Oh, for heaven's sake.

Aug 10, 2007 18:56

Okay, I've had to clear this up for one person on my friends list already, so I'm going to do this as a post so everyone can see it. And no. I am NOT putting this behind a cut ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 13

nesf August 10 2007, 19:15:51 UTC
*shrugs*

Conversely it's not as straightforward as some environmentalists like to make it. It is happening but exactly why it is happening isn't so clear. Which particular gases are the culprits etc.

Reply

granite_lullaby August 10 2007, 19:28:11 UTC
True, but at the moment I'm trying to tackle the "it's a myth" brigade. Gotta start at the bottom and work up . . .

Reply

nesf August 10 2007, 21:45:50 UTC
Yeah, but since you didn't use a cut I decided to pick holes... ;)

Reply

jimmynohands August 11 2007, 00:25:11 UTC
Ummm... Good ol' CO2. The predictions are all over the place, and precisely how much is our fault is debatable, but the mechanism is well known.

Reply


pennfana August 10 2007, 22:53:39 UTC
You've summed it up wonderfully. Unfortunately, I know way too many people who prefer to live in denial. Still, even they can't deny that although a decade ago it was highly unusual for us to have temperatures over 30 degrees Celsius in Sault Ste. Marie, days where the temperature's gone up to 35 degrees Celsius or higher haven't exactly been rare this year (or last year, for that matter). The water levels in Lake Superior are dropping and nobody claims to know why, but there've been suggestions that it's likely that it's at least partially because the local weather's warmed up enough that the lake doesn't freeze over as quickly in the winter, therefore allowing more of it to evaporate. Ten years ago, it was highly unusual for us to have more than a few days in the summer when the air was hazy; these days, it's highly unusual for there not to be a haze. Given what's been happening even just around here in the Sault, I don't understand how they can possibly deny that something's up ( ... )

Reply


kashback August 10 2007, 23:04:35 UTC
You're a wonderful man.

Reply

granite_lullaby August 11 2007, 06:22:28 UTC
*eyebrow*

Do I detect a hint of sarcasm?

Reply

kashback August 11 2007, 14:18:20 UTC
Nope, not even a drop. I absolutely agree with everything you say. Several people I work with have decided to take their cue from a TV show that distorted the whole topic, over years of collated scientific evidence.

Idiots.

Reply


jimmynohands August 11 2007, 00:30:45 UTC
Venus is only 20% closer to the sun than the Earth; yet it is hotter than Mercury. Why? Speculation says because it never developed large bodies of water to act as carbon sinks, and any that was locked in carbonate rock was baked out as the oven heated up. Venus has roughly the same volume of carbon as Earth has.

Reply


msfg August 12 2007, 07:35:39 UTC
I am totally with you on this one also. I too have to deal with eejits on a daily basis re. environmentalism and global warming. People do so love to bury their heads in the proverbial sand when the truth becomes inconvenient.

My biggest bugbear is the huge focus on carbon and the ignoring of other greenhouse gases (particularly methane) when IMHO we collectively need to be tackling all of them. All the publicity and CO2 calculators and that sort of thing don't take it into account so are painting a misleading picture.

Reply

granite_lullaby August 12 2007, 12:59:54 UTC
Well, methane's a carbon gas too (CH4), so I'd say a carbon focus would be good, but not a carbon dioxide focus.

Reply

msfg August 12 2007, 13:01:19 UTC
My science-fu is weak, but you get my point :-D

Reply


Leave a comment

Up