Global Warming: Scientific fact or urban legend?

[__earth]

Malaysians are pretty quiet on this issue. So, I am wondering what do you think about global warming?

FYI, Russia has just refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol and thus, the Protocol is another failed attempt to save the Earth. Pardon me for the biased statement. You see, I'm a green.

[chenchow]

I had this Kyoto Protocol debates over the summer.

From the research that I made, even if 100% of what Kyoto Protocol is implemented (which is definitely too idealistic), we need about 60 Kyoto Protocol to make any headway to curb the environmental slowdown.

I would try to dig out my research material and upload to share with others.

[__earth]

and i think i messed up the poll. :(

[screw3d]

It WAS a fact but believe it or not, the Earth is actually cooling down now. I am doing a course in environmental issues now and I came across this in some book.

Furthermore, even if the Earth is indeed getting warmer, we have absolutely no idea if it is for the better or worse. How do you know if the Earth is not getting warmer naturally?

No I didn't pull this out of my own a$$. Just some stuff I've read and the author might be wrong (Gregg Easterbrook - A Moment on the Earth).

[qedx]

off topic:i think the coding's messed up... i'll pm bachok about it

global warming... arent we between ice ages or something like that? maybe scientists 5000 years from now will complain about global cooling...

[__earth]

Gregg Easterbrook, his reputation is similar to Bjorn Lomborg of whom wrote The Skeptical Environmentalist.
There are errors in his book and he sort of skrewed the intepretation of the data. Not that I am saying he lied but statistics could be presented in many ways.
However, I must admit, I haven't read Easterbrook but being a Green, I can't help but being aware of few global warming nay sayers.

see http://www.michaelspecter.com/times/1995/1995_04_23_rev_easterbrook.html or search for his book in Google. There are tons of stuff rebuffing his book. Even in Amazon, there are negative reviews on his book. Here is a further discussion against Easterbrook from an authority in geography and the environment:
http://civic.net/sustainable-development.archive/199508/msg00045.html
He is one of the few that deviate from the general concensus that global warming is true. Furthermore, he is not an authority in meteological science. In fact, there is a book written by Environmental Defense simply to correct the errors made by Easterbrook.

The only reason he made it to public limelight is because he is a prominent journalist.

At the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), majority of the scientists from various fields agreed to one conclusion - global warming is real. Global warming is true - that's why Kyoto Protocol was first suggested by the IPCC back before the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio.

one point that needs to be cleared when talking about global warming is the difference between natural global warming and the accelerated global warming. We are facing the accelerated global warming.

[__earth]

Check this out. It's funny!

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/umedia/20040202/cp.e2eae3b73469186181fbdf1496c6c44b

[__earth]

Check this out. It's funny!

http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/umedia/20040202/cp.e2eae3b73469186181fbdf1496c6c44b

[Thirdshifter]

God damn it. I could use some global warming right about now! This snow, Sub-zeroes termpature is getting way out of hand.

I am tired of doing this... http://pages.cthome.net/mudasir/DSCF0032.jpg

[Thirdshifter]

God damn it. I could use some global warming right about now! This snow, Sub-zeroes termpature is getting way out of hand.

I am tired of doing this... http://pages.cthome.net/mudasir/DSCF0032.jpg

[__earth]

lol!

[__earth]

lol!

[Vigilante]

Taken from the article Abuses of Skepticism, www.csicop.com

Let's go over a few facts in order to show that this is so. In early 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a body comprised of over 2,500 scientists, that's the world's leading authority on global warming, released its third major assessment of the issue. The IPCC concluded that humans are responsible for global warming and that this poses serious future risks. Now, for obvious reasons, this report posed a problem for the Bush administration, which quickly sought a review of the IPCC's findings by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Given the IPCC's lengthy and thorough process, this seemed a rather redundant effort to many. Sure enough, the NAS panel quickly confirmed the IPCC findings, adding still more force to the weight of scientific consensus.

Given this, anyone wishing to challenge the heavily reviewed conclusions of the IPCC and NAS has to overcome a rather staggering burden of proof. That's not to say it can't be done. But for the moment, it hasn't, which means that adopting a skeptical stance towards climate change in the face of overwhelming scientific consensus can hardly be considered the most defensible position. Instead, I would hazard, it amounts to an abuse of skepticism.

When you think about it, such abuses have always been with us. Tobacco companies tried to make us "skeptical" of the link between smoking and disease. Other corporate interests have challenged whether toxic substances like lead and asbestos are really as dangerous as scientists claim. Anti-evolutionists themselves adopt a stance of skepticism when it comes to Darwin's theory, arguing that natural selection could not have produced complex organs like the eye.

The reason we're so vulnerable to abuses of skepticism is that it's extremely hard to ever say that scientific conclusions are absolutely certain--much less to label scientific dissent a bad thing. After all, it's certainly possible that 2,500 IPCC scientists might have made the same mistake. And if so, we would want someone to point that out. Still, the prevailing view on climate change has gone through repeated challenges in the court of scientific opinion and emerged in its current form. If we really wish to discard this consensus position, then in some sense we're opting to discard the scientific process itself.

And that, finally, points to a way of determining when skepticism has gone too far and outlived its usefulness. In order to be responsible and useful, skepticism must respect the basic scientific process, rather than seeking to undermine it. It's one thing to doubt. But it's something else altogether to undermine the best mechanism we have at our disposal for knowing anything.

__________

Similarly in 1975, a book "Objections to Astrology" was written and contributed by 192 scientists, including 19 Nobel Prize winners, to declare that the "science" of astrology a deception based on "magic and superstition." Unfortunately astrology is gaining popularity around the world.

[Vigilante]

Taken from the article Abuses of Skepticism, www.csicop.com

Let's go over a few facts in order to show that this is so. In early 2001, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a body comprised of over 2,500 scientists, that's the world's leading authority on global warming, released its third major assessment of the issue. The IPCC concluded that humans are responsible for global warming and that this poses serious future risks. Now, for obvious reasons, this report posed a problem for the Bush administration, which quickly sought a review of the IPCC's findings by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). Given the IPCC's lengthy and thorough process, this seemed a rather redundant effort to many. Sure enough, the NAS panel quickly confirmed the IPCC findings, adding still more force to the weight of scientific consensus.

