nas90 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Just been reading an article in New Scientist which makes interesting reading and the fuel that my V8 uses and subsequently sheds as CO2 is grossly insignificant compared to what is happening to the frozen bogs of Siberia! If you thought that global warming would not affect you in your lifetime, this report has some calculations (which if correct) could change that view! Go here sorry it's not clicky http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=...=mg18725124.500 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeryDisco Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Personally I think the government should ban all siberean peat bogs from thawing. How are ramblers expected to walk across if the ice has melted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark90 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 How do they differentiate man made global warming from the fact that in geoglogical terms we're only just coming out of the last ice age and hence everything is warming up anyway? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
02GF74 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 How do they differentiate man made global warming from the fact that in geoglogical terms we're only just coming out of the last ice age and hence everything is warming up anyway? Pretty sure I saw on Telly graphs showing average termperature, C02 or some other stuff over a period of several centruies and both show them increasing since about 19 century, the rate of increase increasing ever more - reasons given are industrial revolution and current ever increasing fosil fuel consumption; seems a bit more than just coincidence? Can't we just dump old fridges in the Siberian peat bogs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LR90 Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 I was with our photovoltaic group today and they have records going back many years. This seems to support the theory that airborne particulate polution which is now being effectively reduced has been further masking the global warming impact. So the problem may actually be bigger than initially thought. The other interresting feature noted is that the periods of low radiation have become longer are now maybe twice as long as they used to be in the 50's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fisha Posted August 17, 2005 Share Posted August 17, 2005 Mark, your right to an extent. the records do tend to show a general increase in temp and CO2 since the last ice age which would correlate with the general melt theory. however the records also show the levels rocketing almost straight up in the last couple of hundred years....kida like | | / | / | / | / | ...........-------------````````````` |_______________________________________________> ice age 19th Cent LR90 called global dimming aint it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg S Posted August 18, 2005 Share Posted August 18, 2005 Science type program on TV a week or so ago was about CO2 and global warming. It suggests that due to the present amount of CO2 in the atmosphere, grasslands are prolific and forests aren't growing as well. They have very good data to support this. They think this is happening because the CO2 level is LOWER than it should be and LOWER than it was in the past. CO2 is, of course, plant food. Go figure eh? Next they'll be telling us that salt on our food isn't bad for us! (Oh, they already did.) Or that margerine isn't really better for us than butter. (Oops, they already did.) Well, at least no scientist will ever tell us that beer is good for us. (You say they already have? And wine too!!!) I give up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.