• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Climate Change vs Global Warming

aplusmnt

Well-known member
With record low temperatures this year it did not take long for Global Warming to turn into Climate Change. Saw twice today were the captions when people were talking about global warming read Climate Change problems.

I wonder how long the left will play out this hoax and how far will they sink America financially before they let it go? Scary thing is the future President buys this crap since all three left standing advocate doing something about Climate Change.

Bad enough the Government wants to control our lives as much as they do, but now they think they can play God and control the climate :mad:
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
It's not a hoax. The earth has been warming and getting colder in cycles since the BIG BANG. Even the magnetic poles have and will swap ends.

BUT....we, humans, since the days of Etheral, Ugh have ramped up this cycle.

This started with the first pollution.....be that methane from a fart from a crynoid in the ancient sea millions of yrs ago...to the smoke from caveman fires to the smoke from the chicken I just took off the grill.

The point is we've put too much junk in the air, ground and water and now it's catching up to us.

It's unavoidable . We need to start getting better control of what and how we waste products of all forms.
 

Hooks

Well-known member
smoke from the chicken I just took off the grill.


.......dang, and all I had for dinner was soup.........................

and as far as pollution..........nope ain't gonna start :roll: :lol:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
It's not a hoax. The earth has been warming and getting colder in cycles since the BIG BANG. Even the magnetic poles have and will swap ends.

BUT....we, humans, since the days of Etheral, Ugh have ramped up this cycle.

This started with the first pollution.....be that methane from a fart from a crynoid in the ancient sea millions of yrs ago...to the smoke from caveman fires to the smoke from the chicken I just took off the grill.

The point is we've put too much junk in the air, ground and water and now it's catching up to us.

It's unavoidable . We need to start getting better control of what and how we waste products of all forms.

Bull Crap!

It is impossible to know if things have been ramped up.

If mankind has ramped up the earth and caused Global Warming then who did the ramping on mars and is causing the record melting of ice caps on it? Or could it be the same solar flares causing both?

The earth has went through these same cycles before man or beast every walked on it.

Now I will agree that our water sources and littering of the land need to be kept better in check. Water shortage is a serious problem in areas. But man is not changing the climate, we just are not that powerful.

Do you think God created the earth for mankind but forgot to account for what they would do on it one day?
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
How hard is it understand that if you have a clean river at one point in history and then it catches on fire years later, that IS NOT a natural occurrence???


This happened to the Cuyahoga river many times.


DUH!!!!


Don't you see the land fills we have now.....try to drink the water that runs off the the pavement?


How can you not see pollution? One thing is linked to another. You can't be that simple and not aware. All this bluff and bluster of yours has to be a front for the ' boys' here on Ranchers.


I'd say God didn't realize what a bunch of azzholes and idiots would evolve also.

AND before you bury me with scripture quotes...."this ain't about religion"...it's about mankind being nasty and not keeping his own house clean.
 

cutterone

Well-known member
I don't have any proof about all the hydrocarbons but I do know the world and this country for instance was heavily covered with trees and they have a significant cooling and cleaning affect. The vast clearing of the Amazon has shown a drastic affect to that area.
We need to do better in any case and learn to conserve.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
cutterone said:
I don't have any proof about all the hydrocarbons but I do know the world and this country for instance was heavily covered with trees and they have a significant cooling and cleaning affect. The vast clearing of the Amazon has shown a drastic affect to that area.
We need to do better in any case and learn to conserve.


:agree: ,Call it global warming or call it anti global warming..either way its a wake up call that this once freash planet has become a tainted and mistreated mess....Why not stop worring what to call the problem and take the steps to fix it???
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
cutterone said:
I don't have any proof about all the hydrocarbons but I do know the world and this country for instance was heavily covered with trees and they have a significant cooling and cleaning affect. The vast clearing of the Amazon has shown a drastic affect to that area.
We need to do better in any case and learn to conserve.

It is sad that the Amazon is being destroyed.

But if you look at America, the tree huggers claim how many trees and forest have been destroyed, but they do not count man planted ones in the equation. I believe that there is actually more forest land now through conservation than there were say 50 years ago. But the tree huggers make it out the opposite, since they only count naturally grown forest.