Given this, anyone wishing to challenge the heavily reviewed conclusions of the IPCC and NAS has to overcome a rather staggering burden of proof. That's not to say it can't be done. But for the moment, it hasn't, which means that adopting a skeptical stance towards climate change in the face of overwhelming scientific consensus can hardly be considered the most defensible position. Instead, I would hazard, it amounts to an abuse of skepticism.

When you think about it, such abuses have always been with us. Tobacco companies tried to make us "skeptical" of the link between smoking and disease. Other corporate interests have challenged whether toxic substances like lead and asbestos are really as dangerous as scientists claim. Anti-evolutionists themselves adopt a stance of skepticism when it comes to Darwin's theory, arguing that natural selection could not have produced complex organs like the eye.

The reason we're so vulnerable to abuses of skepticism is that it's extremely hard to ever say that scientific conclusions are absolutely certain--much less to label scientific dissent a bad thing. After all, it's certainly possible that 2,500 IPCC scientists might have made the same mistake. And if so, we would want someone to point that out. Still, the prevailing view on climate change has gone through repeated challenges in the court of scientific opinion and emerged in its current form. If we really wish to discard this consensus position, then in some sense we're opting to discard the scientific process itself.

And that, finally, points to a way of determining when skepticism has gone too far and outlived its usefulness. In order to be responsible and useful, skepticism must respect the basic scientific process, rather than seeking to undermine it. It's one thing to doubt. But it's something else altogether to undermine the best mechanism we have at our disposal for knowing anything.

__________

Similarly in 1975, a book "Objections to Astrology" was written and contributed by 192 scientists, including 19 Nobel Prize winners, to declare that the "science" of astrology a deception based on "magic and superstition." Unfortunately astrology is gaining popularity around the world.

[DecentMerson]

hehe...malaysians in malaysia are quite ignorant becoz it is too hot..... the north is drying up and the paddy fields are really nice.....golden brown in color and dried.....

it's still quite humid in the center (KL) as u can be doomed by rain with the sun shone brightly!!!

so...how's the weather in the Northeastern region???how's the blistering blizzard???having fun????I'm enjoying the sunshine all the best i can for the last six months in the next few years as I'm heading to U Mich!!!! :twisted: :P

[DecentMerson]

hehe...malaysians in malaysia are quite ignorant becoz it is too hot..... the north is drying up and the paddy fields are really nice.....golden brown in color and dried.....

it's still quite humid in the center (KL) as u can be doomed by rain with the sun shone brightly!!!

so...how's the weather in the Northeastern region???how's the blistering blizzard???having fun????I'm enjoying the sunshine all the best i can for the last six months in the next few years as I'm heading to U Mich!!!! :twisted: :P

[__earth]

Hey guys,
if you actually believe that Earth is in danger, there's something you could do for Earth and for Malaysia.

Read the email below that I've received as forwarded email. if the email is too long, just go to http://www.no-burn.org/action/broga2let.html.

It's about the Japanese are financing an incinerator in Malaysia. Incinerator is really one of the worst ways to solve waste problem because it produces a lot of smoke and dust and excessive CO2 too.

Your support is needed to fight the grey. Money power is nothing when compared to popular support. that's democracy is all about.

Hello! How are you? This is Yoko. Do you still remember me? It's been a while since I saw you on campus last time. I hope everything is going well for you this semester.

I have been wanting to tell you about one issue in Malaysia. This time, I found a web site for petition. I don't know how powerful the petition can be, but at least, I think you can learn from the articles.

It is about a plan to build a huge incinerator for municipal waste in KL by a Japanese company. You may wonder why it is a big deal. Well, burning waste is one of the least wise ways to manage waste. It creates a lot of pollution as you may know, and a lot of problems in the society.

But, at the same time, it is a big money maker for the company who builds it. It has been a serious problem in Japan that incinerators are built without consideration of alternative waste management. The air pollution in Japan is serious and there are many people who have serious health problems around the incinerators.

You may think it is a problem in KL only. But, once the Japanese company start making money out of building incinerator, they probably want more...

You see the depth of problem? But, fortunately this is the first plan. If we can stop this one, and implement a good alternative waste management, then it would be more difficult to start another plan to build incinerators.

Many citizens in KL are opposing this, but it is not working well. Plus, the more the better, right?

I hope you find this interesting and somewhat related to you. I am sorry that Japanese company and the government are creating such a trouble to your country. THis is what I can do for now. Please spread the words.
You citizens have more power than you can immagine.


http://www.no-burn.org/action/broga2let.html

Talk to you later!

Love, Yoko

[__earth]

Hey guys,
if you actually believe that Earth is in danger, there's something you could do for Earth and for Malaysia.

Read the email below that I've received as forwarded email. if the email is too long, just go to http://www.no-burn.org/action/broga2let.html.

It's about the Japanese are financing an incinerator in Malaysia. Incinerator is really one of the worst ways to solve waste problem because it produces a lot of smoke and dust and excessive CO2 too.

Your support is needed to fight the grey. Money power is nothing when compared to popular support. that's democracy is all about.

Hello! How are you? This is Yoko. Do you still remember me? It's been a while since I saw you on campus last time. I hope everything is going well for you this semester.

I have been wanting to tell you about one issue in Malaysia. This time, I found a web site for petition. I don't know how powerful the petition can be, but at least, I think you can learn from the articles.

It is about a plan to build a huge incinerator for municipal waste in KL by a Japanese company. You may wonder why it is a big deal. Well, burning waste is one of the least wise ways to manage waste. It creates a lot of pollution as you may know, and a lot of problems in the society.

But, at the same time, it is a big money maker for the company who builds it. It has been a serious problem in Japan that incinerators are built without consideration of alternative waste management. The air pollution in Japan is serious and there are many people who have serious health problems around the incinerators.

You may think it is a problem in KL only. But, once the Japanese company start making money out of building incinerator, they probably want more...

You see the depth of problem? But, fortunately this is the first plan. If we can stop this one, and implement a good alternative waste management, then it would be more difficult to start another plan to build incinerators.

