Quote by shinsengumi
Quote by AcyxI'm going to laugh my "liberal environmentalist" ass off
when the polar ice caps finally do melt, and Texas becomes a new addition to the continental shelf residing under three
hundred plus feet of water. All because you thought it would be "bad policy" to enact a few pro-environmental
regulations on emissions of carbon dioxide and other chemical which you seem more than happy with belching into the
atmosphere.
Tell you what, when all this finally does come to fruition, and your home and subsequent ranch becomes an artificial
reef that supports dozens of fish and invertebrate species, I want you to come find me, and when you do, I want you to
look me in the eye, and tell me in these words verbatim: "We fucked up."
Ah, Acyx. You are
indeed fond of your sensationalist distopian scenarios, aren't you?
Sure, humans certainly contribute to the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, but you forget that nature itself
has a significant part to play when it comes to global warming. Water vapor, for example, is by far the most abundant
greenhouse gas, and humans have no direct effect on nor control over levels of water vapor in the atmosphere. Climate
change is a natural process of our world, and there is substantial evidence that the current upward trend in average
temperatures may be due primarily from natural processes. I do not deny that anthropogenic greenhouse gases have an
added effect, but I do want to point out that even if all anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions were to end today,
global warming would still continue.
Quote by AcyxAs far as being
supported only by "idiotic idealists" goes, over 158 countries as of September of last year have ratified the
Kyoto protocol, (of these are nearly the entirety of Europe, Asia, Russia, South America, Indonesia, etc.) of which the
U.S. and Australia are the noteworthy exceptions within the developed world. Roughly 61% of the planet emissions are
contained in that sum that have already ratified the protocol, and none of them have yet gone bankrupt as a result.
Seems that we're almost all alone (With exception to Australia), why not hop on a bandwagon that supports a worthy
cause instead of obeying your pundits as if their words were of God himself, hmm? Or would that be too much to
ask?
Hmm, I wonder why that could possibly be. It couldn't be because most of the countries who
have signed the Kyoto protocol haven't really done anything about their emissions and only signed it for political
reasons, could it? A worthy cause is one thing, but a misguided strategy towards a worthy cause is something else
entirely.
Furthermore, the Kyoto Protocol is anything but the end-all-be-all of emissions control. You have conveniently ignored
all of the existing programs in the United States, many of which are managed by the EPA, which have proven very
effective. These voluntary and often incentive-based programs (things ranging from Energy Star on down to Methane to
Markets) have actually done more to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses than the efforts of most signatories to the
Kyoto Protocol.
This thread, however, is not about global warming. It is instead about the substance of the President's State of
the Union address, so if you would like to discuss global warming and climate change, there are perhaps better venues
for such a debate.
For the sake of continuity of the argument, I'm placing this here for the moment being, if I follow it up, it will
be in an alternate thread.
Come to think of it, I do have a favorite dystopia. I'm sure you've heard of Warhammer 40,000 and the
description given for Terra (Earth) in the 41st millennium? A brown-stained, foul orb so polluted that the indigenous
lifeforms have either substantially mutated to avoid extinction or have all but died out, as does it also leave a
cohesive trail of smog behind itself in orbit. Sounds like where we're heading alright..
If I remember my environmental chemistry correctly, water vapor is indeed the primary greenhouse gas comprising some
seventy percentile of the overall gaseous makeup, it is however not directly influenced by human activity. Carbon
Dioxide, being the primary gas involved in trapping and radiating heat from waves of Infared light unlike water vapor is
influenced by human activity, and when given a substantial amount more reactants, the effect is amplified. For example,
volcanic activity alone releases some 130-230 teragrams of Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere yearly, this is however
equivalent to roughly one percent of the amount released by human activities within the same span of time.
What I mentioned about the polar ice caps melting is not sensationalist at all, scientists have known of there being
large ozone holes at the polar regions for years now, and have documented recession of ice shelves in Antarctica as well
as large holes in what would normally be solid ice in the north. According to calculation, if the poles were to melt,
there would actually be around three hundred extra feet worth of water on top of the oceans that are already present,
which are for now stored as ice in the polar regions themselves. So far, water levels worldwide have risen from 9 to 88
cm, and of course as time drags on, the effect will become more pronounced.
Now, I admit that I should have taken more time with the prior post, It was rushed. It is however partly natural
process, and also due to human intervention in the form of artificially generated greenhouse gases that we are seeing,
and that are responsible for the problem of global warming. Yes, the global warming trend would continue even if all the
emissions were stopped due to the average lifespan of a carbon dioxide molecule in an atmosphere, which is I believe
fifteen years or more
(-Couldn't find an exact figure.-). Although as the levels of anthropogenically generated gases decreased in the
long run, so too would several of the negative effects of global warming decrease in overall severity.
Kyoto is not a fix-all, agreed, although it is obviously a step in the right direction for at least a partial repair to
the problem with our reliance on fossil fuels for power and transportation emissions. The Energy star and EPA
regulations also do little to change the fact that as a country, the U.S. is the number one emitter of Carbon Dioxide
and other greenhouse gases with a near twenty three percent (~ 5,844,042 thousand mts yearly) of the worldwide total.
For a completely natural climate change to have come now, after we as a species have dumped countless (figuratively)
teragrams upon teragrams of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere over the last half-century seems awfully convenient, if
not downright preposterous. Perhaps I need to start checking my scientists for that extra wad of cash from the energy,
coal mining, and oil companies?
The theory that this is natural climate change alone is a hoax, a vicious and fabricated hoax seeded by the few
who'd rather asphyxiate this planet to death than take a loss in profits from having to resort to cleaner air
standards, and the bribed scientists who reached similar conclusions in lieu of little more than personal monetary
gain.
-Acyx