since you refuse to face the facts.

The Glaciers are melting and falling off of the Antarctic Continent because mankind is burning too many fossil fuels and warming up this plant's atmosphere. And the poles are the most impacted areas.

And the rate of increase is INCREASING faster than in recorded history.

You can take these facts too the bank!

[Moose1am]

Gumby I am also independent in my thinking. But that does not mean that I can't see the truth. I learned about the Green House effect years ago from the educators at Purdue University. I learned it from my Geology Professors. I learned the same thing from Professors at the University of Southern Indiana.

I don't say that everyone that disagrees with me on everything is spreading hogwash. Some of those people are smart and know what they are talking about at times. But in this case that's not you!

Just because I say you and those that disclaim "global Warming" are spreading hogwash doesn't mean that I do that with anyone that disagrees with me on anything else.

I am independent enough to see the difference.

I knew about Global Warming and the effects of CO2 in the Atmosphere long before Al Gore started his campaign to warm people about the dangers of burning all these fossil fuels in record amounts.

The main reason I joined in this discussion was to set the facts straight on global warming with not just you but anyone who reads some of your posts.

There seems to be a few camps out there that enjoy spreading misinformation. Normally I just ignore them and go one. But this time on this issue I figured I would put my two cents in. Not that you will change your way of thinking, but that others can see what you are saying and discount it as hogwash.

You see independents are capable fo seeing the BS for what it is.

Gumby: I have news for you sir... You are not that independent in your thinking on global warming. If you really were independent you would be able to see the other side and know what the truth is.

And please listen to me really close here. Ask yourself what's making the Ice Caps Melt at this time in the earths history?

You are aware that the polar ice caps and the glaciers are melting and retreating in many parts of the globe?

All I am really trying to say to you is this. Use your eyes and look around at the melting ice up at the North Pole and down at the South Pole and on the mountain tops. Ice that have been accumulating up on the Mountain tops for hundreds of years is suddenly melting and exposing the sides of mountains that have not be visible for many hundreds of years. If you deny this then you can't be an independent thinking man.

This one issue does not make one a democrat nor a republican. There are many republicans that know that global warming is happening right now.

And I would bet that there are democrats that think it's not happening.

Like someone in some of these threads said: This really should not be politicized. The facts should be based on facts and evidence. Not what some politicians thinks they should be.

Having worked for government as a scientist that advised the politicians on environmental facts I know what can happen when politics enters into the discussions.

I am going to go back to talking fishing now. It's less frustrating and take up much less of my time and energy.

Have a good day!

Moose, just for your information I AM NOT A REPUBLICIN -- I am an INDEPENDENT in my politics and, unlike you, in my THINKING!! Just becuase someone doesn't agree with you, doesn't mean that they are spreading HOWSWASH nor DISINFORMATION. Again for your information, there are millions of people that disagree with you AND AL GORE.

Grumpy

[stratosjoe]

**** Moose , you got me so depressed I am going to crawl up in a box of Ben and Jerry's and eat my way out. You may or may not be right but unless your last name is Rothchild your elevated blood pressure is only bad for you. There is far more important things for the nation to be concerned about like who will be the next dancer given the boot or who gets kicked off some island in the carribbean. Those are the important things to get excited about, oh and don't forget about Brittany.

[know1]

What the heck, I'll throw in my .02...

I'm not sure if global warming is real or not, but I'm pretty sure the climate has made some pretty big changes in the past so it's conceivable. The part that cannot be proven to me is that man is having a significant impact on it or that man can do anything to change it significantly.

Now that does not mean I'm in favor of polluting the environment or abusing it negligently, but it also means that I'm pretty sure if man were around to tax the most advanced countries at the time of the ice age to try and prevent that from happening, it would have still occurred.

Also, I do not believe that scientists have relevant statistical samples gathered from the last 100 years or so (the time when we could do any appreciable measuring of climate and weather) to make very solid hypotheses about what is occurring or what will occur. Please don't bring up core sample of ice and tell me that those can be compared with readings we do now.