Many citizens in KL are opposing this, but it is not working well. Plus, the more the better, right?

I hope you find this interesting and somewhat related to you. I am sorry that Japanese company and the government are creating such a trouble to your country. THis is what I can do for now. Please spread the words.
You citizens have more power than you can immagine.


http://www.no-burn.org/action/broga2let.html

Talk to you later!

Love, Yoko

[luke]

Have we forgotten the Jerebu tragedy in late 1990s? Have we forgotten how not nice it was to wear those respiratory masks in our own backyard? Man, if that incinerator is successfully built in KL, we are in deep trouble !! A Japanese would say "Komarimasu yo!" ... We must act !!

Just a question, I want to sign the petition but the form asks for organization and position .. as a student with no position in any organization, what should I put there?

[luke]

Have we forgotten the Jerebu tragedy in late 1990s? Have we forgotten how not nice it was to wear those respiratory masks in our own backyard? Man, if that incinerator is successfully built in KL, we are in deep trouble !! A Japanese would say "Komarimasu yo!" ... We must act !!

Just a question, I want to sign the petition but the form asks for organization and position .. as a student with no position in any organization, what should I put there?

[__earth]

just put in N/A

[__earth]

just put in N/A

[Thirdshifter]

before we jump o nthe signing petition bandwagon.. do you guys know the current garbage disposal procedure? BURNING!

so saying no to this is like giving an OK to open Sky Burning. :roll:

[Thirdshifter]

before we jump o nthe signing petition bandwagon.. do you guys know the current garbage disposal procedure? BURNING!

so saying no to this is like giving an OK to open Sky Burning. :roll:

[__earth]

actually, there are other alternatives
2 of them are

biomass plant
recycling plant

its just that incinerator == open burning.
well, maybe incinerator < open burning in term of pollution but why invest in polluting industry when other better industries exist and potentially, when more investment returns are available?

[__earth]

actually, there are other alternatives
2 of them are

biomass plant
recycling plant

its just that incinerator == open burning.
well, maybe incinerator < open burning in term of pollution but why invest in polluting industry when other better industries exist and potentially, when more investment returns are available?

[el_empty]

well you're quite right; the idea of having an incinerator is that you burn the crap, but there will be sophisticated filters to reduce the toxicity of the smoke. that's how the govt and other dudes like bush justify a very expensive incinerator. after that the waste will be buried i suppose?

what really sickens me is that the media and the govt are not focusing on education and recycling but instead they vehemently defend 'simple aje' projects like this highly highly unpopular incinerator:

http://www.no-burn.org/pix2/brogaAd.jpg

frankly i'm quite tired of the nanny state attitude of the govt. they have done many good things too, but they keep showing us that they are not listening to the public.

sigh...

[el_empty]

well you're quite right; the idea of having an incinerator is that you burn the crap, but there will be sophisticated filters to reduce the toxicity of the smoke. that's how the govt and other dudes like bush justify a very expensive incinerator. after that the waste will be buried i suppose?

what really sickens me is that the media and the govt are not focusing on education and recycling but instead they vehemently defend 'simple aje' projects like this highly highly unpopular incinerator:

http://www.no-burn.org/pix2/brogaAd.jpg

frankly i'm quite tired of the nanny state attitude of the govt. they have done many good things too, but they keep showing us that they are not listening to the public.

sigh...

[topdog]

dude...that pic of alan greenspan cracks me up. i'm pretty sure it's photoshopped right?

[topdog]

dude...that pic of alan greenspan cracks me up. i'm pretty sure it's photoshopped right?

[wawa]

sophisticated filters to reduce the toxicity of the smoke

Pardon my ignorance, but doesn't this make the burning safe?
it would be like factories , which filters all their smoke and release the 'safe' air.:D

[wawa]

sophisticated filters to reduce the toxicity of the smoke

Pardon my ignorance, but doesn't this make the burning safe?
it would be like factories , which filters all their smoke and release the 'safe' air.:D

[qedx]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1539&e=1&u=/afp/20040319/sc_afp/un_climate_040319125534

[qedx]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=1539&e=1&u=/afp/20040319/sc_afp/un_climate_040319125534

[__earth]

GOOD NEWS!

Russia has promised to ractify the Kyoto Protocol, disspelling the the possibility that Russia might withdraw support for the Protocol.

Though Putin says that it will take some time for the Duma to make a decision on this, this news nevertheless provides a boost for the Protocol and possibly acts as a pressure for the US to do the same or face being isolated from the world community further.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=574&ncid=721&e=4&u=/nm/20040521/wl_nm/trade_russia_eu_dc

[__earth]

oh well, the recent talk on climate change sort of failed.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=7131207

[misled_youth]

I've been going to PCB beach in Kelantan since I was a small child. Sandy white beaches, nice breeze, coconut trees, craps, squid... the whole ensemble.

I was there again in Jan 2004. The trees, shops, and everything was there... except the beach itself.

Several bungalows for rental have also been eaten by the sea.

Over the past 23 years, the ocean has taken several hundred metres of shoreline. If that isn't caused by GLobal warming, I dunno what is.
________
Gisselle (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/Gisselle)

[topdog]

i could use a little global warming now.

(kidding...)

[aquila]

Just put Student as Position and the name of your university under Organization.

Stop the incinerator first. We'll think of something for burning. Have to solve one problem at a time.

[el_empty]

dude...that pic of alan greenspan cracks me up. i'm pretty sure it's photoshopped right?

just realized your post. no way it's photoshopped. he says FOUR PERCENT and the world's interest rate becomes four percent. here he says FIVE PERCENT and the world's interest rate becomes five percent. he's the hottest schnizzle in the world.

Greeenspan for President.

[__earth]

dude...that pic of alan greenspan cracks me up. i'm pretty sure it's photoshopped right?

just realized your post. no way it's photoshopped. he says FOUR PERCENT and the world's interest rate becomes four percent. here he says FIVE PERCENT and the world's interest rate becomes five percent. he's the hottest schnizzle in the world.

Greeenspan for President.

Maybe we have found the invisible hand. After more than 4 centuries of seaching, it turns out to be Greenspan's all along!