I will have to try to find that info, since it has been a while since i read up on the forest. If I can find them I will post it.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
How hard is it understand that if you have a clean river at one point in history and then it catches on fire years later, that IS NOT a natural occurrence???


This happened to the Cuyahoga river many times.


DUH!!!!


Don't you see the land fills we have now.....try to drink the water that runs off the the pavement?


How can you not see pollution? One thing is linked to another. You can't be that simple and not aware. All this bluff and bluster of yours has to be a front for the ' boys' here on Ranchers.


I'd say God didn't realize what a bunch of azzholes and idiots would evolve also.

AND before you bury me with scripture quotes...."this ain't about religion"...it's about mankind being nasty and not keeping his own house clean.

I said I agreed with you in regards litter and clean water!

But litter and contaminated water can not be packaged in with Global warming! They are three separate issues!

The temperature of the planet is not affected by how many people throw their trash out the window, or how many sewers run into the lakes.

I hate when people try to equate keeping our planet clean with keeping from getting warmer.

The temperature of this planet is controlled by many sources and mans contribution is so small that this planet can absorb it. Heck most of the stuff they want limit actually helps them trees and plants to grow :roll:

Man is warming this planet about as much as man is warming Mars and melting their ice caps! Solar flares and normal cycles of climate is what is in play.

Disclaimer: I do want clean air, we do not need cities producing smog and being out of control, but we do not need any new EPA laws. America has reached a point of good control on emissions. Now lets clean up the land and water.

There is a balance of all things, and Global Warming Hoax is trying to sway the balance in the direction of those that will profit from it. It does not take a rocket scientist to see this, when the world spokesman for Global warming uses more energy and is responsible for more emissions personally than probably all of us actively using this website combined then it is easy to see something is wrong, it sure is one heck of a caution sign popping up.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
nonothing said:
cutterone said:
I don't have any proof about all the hydrocarbons but I do know the world and this country for instance was heavily covered with trees and they have a significant cooling and cleaning affect. The vast clearing of the Amazon has shown a drastic affect to that area.
We need to do better in any case and learn to conserve.


:agree: ,Call it global warming or call it anti global warming..either way its a wake up call that this once freash planet has become a tainted and mistreated mess....Why not stop worring what to call the problem and take the steps to fix it???

You have to know what the problem is to fix it. Is the problem the water? Or is it pollution? or is it destroying of land?

But as long as people believe the problem is Temperature related then we will be spinning our wheels and fixing all the wrong problems.

If you figure out a way to control the solar flares of the Sun please contact NASA because they will be interested in not only saving Earths ice caps but the ones melting on Mars also!

In the mean time, please do your part to keep land and water clean as I will, but do not try to impose taxation and increased financial burden on me or my family because you libs drink to much Kool-Aid!
 

Mike

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
cutterone said:
I don't have any proof about all the hydrocarbons but I do know the world and this country for instance was heavily covered with trees and they have a significant cooling and cleaning affect. The vast clearing of the Amazon has shown a drastic affect to that area.
We need to do better in any case and learn to conserve.

It is sad that the Amazon is being destroyed.

But if you look at America, the tree huggers claim how many trees and forest have been destroyed, but they do not count man planted ones in the equation. I believe that there is actually more forest land now through conservation than there were say 50 years ago. But the tree huggers make it out the opposite, since they only count naturally grown forest.

I will have to try to find that info, since it has been a while since i read up on the forest. If I can find them I will post it.

Looking at the NASA Landsat satellite images of the
deforestation rates in the Amazon rainforest, about 12.5 percent has
been cleared. Of the 12.5 percent, one half to one third of that is fallow,
or in the process of regeneration, meaning that at any given moment up to 94 percent of the Amazon is left to nature. Even the Environmental Defense Fun and Sting's Rainforest Foundation concede, among the fine print, that the forest is nearly 90 percent intact.
Philip Stott of the University of London and author of the new book,
"Tropical Rainforests: Political and Hegemonic Myth-making," maintains
that the environmental campaigns have lost perspective.
"One of the simple, but very important, facts is that the rainforests
have only been around for between 12,000 and 16,000 years," he says. "That sounds
like a very long time, but in terms of the history of the earth, it's
hardly a pinprick. The simple point is that there are now still -- despite what humans have done -- more rainforests today than there were 12,000 years ago."

http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/ag-forst/2000-July/015420.html
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Mike said:
aplusmnt said:
cutterone said:
I don't have any proof about all the hydrocarbons but I do know the world and this country for instance was heavily covered with trees and they have a significant cooling and cleaning affect. The vast clearing of the Amazon has shown a drastic affect to that area.
We need to do better in any case and learn to conserve.

