Yay cleaning the air is going to kill us ALL


Isn't the world a great place to live?

haha

I guess the only solution now is space colonies. Better get cracking there NASA!

So... now we're going to see hippies lobbying for diesel engines in cars?

It's pretty funny, but there is some air pollution that actually promotes cooling. CFCs are one.

In the short run, yes, getting the air cleaner will produce an adnormal reversed effect. But in the long run, it'll stabalize and return to where it was prior to the industrial revolution.

The effect is so complex, it's very easy for the data to be misleading if all factors are not taken into consideration. Sceintist event admit that more research is needed. This will end up being like everything else. There are numerous issues out there that every 5 years or so they tell you it's "bad" then they tell you it's "good" then it's "bad" again, etc. Overall, however, anyone who argues that cleaning the air isn't better for our health is a moron.

Or maybe you don't know everything. Take that one into consideration. May be hard for you to swallow, but think about it.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Or maybe you don't know everything. Take that one into consideration. May be hard for you to swallow, but think about it.[/QUOTE]

Anybody that has a rational mind could tell you that this article (and the Scientist's research therein) is relating to only one aspect of the "pollution v. clean air" issue.

But of course, that would be too obvious for you to pick up on...

Or you could just explain the other aspects instead of being so vague, acting like you know what you're talking about.

[QUOTE=Dj Yoshi]Or you could just explain the other aspects instead of being so vague, acting like you know what you're talking about.[/QUOTE]

Or you could glance back at the article, take note of what aspect they are referring to, then research the general topic to find out more information on the issue as a whole. I'm not a research assistant. I put in my 2 cents to encourage people who are really interested in the subject to look into in further. Why should I sit here and give you a "Cliffs Note's" version of the issue if you're not really interested in the subject matter anyway and you are just using this thread for your own personal "spotlight"?

I'm not really sure what you're out to prove on the internet, Dj Yoshi.

Translation:

"I don't know what I'm talking about."

I rest my case.

Damned if we do or... damned if we do.

The Earth's temperature is cyclic and we are currently at the peak of the cycle. The temperature will go down naturally.

Sorry everyone, I left my heater on in the garage. I'll turn it off.

How could anyone know if we were at the peak? That doesn't seem logical.

Because global warming is a liberal conspiracy. Obviously.

I came in here looking for a catch 22 and found none. I DEMAND A CATCH 22!

You can only make the air better by not polluting, but by doing so, it gets worse

That doesn't quite work. "Better" for what? "Cleaner air" is the product of cutting down polution, but not "better air."

According to research done by the government (which was cited by Steven Chu, a professor at Standford and the current director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, in his presentation on global warming and the looming energy crisis: http://www.lbl.gov/nanohigh/assets/chu_nanohigh_10_29_05.pdf). I'm not sure exactly how they went about proving this sort of thing, but I'm pretty sure the methodology is similar to carbon dating.

Chu's presentation is good by the way; I saw it at Princeton not too long ago.

ORLY?

why don't you make the catch, eh? EH? TOUGH GUY?

Because I can't read and catch 22's lack pictures?

your version of the forums is in picture form?

Now that you mention it, O' Reilly would say something like that.

You mean Milankovitch Cycles.

The simple answer is that we don't know enough to say whether we're at the peak of a cycle or not. The problem is is that in addition to the cycle we're also increasing the temperature of the Earth artificially with excess amounts of greenhouse gas so it's changing to rapidly and ecosystems are having a tough time adapting in such a short period of time.

Yours isn't?

Don't worry guys, we're screwed anyway. Whether it be by geological means, or our own hands, a sizeable chunk of our population is going to go poof.

Well... we have ice core samples. I don't imagine that's very reliable though. Really though, this whole thing is stupid. Scientists going "ZOMG we're going to fry because teh earth gained one average degree Celsius over teh last hundred years!!11one" are not really scientists. There is not enough information to draw any conclusion there. Too much extrapolation. Things vary. The fact that only 2-3% of CFC's in the air are man is something else to consider. If we had a major volcanic eruption tomorrow, we'd see a dramatic increase in CFCs and stuff. I think I heard some where the Mount St. Helens put more pollution into the air than humans have since the industrial revolution. Don't quote me on it though.

The thing about 1 average degree is that the warming isn't 1 degree across the board. The tropics aren't going to really be affected that much, so it turns in to a few degrees further to the north or south, and that's a big difference in a colder climate.




There's a lot of data out there. A lot of it is from ice cores that have air bubbles in them. They can measure the CO2 content in the air and estimate the temperature at a point in time (based on how deep the core is).

The data kind of looks like a sine wave, with the temperature having peaks and troughs over a long period of time, but there are smaller waves on the big wave, and smaller waves on the smaller waves as there are 10,000 year cylces, 1000 year cycles, 100 year cycles, etc when it comes to the Earth's average temperature.

A lot of people seem to disregard that the Earth has been a lot warmer in the past than it is now. I don't doubt that people have had a effect on global warming, but it's really stupid to think that we can actually make a huge impact on the global warming issue.

Either way, I totally don't give a rat's ***.

I always thought this was an interesting graphic.