[el_empty]

yeah he does look pretty old...

[topdog]

who's the uglier dude: larry king or alan greenspan? i'll have to say king.

[el_empty]

is this larry king or alan greenspan?

http://www.hydrotoys.com/wavs/Larry%20King%20Live.jpg

[el_empty]

Alan "For President" Greenspan is really cool because his actions almost determine the course of the world's economy:

you can tell it's recession time...

http://www.stockmarket.vnn.vn/ttquocte/images/green_span.jpg

or a booming period...

http://i.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1997/1101971110_400.jpg

and sometimes he really leaves us guessing...

http://www.theage.com.au/ffxImage/urlpicture_id_1077676899679_2004/02/26/alan_greenspan,0.jpg

[topdog]

is this larry king or alan greenspan?

http://www.hydrotoys.com/wavs/Larry%20King%20Live.jpg

that's larry greenspan.

[qedx]

how do we tell whether the earth temperature is increasing naturally or is due to human activities. if i remember right, during the dinosaur age the global climate was tropical.

we have no records prior to even the last ice age. so how do we know its not part of some natural cycle?

even if i am skeptical about global warming, i do agree that burning waste is bad, if only because i'm asthmatic/bronchitic (the doctors never seem to agree :p)

[el_empty]

is this larry king or alan greenspan?

http://www.hydrotoys.com/wavs/Larry%20King%20Live.jpg

that's larry greenspan.


WRRONNNGG - i think it's a monkey

[Europa]

Think I'll contribute my two cents worth.

we have no records prior to even the last ice age. so how do we know its not part of some natural cycle?

Uh, actually there is prior records up to the last Ice Age. The source reliably provides us information on the atmospheric composition from previous times. How they got it? Apparently it was from the ice cores drilled into the polar ice sheets in excess of 150 feet deep into the ice. Since the ice has been compressed and separated by succesive layers of ice, it is relatively free of contaminants until you expose it to air. So by determining the CO2 and CH4 content in the atmosphere scientists could estimate the temperatures from the past.

Some research do indicate that the current cycle is partly natural but it is not sufficient enough to cause the dramatic rise. (although to laypeople a rise of abt 1 deg. Celcius per decade is hardly dramatic enough for them) However, insufficient data on some variables that may affect the climate (e.g Solar cycle) make this debate unconclusive. Even if you're skeptical about the warming qedx, you can't ignore the consequences if it is really happening. But I'm under the impression that the warming part is settled within the scientific community , problem is with the cause and effect part.

[Thirdshifter]

I notice that once again, nobody in here (or anywhere, frankly) gives much of a shit about the Bush administration's continuing erosion of environmental policy, including me. I just thought this is something i should share with you folks here.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=544&u=/ap/20041222/ap_on_go_pr_wh/forest_rules_glance_1&printer=1

the new rules:

Give regional forest managers more discretion to approve logging and other commercial projects within two or three years by streamlining environmental reviews that now take up to seven years.

_Relax a requirement to protect fish and wildlife in national forests so species do not become threatened or endangered. Instead, the rules direct forest managers to take into account the best available science to protect air, water, wildlife and other natural resources at a landscape level.

_Require independent audits of all forest plans, using a process known as Environmental Management Systems. The Forest Service says the system accounts for changing forest conditions, while emphasizing science and public involvement.

_Do not promote or discourage any particular forest use, such as recreation, grazing, timber harvest or mineral development. Decisions regarding such uses will be made on a forest-by-forest basis and will be informed by local conditions, science and public input, officials say.

Logging industry lobbyists. Hooray. Much of this stuff wasn't Democratic hippy fodder, either, it was put in place by Reagan.

Decisions regarding such uses will be made on a forest-by-forest basis and will be informed by local conditions, science and public input, officials say

Yeah, guess what that means. A Logging industry "independent" stat farm cooks up bullshit, which is then presented to the local well lobbied local manager, who gives the green light without pesky federal oversight.

No inspection of data validity, no exploration of alternative courses of action. No checks and balances.

Science? This administration takes input from scientists and the public?

[__earth]

kyoto in less than 6 hours baby!

worth every second of the wait.

[Thirdshifter]

kyoto in less than 6 hours baby!

worth every second of the wait.

Did i fell asleep when the USA signed?

[el_empty]

http://www.seppo.net/ekoteho/ekotehonorsuapina_eng.jpg

[__earth]

kyoto in less than 6 hours baby!

worth every second of the wait.

Did i fell asleep when the USA signed?

The protocol became effective 90 days after Russia ratified. Russia's share is enough to move the proposal into implementation regardless of the US position.

[Thirdshifter]

kyoto in less than 6 hours baby!

worth every second of the wait.

Did i fell asleep when the USA signed?

The protocol became effective 90 days after Russia ratified. Russia's share is enough to move the proposal into implementation regardless of the US position.

Considering that USA is the biggest polluter and the other nation can pull out wihout any penalties, I wonder how long kyoto will last.
I'm not implying or hoping that kyoto would not work, I like the theory but without the USA participating it's naturally going to make other industrialized country quit if it starts to make them uncompetetive against USA.

We do however need an organized world wide effort to achieve sustainable industrialization and Kyoto is the only game right now. I'm sure it will evolve. It will be bitter medicine. USA need to take that first step.

Also if we look back, not to long ago The U.S. economy benefited handsomely from the Montreal Protocols limiting CFC emissions and usage despite crys that the Montreal Protocols would ruin U.S. industrial base and make the southwestern U.S. uninhabitable.

However, Above all, it is Sad that, Kyoto is realistically an utterly harmless and toothless treaty, thanks to the out clauses in it.

[el_empty]

i think it's about time the rest of the world learn to balance out the US dominance in world politics. the europeans and asians are to learn a thing or two about politics, then every collaboration will be a valuable experience. the rest of the world just needs to learn to get things done.

[star-anger]

i not so worried about global warming as i m about the world s weather going haywire. Tsunami, landslides, droughts,la nina el nino. jst to prove this trend, the recent CNY it actually rained. That is not suppose to happen!!!! I ve lived in australia and malaysia. When i came back to mlsy for holidays i remember the nights were cool almost freezingly so. But now w/o air con its like an oven. Still i try and resist oning it cos it's ironic, by using the air con u ll be cooler but the world will b hotter. Too bad i can t convince the rest of my family.

