|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:34 pm
The frequent and violent hurricanes across the world, the melting Ice Caps, the wildbrushfires spreading like wildfire. All these things point to one thing: Global Warming is here, and its ready to slap mankind senseless. Hell, even some of the most ardent Republicans are trying to make Earth a better place
The question is this: is this nature's course, man's own doing, or both, and is there anything we can do about it?
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 8:47 pm
I think that it's man's doing. The world's temperature should be going down, leading to a new ice age, but it's going up instead because of the carbon monoxide and other such things that man has put into the air.
Thus, it is Man's fault.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 1:13 am
Global Warming is an ongoing process, not a set, fixed date as implied. I also ask for proof that the hurricanes and brushfires are exact indicators, for i've heard quite a little around. The whole magnetic pole shift of Earth, for example, could be starting up.
However, yes, I do believe that this process of global warming is our own fault.
As for Spiffy's notion of the temperature, there are a few scientists who believe that the Earth is still gradually pulling out of an ice age, and that the real temperature of Earth is quite a bit higher. Therefore, this could also explain away global warming: the temperature should be rising as it is.
It doesn't help that we're using all those CFCs and the ilk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 5:16 am
I would believe it is both a natural process and a man-made process. By that I mean, the earth's temperature heats up naturally over thousands of years. However, we are just speeding up the process.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 2:51 pm
i say let it happen. just maybe minimize our uses of fossil fuels and such. but we need a lot of the human kind to be killed off. theres too many of us! and with less people the employment rate goes up and the number of people struggling for food, water, shelter, and clothing would decrease.
3nodding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:14 am
mmm-mmm-good i say let it happen. just maybe minimize our uses of fossil fuels and such. but we need a lot of the human kind to be killed off. theres too many of us! and with less people the employment rate goes up and the number of people struggling for food, water, shelter, and clothing would decrease. 3nodding I feel the same way with the HIV/AIDS epidemic. Sure, sounds cold and mean, but maybe the two diseases came about as a means of population control? The same with the lobola disease where your innards literally get put in a mixer on the highest speed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 3:54 am
mmm-mmm-good i say let it happen. just maybe minimize our uses of fossil fuels and such. but we need a lot of the human kind to be killed off. theres too many of us! and with less people the employment rate goes up and the number of people struggling for food, water, shelter, and clothing would decrease. 3nodding The world is NOT overpopulated. Look at population densities around the world and you'll see what I mean. There's enough space for all of the world's population and more, even considering farming space and allotted building. The problem we have is that we have not built enough resource areas (ie, farms, water treatment facilities). Instead, the world seems a little more preoccupied with oversized golf landscapes, theme parks, and various other frivilous places. --- As for population control, that's a whole new topic. To add to it, however, I couldn't say at all. HIV/AIDS could have been around since the Renaissance and before. The problem is, we wouldn't have recognised it back then. It would just be an 'unexplained death'. Hence, it wouldn't be a means of population control at all. We didn't have massive industries eating up fossil fuels back then, nor was the Earth's population anywhere NEAR problematic. War, however, is the best method of population control: I am not an advocate of modern war.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 6:40 am
Tailos is correct. I have discussed this in another thread when a girl used overpopulation to justify abortion. The world is not overpopulated, merely densely(sp?) populated in some areas while scarcely populated or unpopulated in others.
I believe GW is the result of nature taking it's course, while man is merely accelerating it. HIV/AIDS is not pop. control, merely because it's a disease that's been running around for ages. As long as humans were exchanging bodily fluids frequently and carelessly, there has been AIDS, just not in this modern age's magnitude.
War is indeed the best human population growth buffer. That and eating problems, wether it's lack of eating or eating disorders.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 7:15 am
Well, if I go back to the original subject of the post, global warming, all un-paid-by-mega-gas-corporates scientists agree that the impact is most felt in our poles rather than in our mostly populated areas.