It is sad that the Amazon is being destroyed.

But if you look at America, the tree huggers claim how many trees and forest have been destroyed, but they do not count man planted ones in the equation. I believe that there is actually more forest land now through conservation than there were say 50 years ago. But the tree huggers make it out the opposite, since they only count naturally grown forest.

I will have to try to find that info, since it has been a while since i read up on the forest. If I can find them I will post it.

Looking at the NASA Landsat satellite images of the
deforestation rates in the Amazon rainforest, about 12.5 percent has
been cleared. Of the 12.5 percent, one half to one third of that is fallow,
or in the process of regeneration, meaning that at any given moment up to 94 percent of the Amazon is left to nature. Even the Environmental Defense Fun and Sting's Rainforest Foundation concede, among the fine print, that the forest is nearly 90 percent intact.
Philip Stott of the University of London and author of the new book,
"Tropical Rainforests: Political and Hegemonic Myth-making," maintains
that the environmental campaigns have lost perspective.
"One of the simple, but very important, facts is that the rainforests
have only been around for between 12,000 and 16,000 years," he says. "That sounds
like a very long time, but in terms of the history of the earth, it's
hardly a pinprick. The simple point is that there are now still -- despite what humans have done -- more rainforests today than there were 12,000 years ago."

http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/ag-forst/2000-July/015420.html

Perfect example of why I should not ever believe the hype from the left. Seems they are inaccurate on about everything out there. I bought into the rain forest being destroyed at alarming rates even though I knew better about our local forest.

Thanks for reminding me to look into everything for myself.
 

hopalong

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
How hard is it understand that if you have a clean river at one point in history and then it catches on fire years later, that IS NOT a natural occurrence???


This happened to the Cuyahoga river many times.


DUH!!!!


Research is the best way to make a statement Kolouraven.\
How much research did you do on this river??http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-06/cwru-msc061704.php
And that is only one of many that shows it was not as bad as most would make it!!
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
kolanuraven said:
How hard is it understand that if you have a clean river at one point in history and then it catches on fire years later, that IS NOT a natural occurrence???


This happened to the Cuyahoga river many times.


DUH!!!!


Don't you see the land fills we have now.....try to drink the water that runs off the the pavement?


How can you not see pollution? One thing is linked to another. You can't be that simple and not aware. All this bluff and bluster of yours has to be a front for the ' boys' here on Ranchers.


I'd say God didn't realize what a bunch of azzholes and idiots would evolve also.

AND before you bury me with scripture quotes...."this ain't about religion"...it's about mankind being nasty and not keeping his own house clean.

I said I agreed with you in regards litter and clean water!

But litter and contaminated water can not be packaged in with Global warming! They are three separate issues!

The temperature of the planet is not affected by how many people throw their trash out the window, or how many sewers run into the lakes.

I hate when people try to equate keeping our planet clean with keeping from getting warmer.

The temperature of this planet is controlled by many sources and mans contribution is so small that this planet can absorb it. Heck most of the stuff they want limit actually helps them trees and plants to grow :roll:

Man is warming this planet about as much as man is warming Mars and melting their ice caps! Solar flares and normal cycles of climate is what is in play.

Disclaimer: I do want clean air, we do not need cities producing smog and being out of control, but we do not need any new EPA laws. America has reached a point of good control on emissions. Now lets clean up the land and water.

There is a balance of all things, and Global Warming Hoax is trying to sway the balance in the direction of those that will profit from it. It does not take a rocket scientist to see this, when the world spokesman for Global warming uses more energy and is responsible for more emissions personally than probably all of us actively using this website combined then it is easy to see something is wrong, it sure is one heck of a caution sign popping up.



You are SOOOOOOO wrong.

You speak of sewers.....let your crap pond back up... cover it up....wait a few days...then ck the temp. Ahhhh....haaaa warmer than the outside. And if the methane doesn't knock you on your keister first.