[__earth]

i not so worried about global warming as i m about the world s weather going haywire. Tsunami, landslides, droughts,la nina el nino. jst to prove this trend, the recent CNY it actually rained. That is not suppose to happen!!!! I ve lived in australia and malaysia. When i came back to mlsy for holidays i remember the nights were cool almost freezingly so. But now w/o air con its like an oven. Still i try and resist oning it cos it's ironic, by using the air con u ll be cooler but the world will b hotter. Too bad i can t convince the rest of my family.

firstly, huh?

secondly, tsunami has nothing to do with the weather.

thirdly, global warming is about weather going haywire. or at least its a subset of climate change.

fourth, though im a green, i don't get how raining on CNY is related to the weather going wild.

[flibbertigibbet]

I thought the tsunami was a result from an earthquake. Does an earthquake have anything to do with the weather changes? I never read about that before. Do enlighten me if you know more about it.

But I do agree with you saying that we are harming the earth more with the increasing usage of air-conditioners. If we human care to plant more trees in or around our house compound, it will bring about some cooling effects. And while development as well as the building of more houses are inevitable, perhaps the developers should pay more concern on our environment and plant some trees around the housing area. Don't just cut the hundred-ages trees and do nothing to compensate the loss of plants. At least, try and create a green surrounding for our future housing areas.

[Thirdshifter]

NEw housing developements in Malaysia is a disaster.. Anyone been to Bukit jalils new developement? They pretty much flatten the whole Bukit and turned it into a huge lateric desert.

[lolilo]

there too much opinion on this issue:urban legend or facts ? BUt seeing that malaysia's temperature has gone up to 40 degree celcius, i seriouly dont think this is a legend whatsoever...Global warming may be good in countries with 4 seasons or cold throughout the year, but its definitely not good in here :(

If i am not mistaken, last month issue of NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC mag did a great coverage on this issue, i dunno whether u can download it onlline, but it is definitely worth a good read(although its a bit too scentific). Because of this issue, some readers even terminated thier membership and gave up reading NG.sad huh? NG said its a fact but there are so much letter to the editor denying it, saying that its just a political issue so i really dont know what to believe...can anyone enlighten me?thanks.... :D

[Anduril]

Our world is sick and there is no way to deny that fact!

I read from a website that the year 2004 had been deemed as one of the five hottest years since 1990. But then, I don't see the weather is changing any better this year! Instead, the temperature here in Malaysia has reached a staggering 38 to 40 celcius. Correct me if I am wrong, but I truly believe that Mother Nature is suffering under all these pollutions and human activities. It is high time everyone of us did something to help out.

[__earth]

NG said its a fact but there are so much letter to the editor denying it, saying that its just a political issue so i really dont know what to believe...can anyone enlighten me?thanks.... :D

you wouldn't believe how hotly contested the issue is in the US. climate change and the environment as a whole itself stands perhaps only second after economic issues if ranking of priority were to be made.

[lolilo]

NG said its a fact but there are so much letter to the editor denying it, saying that its just a political issue so i really dont know what to believe...can anyone enlighten me?thanks.... :D

you wouldn't believe how hotly contested the issue is in the US. climate change and the environment as a whole itself stands perhaps only second after economic issues if ranking of priority were to be made.

the issue is highly contested as in the political way or the environmental way?i knew that BUSH do make it one of his issue during his campaign

[__earth]

the environment is part of politics.

[Thirdshifter]

Our world is sick and there is no way to deny that fact!

I read from a website that the year 2004 had been deemed as one of the five hottest years since 1990. But then, I don't see the weather is changing any better this year! Instead, the temperature here in Malaysia has reached a staggering 38 to 40 celcius. Correct me if I am wrong, but I truly believe that Mother Nature is suffering under all these pollutions and human activities. It is high time everyone of us did something to help out.

It is usual for Malaysia to be very hot and uncomfortable during the months of November through April. However April will bring in a lot of rain, this is usually when the monsoon season starts as well. This is probably the best time to visit Malaysia if your overseas.

Around that time of the year, Malaysia would average a 27-29C everyday (thats about 77-82F) compared to the 32-35C during the non-monsoon period.

Penang Island however is a different story all together, but we'll get way off topic.

[el_empty]

aha but the klang valley feels the extra heat because of the excessive and unchecked development. and the bulldozer-happy developers who clear trees and mountains like dirty laundry. they've built another giant mall outside my house and the heat at my housing estate is simply unbearable now.

[Thirdshifter]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20314-2005Mar9.html

President Bush's bid to rewrite federal air pollution laws ground to a halt in Congress yesterday when Republicans were unable to overcome objections in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that the bill would weaken the central pillars of the nation's environmental protection framework.

The setback is a body blow to the White House's prized plan and a victory for environmentalists who have long said that the "Clear Skies" bill is a euphemism for rolling back safeguards at the behest of industry.

The Environmental Protection Agency will issue new regulations today and next week to set limits on air pollutants, but the rules will not change the provisions in the Clean Air Act that would have been revised by Clear Skies
Some of the quotes in the article are pretty funny.

This bill has been killed by the environmental extremists, who care more about continuing the litigation-friendly status quo and making a political statement about carbon dioxide than they do about reducing air pollution," said Chairman James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.)
I love this "up is down" crap modern Conservatives utilize. Call an anti-environmental law "clear skies", then suggest Democrats who didn't support it are pro-industry, when the exact opposite is true....

Read Sierra Club info on Clear skies:

http://www.sierraclub.org/cleanair/clear_skies.asp

[byzhanii_bogn]

read on Sin Chew that global warming might have started way before civilization when homo sapiens cut down the first tree... dunno how true is that, but i think doomsday is near 8O

[__earth]

read on Sin Chew that global warming might have started way before civilization when homo sapiens cut down the first tree... dunno how true is that, but i think doomsday is near 8O

Global warming has always happened in the past. Global warming is actually cyclical. The only difference with this one is that, we are accelerating it.

A graph on it. Desciption is at Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png).

