Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Methinks you need a little geography lesson.>> <You think wrong. I'm well aware of the fact that there are many glaciers around the world. I'm also well aware that they are relatively small, compared to the amount of ice covering Greenland and Anartica.> But your premise remains wrong. Whatever the contribution of Greenland and Antarctica melting (and even your source says they are accelerating), the rise in sea level is a concern. <<The melting of glaciers in Greenland and Antarctica is neither the only contributor to sea level rise, nor the only problem associated with global warming.>> <I'm well aware of that, and have already admitted it. > Then I'm not sure what you think your point is.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Actually Dabob, it wasn't hyperbole as much as it was sarcasm and an intent to cause people to look at it from a different perspective. And while it may seem to be an outrageous stretch for some, there truly are people in the environmental movement who suggest these very solutions.> There are people on the fringe of the gun control issue on one side who think all guns should be taken away. There are those on the other extreme who think all adults with no criminal record should be required to own a gun. But since neither of those things is going to happen realistically, there's little value in arguing those points, or pretending they're anything but fringe positions with minimal backing. <Really what I posted is not hyperbole but instead stringing all the thoughts together and pointing out an issue.> No, what you did was post a strawman. <But calling it hyperbole is a lazy way of dismissing it.> "Strawman" might have been more accurate, true.
Originally Posted By Disneyman55 Dabob, it would have only been a strawman if I had indicated that this was your position or the general consensus position of the majority of those who are caught up in the hysteria. I do not at this moment believe that is your position. But if you truly believe that the existing predictions regarding global warming are true, why are you not embracing the most radical things you can. If you truly believe that the sea-level is going to drastically increase by 2090 or that the major cities of America will have 110 degree average summertime temperature (two existing predictions by the way), why are you still driving your car? Or flying? Why don't those who promote global warming hysteria actually live the life-style they are promoting to the masses? The greatest arguement against guys like Al Gore is that he obviously does not believe it enough to actually live it.
Originally Posted By jonvn "But if you truly believe that the existing predictions regarding global warming are true, why are you not embracing the most radical things you can." Because that's not the thing to do. What needs to be done is to get governments to work on the issue. One guy driving a prius helps in a minuscule way and does not solve the problem. It's a large scale problem that requires a large scale solution. "If you truly believe that the sea-level is going to drastically increase" It's not whether he personally believes it or not, it's what science is telling us. This has been said now dozens of times. "guys like Al Gore" Guys like Al Gore are simply digesting and relaying what the current scientific thinking on the subject says.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Dabob, it would have only been a strawman if I had indicated that this was your position or the general consensus position of the majority of those who are caught up in the hysteria.> It's a strawman because you posited it as a belief system that had a chance of taking hold, rather than a fringe set of beliefs that few hold. There's no danger of any of what you set out happening any time soon, if ever, so throwing it out there as some sort of threat amounts to creating a strawman argument. <But if you truly believe that the existing predictions regarding global warming are true, why are you not embracing the most radical things you can.> Partly because most of the people I respect suggesting solutions do not believe wholesale radical lifestyle changes are necessary. And partly because of what jon said. Steering the government towards finding large-scale solutions is a better use of energy (no pun intended). For example, it still impresses me that in only about a decade we were able to go from zero to a manned landing on the moon. We were able to do that because we committed as a nation to doing it. We devoted the best minds in science and tons of money to finding out how to do the seemingly impossible. And we went from failures and astronaut-killing explosions to "one small step for man" in a decade. I believe we should have a NASA-like project for the next decade devoted to finding clean energy solutions. If we REALLY devoted the best scientific minds in the country and tons of money to it, I have no doubt it could be done. And when we come out on the other side: 1). We slow down the human-created portion of global warming, hopefully to the point where it no longer is a problem; 2). We get ourselves weaned off foreign oil, and diminish the importance of oil worldwide, thus diminishing the influence of that volatile part of the world; 3). despite having spent billions of dollars on it, we come out saving many more billions down the road, as (presumably) we've created cars and electricity systems that are less expensive to the consumer, thus freeing up tons of capital and consumer disposable income; 4). We would lead the world in a technology the whole world will want, thus improving our standing in the world economy.