This "winter" (quotation marks added since winters consist of snow and snow storms and moderate cold...and this winter had next to no such things), confused many inuits (those folks that live in the artic). Some of their house fell under the ice...house build on the permafrosted ground that stood for years before, polar bears have been attacking them more frequently since they dont have seal to hunt for anymore on the banks (sp?), because there are no more ice banks for the seals to mate or give birth. This is forcing the inuit population to kill the bears, already having trouble with it's survival from the latest years, since their whole surroundings are changing and cant adapt as fast (just like the neanderthal man in the ice age that fell at the coming of the global warming of that time). Seals, if I may go back, now give birth on the fe beaches present...and their youngs get grasped by the coming waves and end up in the water, defenseless, incapable of swimming, cold...they die. Reducing the population of seals. There are more than these 2 species of animals that are getting affected; for examples, artic now has insects: yup, you heard me, insects. Inuits are overwhelmed by the idea of mosquitos and hornets. They hurt, and they had no idea. Diseases are hitting them harder, since the cold is not inhibiting some bacterias from growing. Our great Canadian forests of the North (I am talking mostly about Canada, the country I live in and is most aware of towards these GW changes), are getting destroyed since ravaging insects like termites can freely wander there now, with no natural predators.
The neanderthal has been speculated to have disappeared because of the warming of the ice age that was much too quick for it to adapt, and he fell, leaving the homo sapien sapiens to populate the world in it's place...
I could go on and on, but it would start to get ranting, and I dont like ranting unless I have someone else against me, so I can crush their hopes and dreams in person...ABOUGAGAGANOU! ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:23 am
Global warming is partially inevitable, as we are technically in an ice age right now. The earth goes through a pattern of ice age -> non-ice age, and since it has been colder in the past, it would follow that, because of the earth's rotation and such, we would get warmer.
However, there is also a man-made aspect. The steady flow of pollution reduces our ozone, which makes temperatures rise. I have heard that a volcano eruption causes more of the things that reduce ozone than all of human industrial activity, but still, volcanoes aren't dependant on ozone for existance, so it's not so stupid. >.<
Too bad: we're all fairly liberal, so no one is opposing anyone.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:23 pm
There are always fires, pollution, drought, and floods. What makes me laugh is simply the fact that people have the gall to be SURPRISED when a heavily wooded area that is full of brittle and dry wood catches fire. Or they're surprised when they get their yearly hurricane.
It's like being surprised that an earthquake happens if you live on top of the San Andreas fault.
And believe me, pollution is not just from man-made sources.
Volcanos and other geothermal activity spews millions of cubic tons of pollution into our atmosphere each month.
Oxygen, the thing we use to breathe, was originally a poisonous gas on our planet, and yet now it's everywhere, but we wouldn't say that's a bad thing.
The bottom line is that sadly, we only care about bad things happening to our world when they happen to us, screw up our quality of life. People only talk about starving kids in Uganda to make their kids eat their veggies, but beyond that, most people just don't care, because it's not sitting in their backyard, and when it is, they tell them to "get a goddamn job" or get pissed that people can't "pull themselves up by the bootstraps" and start making sweeping raical and socioeconomic generalizations and start saying that "people like that" should be shot, killed, sterilized, shot to the moon, etc.
Face it, humans exist to complain and covet the things that their "neighbors" have.
But perhaps we MUST "destroy" this world (ie: change it irreversably from the way it is today) in order to escape the Earth before the sun blows up to red giant and engulfs our planet. Heaven knows that it will eventually be destroyed and wipe out all life on it eventually.
The question is, do we just want to sit here and do nothing about it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:57 am
That's one of the good things about living in South Africa...there's like a very slim chance that one will experience a natural disaster of any kind. The closest I got to a natural disaster was two mine tremours (I live about 5 kilometres from an old gold reef mine). And my mother said there was a small hurricane in a lake about 10 km away from where I stay too, but it only caused damage to five houses? Mainly by removal of their roofs?
That's about all the natural disasters I have ever "experienced"? The only disaster we may experience is insect plagues or something I guess with the mass flock of ants trying to mate? And once we were driving to Zimbabwe and we drove over a mass migration of mpani worms?
Damn...I guess why I understand why people think that the continuity presenters are celebrities seeing as nothing real interesting happens here ninja
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