[Moose1am]

Why are you willing to discount the core samples? They are a legitimate way of finding out how much CO2 gas was in the atmosphere in the past.

Seriously the ice back then trapped the air and the amount of CO2 in that air can be measured today.

You seem pretty intelligent as you used terms like Significant. I assume you are aware of Confidence levels at the 95% area of the bell curve and also may understand how to test difference in populations. You also may be aware of Chi Square Testing procedures.

Infrared Light can be used to measure how much CO is in the air. I use that methodology to test the air for Carbon Monoxide in the Evansville, IN area.

Likewise there are methodologies that are capable of measuring how much CO 2 is in an air sample.

I don't know if you have taken any Geology or not, but geologists use core sample of the earth to determine how old the various layers of the rocks are. Likewise they can take core samples of the old ice and determine the age of the various layers of ice. And they can also measure how much CO2 is found in each different layers. This means that they can go back in time and figure out how much CO2 is in the various ice layers. That in terms relates to how much CO2 was in the earths atmosphere at those times.

Do you dispute these facts about measuring the ice layers and the amount of CO2 in them and therefore the past amount of CO2 in the Earths atmosphere?

I am just curious as to what you don't believe?

Are you familiar with the Bureau of National Standards or ASTM methods? I have had to calibrate Class A thermometers and certify them as traceable to a NBS certified thermometer. That's pretty easy to do. I even purchased thermometer that came with this certification to the NBS. I think they changed the name to some thing else about 15 years ago. And I can't recall the new name but the agency still performs the same functions.

American Standards Testing Materials ASTM have published many books that describe how these tests are performed. They are used all over the USA to conduct business. So anyone that can read the ASTM books can figure out how to calibrate a thermometer. And most people can read a thermometer easily. I could probably train a kid to take temperature readings and to write them down in a bound log book with numbered pages.

So please don't tell me that we can't record the air or water temperature back 100 years ago. Some of the best minds that have ever been born were around long before 100 years ago. Copernicus, Newton just to name two.

Geologists have been around for hundreds of years and many scientific disciplines have been taking temperature readings for many years now.

But for the sake of argument lets just limit the discussion to the last 30 years. In fact 30 years ago I was taking water samples and measuring the Ph of the rain water. And I was using a Ph Meter that was purchased from Fisher Scientific. It had a automatic temperature compensating probe built into the pH probe and meter.

Are you aware of how a thermocouple works? Do you really thing that taking a air temperature reading is that hard. In fact taking temperature reading is probably the most basic scientific test that can be done.

So please don't tell me that people can't measure the air temperature in the USA, or in Alaska or in South Africa. Thermometer were designed long before you and I were even born and they have not really changed that much. They were using liquids that expand and contract volume with changing temperature ever since they were invented.

While they may have been a few errors in reading these over the years they were very few and far between. These temperatures can be combined and easily averaged. And it's easy to take temperature readings throughout the various parts of the globe and analysis and interrupt them.

Taking air temperatures is pretty **** hard to screw up!

And last question. How do you explain the vanished Glaciers?

Ice won't melt unless it gets above 32 deg F or Zero deg C. or 273 deg Kelvin longer than it stays below that temperature. So if the average air temperature are over 32 deg F the ice melts. If the average temperatures are below 32 deg the F freezes and builds back up. Over the last 30 years all the ice has been doing more melting than freezing. That's perfectly clear.


In fact the way that scientist can test a thermometer and determine if it's working property is to put it in ice water and see if it reads 32 deg F and then put it in boiling water and see if it reads 212 deg F. For you metric guys that zero deg C and 100 deg C respectively.

Now I think that mankind has had a significant impact on the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere.

This morning I read on MSNBC web site that the oceans are turning more Acidic. This is directly due to the increase in CO2 in the air. You are most likely aware of the laws of Partial Pressure? You know the physic laws that states that the higher the partial pressure of a gas the more the gas will go into solution in a liquid.