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

This graph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Phanerozoic_Climate_Change.png) may describe the cyclical event better.

[byzhanii_bogn]

yea, i read on National Geographic about it too...

but the acceleration is really worrying. glacier's melting... coral reefs dying... scary... really scary

[__earth]

I don't know if any of you guys heard this but the Senate is voting on drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge today (wednesday).

There is a good chance that the drilling will go, due to some political maneuver instead of any real majority concensus.

This might be too late but if you are living in MN, OR, PA, FL, IN or NH, please send a email or something to ask your rep to say no on the drilling bill.

[star-anger]

does anyone know if sanitary pads are biodegradable?

[Anduril]

read on Sin Chew that global warming might have started way before civilization when homo sapiens cut down the first tree... dunno how true is that, but i think doomsday is near 8O

I read on a book (which is actually a collection of newspaper articles) that scientists have predicted that doomsday will come in about hundred years to come. I don't know whether it is true or not, or anyone is going to believe it. But this whole earth is really crazy.

ps: I wrote that statement in my SPM chinese paper. I think it had affected my result.

[star-anger]

[quote="__earth"]I don't know if any of you guys heard this but the Senate is voting on drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge today (wednesday).

There is a good chance that the drilling will go, due to some political maneuver instead of any real majority concensus.

This might be too late but if you are living in MN, OR, PA, FL, IN or NH, please send a email or something to ask your rep to say no on the drilling bill.
Pres. Bush has been pushing from this since the start his term.
I think Bill Clinton was the one who proposed it.

[__earth]

I don't know if any of you guys heard this but the Senate is voting on drilling the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge today (wednesday).

There is a good chance that the drilling will go, due to some political maneuver instead of any real majority concensus.

This might be too late but if you are living in MN, OR, PA, FL, IN or NH, please send a email or something to ask your rep to say no on the drilling bill.
Pres. Bush has been pushing from this since the start his term.
I think Bill Clinton was the one who proposed it.

nope. Clinton refused to sign the reserve as a non-drilling land. Bush OTOH calls for the drilling.

In any case, the bill comes in 2005 and clinton is not in office any more.

[__earth]

The debate has returned.

Nukes are green (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/09/opinion/09kristof.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists). registration required but its free anyway.

Nuke has been proposed as a solution to reduce greenhouse gases emission sometimes ago.

[whatever]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4395817.stm

[The_forgotten]

FUN FACTS about CARBON DIOXIDE

Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter earth's atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth's oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.

At 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life-- plants and animals alike-- benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.

CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there but is continually recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth's oceans-- the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.





if those statements are true, we humans have clearly overestimated our influence to the mother nature...

[latent_talent]

Always wanted to go scuba-diving but never quite found the time? You might want to do it fast, like right now...Why?

According to a report released at a meeting of coral-reef scienctists in Bali, fully a quarter of the world's reefs are already effectively gone. If global warming continues as expected, there's a very good probability that coral reefs as we know them now will be gone in 30-50 years!!

Isn't that terrifying... 8O

The facts:
Corals are odd creatures and that may be their undoing. The tiny animals, living by the millions on the rocky structures they produce capture single-celled and force these plants to make their food like galley cooks on a slave ship! :D Maybe global warming is the algae's revenge: heat boosts the plants' metabolism, so they generate more oxygen. At about 85 degrees, the animal cells start to syffer from oxygen poisoning, so they spit out the algae. The corals are left chalky-white - it is called bleaching - and are unable to grow. If the water stays warm, the corals eventually die.

Many scientists are ready to soundalgae the alarm. The question is, will anyone be listening??

[__earth]

if those statements are true, we humans have clearly overestimated our influence to the mother nature...

I'm no climatologist but I have interest in climate change.

The statements you've quote above seem to be true but the implication of overestimation is not really accurate.

Concerning the last statement on where CO2 resides, it also depends on rate of absortion and rate of release. The statement again is right but if the absortion rate is greater than release rate, then retirement time is well into the unforeseeable future. With rapid industrialization and rapid deforestation, it's safe to say the rates aren't not pretty atm. The statement doesn't quite mention that.

This is amount of CO2 contributed by human activities (mainly anyway):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png

Notice how the contribution has helped change the dynamic.

The figure for CO2 in the atmosphere is small but that small figure influences life on Earth. That small amount of CO2 is one of the few reasons why life exists on Earth - it maintains the temperature suitable for life.

Any noticeble change in the CO2 composition will affect something.

[zqax]

hi _____earth, how come I can't vote one??I want to vote for myth.
:D

[__earth]

hi _____earth, how come I can't vote one??I want to vote for myth.
:D

It has on for a long time. Maybe it has been closed.

But why do you say it's a myth?

[Thirdshifter]

We're so self-important. Everybody's going to save something now.

"Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails." And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet.

What? Are these fucking people kidding me?

Save the planet, we don't even know how to take care of ourselves yet. We haven't learned how to care for one another, we're gonna save the fucking planet?

I'm getting tired of that shit. I'm tired of fucking Earth Day, I'm tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren't enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world safe for their Volvos.

Besides, environmentalists don't give a shit about the planet. Not in the abstract they don't. You know what they're interested in?
A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They're worried that some day in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn't impress me.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are fucked.

Difference.

The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years. Did you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We've been here, what, a hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we've only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we're a threat? That somehow we're gonna put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that's just a-floatin' around the sun?

The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles...hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worlwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages...

And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference?

The planet...the planet...the planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE!

We're going away. Pack your shit, folks. We're going away. And we won't leave much of a trace, either. Thank God for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. The planet'll be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance.

You wanna know how the planet's doing? Ask those people at Pompeii, who are frozen into position from volcanic ash, how the planet's doing. You wanna know if the planet's all right, ask those people in Mexico City or Armenia or a hundred other places buried under thousands of tons of earthquake rubble, if they feel like a threat to the planet this week. Or how about those people in Kilowaia, Hawaii, who built their homes right next to an active volcano, and then wonder why they have lava in the living room.

The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we're gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, 'cause that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it's true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new pardigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn't know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, "Why are we here?" Plastic...

