Global warming is old news...

[Quakken]

But i actually believe the thing about the beef making gases. I wouldn't say CO2, but 10% of all methane is made by cows. Maybe CO2. But i'm not a cowologist.

The fact is that neither side can come up with any definitive evidence. "the earth is getting hotter". Prove it. "We are killing the earth". Prove it. Whatever. Think what you want i suppose.

[calumc]

the thing with all that stuff with cows, etc. is that our planet has evolved to be able to cope with those gases in one way or another but what it cant cope with is what we are doing: creating more gases by destroying the things that can neutralise them eg trees

[Quakken]

And taking stuff that the earth usually wouldn't burn (fossil fuels) and throwing the extra CO2 in the atmosphere, which the earth's natural such and such can't cope with either.

[Stockholm1984]

I see this went on a little longer after I went to bed. Lol! Regarding the farm animal side of it, the main problem warming-wise is the methane released as it is a far more potent insulator than CO2. And in a serious question, have any of you guys ever seen the graph plotting CO2 levels vs global average temperature over the last 200yrs or so? Was pretty conclusive evidence for me.

[.jrauck]

I do believe the earth is killing itself but also we are also helping it. Not to mention over crowding with trash and people.

Why not try to prevent something from happening if it doesn't cost much more and if we have the technolodgy.

[DaveW]

Don't be stupid, the earth is not killing itself. If anything, it's trying to regain balance by wiping US out.

I've handed out a few +Reps already for points and counter points, more to come if this is kept civilized!

-Dave

[progbuddy]

I had Jello today.

Lucky you. I had pop-tarts.

[Stockholm1984]

Why not try to prevent something from happening if it doesn't cost much more and if we have the technolodgy.

We do have the technology we're just too tight to use it (directed at both US and UK governments). For example, on the south coast of the UK a few miles west of Brighton there was an old, disused power station that they wanted to re-instate into the national grid. Now this building was right on the coast and would have been the obvious location for a new wave power plant which would release practically zero CO2. Unfortunately this idea was deemed too expensive so they built a gas fired power station instead. I realise this is much preferable to a coal or oil fired but talk about a wasted opportunity!!

I have to be honest though and say that, for the short term until we have improved the efficiency of options such as wind, solar and wave power I think the only option we have is nuclear if we really are going to stop a climatic disaster. After studying both the benefits and the cons (ie. incidents such as Chernobyl and realising how much was down to stupidity) I feel that it is a much more viable option than I used to. I've stood on top of all of the reactor waste produced in the UK since the start of the nuclear program in the 50s on a visit to Sellafield and it was tiny! It's worth a thought anyway...

[XcOM]

i second that, nuke is the way to go, i think this is the only option we have, we ask for wind farms, they getr denyed, the damage the view, river/tubines no - damage the river life.

Wave machiens - no to expencive,

but when we go to the moon in 2017, we may have a power source that will produce next to no emmisions, we just need to get it back here, called H3.

[XcOM]

H3?? The mini-hummer???

GUAT IS THIS H3 YOU SPEK OOF.

enough of the madness, i know your name dipices and requests this of you, but :
Linky