Originally Posted By jonvn "And we went from failures and astronaut-killing explosions to "one small step for man" in a decade." Armstrong and Aldrin almost got killed as they were landing on the moon. It was an extremely scary thing. There's actually a documentary floating around on cable this week or next about it. But they were like within a few seconds of dying.
Originally Posted By Rush is Right << But your premise remains wrong. Whatever the contribution of Greenland and Antarctica melting (and even your source says they are accelerating), the rise in sea level is a concern. >> If the polar caps are melting how come we have had no rise in sea level yet? How come Gore said the sea level was going to rise 20 feet and the UN had to admit the sea will only rise a few inches in years to come... like it has since the beginning of time? You people pushing these bogus scare tactices really need to get a life.
Originally Posted By Rush is Right <<It's not whether he personally believes it or not, it's what science is telling us.>> The science tells us nothing is really happening jonny. If we shut down every factory and destroyed all our cars today nothing would change temperature wise. Nothing. It was hotter in the 1930's and it was hotter in Medevil times. How could be jonny? You also have no clue about how they used to measure the temperature compared to how they measure it now. All of these things factor into the hysteria and lies that people like you try and push that WE are causing the earth to heat up. Total BS But you just go ahead and say the government should get involved so they can tax us and tell us what we can and can’t do. Really dude, your ignorance on this issue is very revealing about who you are.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Armstrong and Aldrin almost got killed as they were landing on the moon. It was an extremely scary thing. There's actually a documentary floating around on cable this week or next about it. But they were like within a few seconds of dying.> I've heard that too, but my point is that when we made a national commitment in money and brain power to solving a seemingly unsolvable problem, we got it done. Creating energy independence for ourselves (and eventually the rest of the world, thus undercutting the influence of middle eastern countries) is, IMO, at least as worthy a goal as putting a human on the moon - quite apart from global warming considerations. Meanwhile, it looks like the troll is back.
Originally Posted By jonvn "I believe we should have a NASA-like project" The best thing for us to do on this would be two fold. Both involving nuclear power. First, figure out what we can do with nuclear waste. That's the big sticking point for a lot of people, but not really me. Second, throw as much as we can into fusion energy research. If we can achieve that, we can effectively eliminate any energy problems, permanently. Solar, is fine. But the sun only produces about 100 watts of power per square yard or so. You can't run a lot of stuff with that, also, you have to look at the energy it takes to produce solar cells, and in fact any energy production technique. You have to be able to use far less energy to create the new energy. For instance, it takes energy to produce the solar cells, energy to put them in place and so on. Does the energy required to build them actually suck up more power than what a solar cell over the lifetime of that cell produce? This is the problem with hydrogen fuel cells. It takes more energy to produce than they save, so there is actually a net loss in savings. We don't have that with nuclear fission reactors, nor with fossil fuels. So those have become our energy sources of choice. France is energy independent, and gets 80% of their energy from nuclear power plants. We really need to emulate them and replace our coal burning plants with nukes. This is something we can start doing right away.
Originally Posted By jonvn "but my point is that when we made a national commitment in money and brain power to solving a seemingly unsolvable problem, we got it done" Yes, I know, and I posted above based on that point. I just wanted to point out something about what you mentioned that few people know, and I think makes their achievement all the more incredible and brave. It cheeses me off to no end when people think it was all faked. And I absolutely agree with you. We need to do that again. We're not. We're just sitting around with our fingers in our noses sucking up mideast oil and driving gas guzzlers (which is unpatriotic at this point, I think). Troll? Don't even acknowledge his existence. Report his posts, then post around them.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Solar, is fine. But the sun only produces about 100 watts of power per square yard or so.> That's with the present technology of solar cells. One thing this proposed NASA-like brain trust could look at is to invent a cell that creates more power than that per square foot (or eventually, one hopes, square inch). I don't believe 100 watts per square yard is the theoretical limit, just the current technology.
Originally Posted By jonvn I think that's what the sun produces. I could be wrong. I shall try to look this up.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Reality check, Beau: as quickly as your posts are getting deleted, no one but (literally) one or two people posting nearly simultaneously are reading them. I've already missed most of what you posted on other threads, just in the past 15 minutes. That's how fast they're disappearing. Just so you know.
Originally Posted By jonvn OK, I just found where it is 1 KW per square meter, and with current technology, we can convert about 25% of that. That's not a lot.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