So, the plastic is here, our job is done, we can be phased out now. And I think that's begun. Don't you think that's already started?

I think, to be fair, the planet sees us as a mild threat. Something to be dealt with. And the planet can defend itself in an organized, collective way, the way a beehive or an ant colony can. A collective defense mechanism. The planet will think of something. What would you do if you were the planet? How would you defend yourself against this troublesome, pesky species? Let's see... Viruses. Viruses might be good. They seem vulnerable to viruses. And, uh...viruses are tricky, always mutating and forming new strains whenever a vaccine is developed. Perhaps, this first virus could be one that compromises the immune system of these creatures. Perhaps a human immunodeficiency virus, making them vulnerable to all sorts of other diseases and infections that might come along. And maybe it could be spread sexually, making them a little reluctant to engage in the act of reproduction.

Well, that's a poetic note. And it's a start. And I can dream, can't I? See I don't worry about the little things: bees, trees, whales, snails. I think we're part of a greater wisdom than we will ever understand. A higher order. Call it what you want. Know what I call it? The Big Electron. ...buzz. buzz. buzz. It doesn't punish, it doesn't reward, it doesn't judge at all. It just is. And so are we. For a little while. - G.C

[el_empty]

We're so self-important. Everybody's going to save something now.

"Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save those snails." And the greatest arrogance of all: save the planet.

What? Are these fucking people kidding me?

Save the planet, we don't even know how to take care of ourselves yet. We haven't learned how to care for one another, we're gonna save the fucking planet?

I'm getting tired of that shit. I'm tired of fucking Earth Day, I'm tired of these self-righteous environmentalists, these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren't enough bicycle paths. People trying to make the world safe for their Volvos.

Besides, environmentalists don't give a shit about the planet. Not in the abstract they don't. You know what they're interested in?
A clean place to live. Their own habitat. They're worried that some day in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn't impress me.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine. The PEOPLE are fucked.

Difference.

The planet is fine. Compared to the people, the planet is doing great. Been here four and a half billion years. Did you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years. We've been here, what, a hundred thousand? Maybe two hundred thousand? And we've only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over two hundred years. Two hundred years versus four and a half billion. And we have the CONCEIT to think that somehow we're a threat? That somehow we're gonna put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that's just a-floatin' around the sun?

The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us. Been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drift, solar flares, sun spots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles...hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worlwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages...

And we think some plastic bags, and some aluminum cans are going to make a difference?

The planet...the planet...the planet isn't going anywhere. WE ARE!

We're going away. Pack your shit, folks. We're going away. And we won't leave much of a trace, either. Thank God for that. Maybe a little styrofoam. The planet'll be here and we'll be long gone. Just another failed mutation. Just another closed-end biological mistake. An evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet'll shake us off like a bad case of fleas. A surface nuisance.

You wanna know how the planet's doing? Ask those people at Pompeii, who are frozen into position from volcanic ash, how the planet's doing. You wanna know if the planet's all right, ask those people in Mexico City or Armenia or a hundred other places buried under thousands of tons of earthquake rubble, if they feel like a threat to the planet this week. Or how about those people in Kilowaia, Hawaii, who built their homes right next to an active volcano, and then wonder why they have lava in the living room.

The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we're gone, and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself, 'cause that's what it does. It's a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it's true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new pardigm: the earth plus plastic. The earth doesn't share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the earth. The earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place. It wanted plastic for itself. Didn't know how to make it. Needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old egocentric philosophical question, "Why are we here?" Plastic...

So, the plastic is here, our job is done, we can be phased out now. And I think that's begun. Don't you think that's already started?

I think, to be fair, the planet sees us as a mild threat. Something to be dealt with. And the planet can defend itself in an organized, collective way, the way a beehive or an ant colony can. A collective defense mechanism. The planet will think of something. What would you do if you were the planet? How would you defend yourself against this troublesome, pesky species? Let's see... Viruses. Viruses might be good. They seem vulnerable to viruses. And, uh...viruses are tricky, always mutating and forming new strains whenever a vaccine is developed. Perhaps, this first virus could be one that compromises the immune system of these creatures. Perhaps a human immunodeficiency virus, making them vulnerable to all sorts of other diseases and infections that might come along. And maybe it could be spread sexually, making them a little reluctant to engage in the act of reproduction.

Well, that's a poetic note. And it's a start. And I can dream, can't I? See I don't worry about the little things: bees, trees, whales, snails. I think we're part of a greater wisdom than we will ever understand. A higher order. Call it what you want. Know what I call it? The Big Electron. ...buzz. buzz. buzz. It doesn't punish, it doesn't reward, it doesn't judge at all. It just is. And so are we. For a little while. - G.C

what on earth have you been smoking?

[DecentMerson]

lol...

Global warming is definitely not a myth... just that what's really causing it is being mystified.

example? look at all the melting ice cap, well... it helps archeologists to discover few thousand years old frozen man/woman though...

quoted from a flyer I received yesterday... checkout http://www.alaskacoalition.net
quote:
"another fact: average global surface temperatures have risen .4-.8 C during the last century, however, in the same time frame, arctic permafrost termperatures have risen 2.0 - 4.0 C"

what's causing global warming? natural reason? or man-made?
quote: "climate change (global warming in the context), is caused, in part, by the accumulation of greenhouse gases generated during the combustion of fossil fuels."

I don't think it's natural reason... it's us... creating all the Greenhouse Gases (GHGs)...

what's next?? well... sustainable energy, alternative clean energy sources, decrease the release of GHGs, ambitiously, try to make the Moon and Mars as our new home?

[Thirdshifter]

hate me for saying this.. but well it's 60 F in CT yesterday and today.

I love global warming if it all is true.

[iQing]

Global warming can be a natural phenomenon as it happens in cycles.

It might be worsen by polution but I believe it is a natural process.

[lyzzy]

The earth's climate fluctuates - Ice Age or no Ice Age. As of right now, we are still coming out from the last Ice Age, and this has somewhat contributed to the rise in the global temperature.

Over the last century, there has been a very very rapid increase in the global temperature that's anomalous when compared the temperature pattern in the last 35 000 years, even taking the factor that we are coming out of the last Ice Age into account.