Garbage produces heat....heat evapors into the atmosphere.....


Geezzzz...I feel like I'm back teaching 8th grade earth science class.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
You are SOOOOOOO wrong.

You speak of sewers.....let your crap pond back up... cover it up....wait a few days...then ck the temp. Ahhhh....haaaa warmer than the outside. And if the methane doesn't knock you on your keister first.

Garbage produces heat....heat evapors into the atmosphere.....


Geezzzz...I feel like I'm back teaching 8th grade earth science class.

You are splitting hairs, garbage at dumps are not causing the ice caps to melt. Lots of thing produce heat. Don't tell me you are one of those that believe the cows are causing the Temperature to rise?

You are really grasping to prove a point that is unprovable.

You still have to answer the question on who is dumping trash then on Mars, why is them ice caps melting? You think them martians are not being good stewards of their planet or could it be that the solar flares are causing both planets ice caps to melt?

I know lets blame it on the Martians instead of the humans, maybe we can get them to pay a carbon tax? :wink:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Kolouraven if you really understod 8 th grade science you would be familiar with this natural act!!!!


SWAMP GAS

Swamp gas has been known by several names: ignis fatuus, will-o’-the-wisp, corpse candles, jack-o’-lantern, and marsh gas. A multitude of reliable references to and descriptions of this natural phenomenon have been found in prestigious journals such as Nature, Edinburgh Philosophical Journal, and Symons Monthly Meteorological Magazine. Some of these references are global in scope and span the years from the 19th century to modern times.[1]



Characteristically, swamp gas is found in peat bogs, mud flats, marshes, and swamps—wherever stagnant water coincides with the decay of organic matter. The following reference demonstrates a typical observation:



“The water of the marsh is ferruginous, and covered with an iridescent crust. During the day bubbles of air were seen rising from it, and in the night blue flames were observed shooting from and playing over its surface. As I suspected that there was some connection between these flames and the bubbles of air, I marked during the day-time the place where the latter rose up most abundantly, and repaired thither during the night; to my great joy I actually observed bluish-purple flames, and did not hesitate to approach them. On reaching the spot they retired, and I pursued them in vain; all attempts to examine them closely were ineffectual. On another day, in the twilight, I went to the place, where I waited the approach of night; the flames became gradually visible, but redder than formerly, thus showing that they burnt also during the day; I approached nearer and they retired. Convinced that they would return again to their place of origin, when the agitation of the air ceased, I remained stationary and motionless, and observed them again gradually approach. As I could easily reach them, it occurred to me to attempt to light paper by means of them, but for some time I did not succeed in this experiment, which I found was owing to my breathing. I therefore held my face from the flame, and also interposed a piece of cloth as a screen; on doing which I was able to singe paper, which became brown-colored, and covered with a viscous moisture. I next used a narrow slip of paper, and enjoyed the pleasure of seeing it take fire. The gas was evidently flammable, and not a phosphorescent one, as some have maintained. But how do these lights originate?”[2]



Indeed, how do they originate? In spite of all the observations made of this natural oddity, it remains a puzzle to science. Assumptions have always been made that methane (CH4), a odorless, colorless, and highly flammable gas, is the primary constituent of swamp gas. In nature, swamp gas results from the breakdown of fats, cellulose, and proteins by anaerobic bacteria (those not requiring oxygen) in mud and sediment on the marsh floor. The gas is lighter than air and will burn with a pale blue or yellow flame. At a stagnant pool, bubbles of swamp gas can be induced to ignite with a lighted match. The gas will burn with a brief flame and often emit a ‘pop’ like report.



Bored with the chemistry yet? Cheer up, it gets worse.