Well it just so happened that we can measure the pH of the sea water and the scientist are discovering that the ocean coastal waters off the USA West Coast are getting more acidic. And acidic water dissolved calcium carbonate into solution. Take some acid and pour it over some limestone and watch the reaction. This is going on right now. Sea critters who's shells are made out of calcium are having their shells dissolved due to the lower pH of the ocean waters. That's something new that I just read this morning.

I have performed tests on water samples that were highly basic. Take a test sample of effluent that has a pH of 10.0 and add some CO2 into the solution quickly and then watch the pH of that solution drop like a rock below 7.0. In fact you can take a straw and blow though the straw and put your breath into the solution and make it's pH drop down to 5.0 in less than 5 seconds.

That's because humans exhale CO2 into the air. Might add that the 7 billion humans breathing ever few seconds also contributes to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. We and all the other animals were in balance with the plants for hundreds of years. Now we are out of balance with the plants as the amount of CO2 in the air is increasing.

You surely won't debate the fact that man is digging up and burning much more fossil fuels that we ever did 100 year ago. Surley you will admit to that!

Would you also deni that buring these fossil fuels is putting more CO2 into the atmosphere? Surely you will admit that is a fact!

What the heck, I'll throw in my .02...

I'm not sure if global warming is real or not, but I'm pretty sure the climate has made some pretty big changes in the past so it's conceivable. The part that cannot be proven to me is that man is having a significant impact on it or that man can do anything to change it significantly.

Now that does not mean I'm in favor of polluting the environment or abusing it negligently, but it also means that I'm pretty sure if man were around to tax the most advanced countries at the time of the ice age to try and prevent that from happening, it would have still occurred.

Also, I do not believe that scientists have relevant statistical samples gathered from the last 100 years or so (the time when we could do any appreciable measuring of climate and weather) to make very solid hypotheses about what is occurring or what will occur. Please don't bring up core sample of ice and tell me that those can be compared with readings we do now.

[Moose1am]

I stopped watching right after "there is enough oil on the North slope of Alaska to last America 200 years."

No one knows how much oil is up there. Anyone who can make a blanket assertion like that and present it as fact loses all credibility in my eyes.

----------------------------------------

That guy in the video is a nut. No one knows exactly how much if any oil exists below the ground if they have not drilled test wells. From what I have read from Legitimate source (petroleum institute) there has only been one test well drilled near ANWAR and the results of that test well are Classified by the OIL COMPANY that drilled the well. They are not going to share that information with anyone. Not even the US Government.

Unless that idiot in the movie has X ray Vision like Super man he knows nothing.

He is just spouting of bs without any basis in fact. There may not be any oil under the ground in the small area of Alaska called ANWAR. There has been oil found on the North Slope of Alaska and the Oil companies can drill in this large area. Even then the North Slope is only a very small part of Alaska. And ANWAR is only 5 % of the North Slope Area.

So ANWAR is a tiny fraction of the State of ALASKA and it has been set aside as a animal wildlife refuge. Only a very tiny fraction of the land in the USA is set aside for the Wildlife. And what's protected should remain protected for all times to come.

The oil companies have many many many other areas to drill for oil. They need to keep their greedy little paws of of ANWAR. They only want it because they can't have it and they always get their way.

Some xperts have stated that there is no oil there, or at least not enough to make a dent in our consumption. Our consumption of oil is so huge that it's creating the majority of our problem. Wait until the world human population doubles. And as China and India grow and modernize the demand for oil with increase tremendously.

Only two things will stop the increase in demand for oil. Alternative energy source or war to control the human population.

In the past war has always controlled human population levels. But today with the threat of nuclear wars the human population has grown where we only fight small wars now days. We have not fought a global war since 1945. The wars we have fought have lower the human population to a degree but they have only been what's called "Police Actions". Korea and Vietnam were more limited scale wars and not fought all over the globe.