The fabled will-o’-the-wisp and jack-o’-lantern are said to be manifestations of swamp gas. However, since methane does not ignite spontaneously, we suddenly find that this phenomenon of nature has become more phenomenal. Sounds redundant, doesn’t it? Well, it’s not nearly as redundant as using a mystery to explain away other mysteries. So, to account for the will-o’-the-wisp how does the gas ignite to provide the necessary flame? A misconception occasionally stated in chemistry texts and books dealing with these phenomena is that the spontaneous ignition of methane could result from the additional presence of phosphine (PH3) in the swamp gas. Phosphine (phosphorus trihydride), a highly poisonous gas also evolved from waterlogged soils, results from the decay of protein, bone, and other phosphate-bearing matter. Interestingly, pure phosphine is not self-igniting either. In order for it to spontaneously inflame, it must be contaminated with a small amount of phosphorous tetrahydride (P2H4). Recently, however, some of these “given” operating conditions for swamp gas have been challenged in the laboratory. Demonstrations have shown that if the tetrahydride-bearing phosphine is injected into a stream of methane—and if self-ignition occurs—the resultant flame will be a bright green color, accompanied by copious smoke and a distinct odor. Nevertheless, despite these findings, it is generally agreed that jack-o’-lanterns do not produce stinking, green contrails. Accordingly, laboratory experiments devoted to the synthesis of self-igniting swamp gas have, thus far, been unsuccessful. In fact, recent tests using soil/phosphate mixtures have evolved flammable, though not self-igniting gasses. Additionally, in the same series of experiments, vapor phase chromatography (a sensitive analysis technique) failed to detect even part-per-million traces of phosphine in the laboratory samples.[3]



The final analysis of this little chemistry lesson infers that in spite of “established facts” and learned opinions on the subject, much remains unclear about the evolution and characteristics of swamp gas in Nature. Furthermore, if the technicalities are still so vague, then perhaps more reservation should be exercised before swamp gas is assigned as the explanation for so many nocturnal luminous phenomena.



*********
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
kolanuraven said:
It's not a hoax. The earth has been warming and getting colder in cycles since the BIG BANG. Even the magnetic poles have and will swap ends.

BUT....we, humans, since the days of Etheral, Ugh have ramped up this cycle.

This started with the first pollution.....be that methane from a fart from a crynoid in the ancient sea millions of yrs ago...to the smoke from caveman fires to the smoke from the chicken I just took off the grill.

The point is we've put too much junk in the air, ground and water and now it's catching up to us.

It's unavoidable . We need to start getting better control of what and how we waste products of all forms.

Bull Crap!

It is impossible to know if things have been ramped up.

If mankind has ramped up the earth and caused Global Warming then who did the ramping on mars and is causing the record melting of ice caps on it? Or could it be the same solar flares causing both?

The earth has went through these same cycles before man or beast every walked on it.

Now I will agree that our water sources and littering of the land need to be kept better in check. Water shortage is a serious problem in areas. But man is not changing the climate, we just are not that powerful.

Do you think God created the earth for mankind but forgot to account for what they would do on it one day?

Aplus, There's no doubt that man is just not capable of the destruction that the meteor did.

But man has indeed ramped things up. Man has been extremely wasteful of resources too. Some precious and some not.

After the meteor and the ice age the world sort of evolved into the current climate cycles, which have swung themselves naturally. We are located just so from the sun and receive just so much radiant heat, rotate on the 24 hour cycle versus say 50 hours etc. Part of the current swing is just natural and part of it isn't.

Al Gore is just arrogant enough to say he invented the 24 hour rotation of the earth and so forth. If a day was 25 hours long, things would be extremely warmer and the cool of the nights would be about the same at day break. The extra heat would create extra water vapor in the atmosphere. That would create more rain and lightening. More lightening would create more ozone etc. etc.

Lightening is what creates ozone. If all ozone is completely destroyed, it will eventually get back to about the same level it currently is, just based on the 24 hour rotation and our distance from the sun and lightening. If we are hit by another meteor, all things change as does the potential earth rotation, axis and everything else - including ozone levels.

You have to logically sort out the Al Gore sky is falling story, which is not much different than the Y2K scare or other BS we have heard most of our lives, and scientific facts.

Do you remember back about '75 or so when they told us we would not have petroleum after 1983? Were they not saying the earth only has about 8 years left and the last few gallons will be worth well over $100 a gallon? 50 cents a gallon didn't seem so bad after hearing that.

We simply need to be smart. We need to be good stewards of the environment. We need to pass on something workable to our future generations. We need to ignore folks who run around screaming that the sky is falling. There is no need to start worrying about Y3K or stocking up and hording groceries and supplies just yet. It is a long way off. :)
 

Latest posts

Top