This rapid spike in temperature has been attributed to human influences (CO2 emissions) and is named 'global warming'.

- the geologist speaks :)
________
drug testing kit (http://drugtestingkit.org)

[Thirdshifter]

To, Lyzzy- the geologist.

http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9420/soltmps1dm.jpg
Solar activity and Global warming Together


http://www.junkscience.com/news/robinson.htm

Also see : http://www.tmgnow.com/repository/solar/lassen1.html

said by Solar Activity and Climate :

"Conclusion

70-90 years oscillations in global mean temperature are correlated with corresponding oscillations in solar activity. Whereas the solar influence is obvious in the data from the last four centuries, signatures of human activity are not yet distinguishable in the observations."

Now you just need to come up with a similar sort of clear correlation between something clearly caused by man and global temperatures.

And I suppose this may be impossible.

Anyways, I have information that links rises in levels of chemicals to global warming just as accurately as this chart on climate change. However, I am yet to find an easy to understand chart that shows that man is directly responsible for this, And since these charts didn't show the dip of pollutants (GHGs) when the global temperatures from 1940 to 1970 took a dive, I naturally have to rule it out.

I'm not saying global warming is a myth.. it is happening. Is it Humans fault? Not yet proven. I'll give you that.

I'm not convinced that by cutting down the emmision as suggested in the kyoto protocol would actually help reverse global warming.

It's a natural process.

But ofcourse, Having said all that.. Clean air doesn't hurt either.

[lyzzy]

(Sorry about the oversized files)

To thirdshifter

Pollution is not synonymous with global warming. You can have pollution without causing a change in climate, you can have climate change that's not caused by pollution. They *usually* go together, but one doesn't necessarily mean the other.

And this is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e9/Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr-2.png

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/2000_Year_Temperature_Comparison.png

Notice the sudden spike in temperature, which corresponds to the time Industrial Relevation began.

Also, in answer to your post:

Direct variations in solar output appear too small to have substantially affected the climate; nonetheless some researchers (e.g. [15]) have proposed that feedbacks from clouds or other processes enhance the effect.

In the IPCC Third Assessment Report (TAR), it was reported that volcanic and solar forcings might account for half of the temperature variations prior to 1950, but that the net effect of such natural forcings was roughly neutral since then [16]. In particular, the change in climate forcing from greenhouse gases since 1750 was estimated to be 8 times larger than the change in forcing due to increasing solar activity over the same period [17].


Wikipedia may not be the best source, but it's free, and unless marked "the neutrality of this article is debated" or something like that, it's pretty representative of views on global warming.
________
Festiva (http://www.ford-wiki.com/wiki/Ford_Festiva)

[__earth]

Digressing:

Wikipedia may not be the best source, but it's free, and unless marked "the neutrality of this article is debated" or something like that, it's pretty representative of views on global warming.

You'll be surprised that there are scientists that edit that page. For instance, William M. Connolley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:William_M._Connolley). His a climate modeller, working for British Antarctic Survey and a contributor to RealClimate (http://www.realclimate.org/).

Anyway third, you might be interested in all these graphs at wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dragons_flight/Images#Solar_Activity). There is one graph that deals with climate change attribution in the same page.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/Climate_Change_Attribution.png

That's graph tries to capture all possible factors that contribute to climate change. One of them is GHG, of which one of few we can control. Explanation for the graph is here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Climate_Change_Attribution.png).

[Thirdshifter]

Just to open a little bigger can of worm about CO2. This is considering the whole global warming theory is right.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/01/0111_060111_plant_methane_2.html

Grasses and other green growth may produce 10 to 30 percent of Earth's annual methane output, a new study reports, making plants a surprising?and potentially significant?contributor to global warming.

According to Lowe, "We now have the specter that new forests might increase greenhouse warming through methane emissions rather than decrease it by being sinks for carbon dioxide."

Methane is considered a key greenhouse gas because it traps heat inside the Earth's atmosphere about 20 times more effectively than carbon dioxide.

Research suggests that rising temperatures could boost plants' methane production, which might help to retain heat and spark further temperature increases in a self-perpetuating cycle.

Lowe notes that any reassessment of current climate change models could include some interesting political ramifications.

For example, the Kyoto protocol?an international treaty designed to try and curb climate change?requires complex accounting that holds countries to specified greenhouse gas emissions limits.

"Several countries are counting their forests as vegetative sinks for carbon dioxide," he said.

"But are you absorbing more carbon dioxide than you are [possibly] releasing methane? I suppose that the Kyoto protocol accountants are going to be working overtime trying to figure that one out."

But ofcourse I agree, Humans don't deserve to be on this planet at all.

[__earth]

An article on statements made by the researchers (http://www.scidev.net/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=readnews&itemid=2605&language=1) that produced that results.

Speaking to SciDev.Net, Keppler said he wanted to make three points clear to the public.

First, their findings do not mean that reforestation programmes should be condemned. Trees absorb carbon dioxide, the most important greenhouse gas, so planting them is still beneficial.

When the methane emitted by trees is taken into account, says Keppler, the benefits of planting trees to absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide diminish by just one to four per cent ? a negligible effect.

Secondly, changes in the overall amount of methane emitted by plants ? including changes that could worsen global warming ? are likely to be caused by human activities such as deforestation.

Finally, they say that much more research is needed to discover how methane emissions from plants vary according to species, temperature, humidity, sunlight and other factors, as well as how these emissions might change as the environment does.

Also, some stuff from realclimate (http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=236) (a few ppl at real climate also contribute to wikipedia's climate related articles.)

[day_dreamer]

time to revive this thread......
time for an enviromentalism revolution.....

calling all ReComers majored in the biological field, time for you to serve your country, time to launch real and sustainable "kempen" !!

Please provide solution for the temperature rise in malaysia that is household friendly( some little thing that everyone can do to help ).
And please, provide solution that suits our country's climate, i am sick of browsing the the just to find out some programmes for temperate region only.

For Mother Nature !!!!

[day_dreamer]

will it help if everyone plants a tree or lot's of shrubs in front of their house ?

will it help if everyone in Malaysia cycles to and from their workplace everyday?

[Thirdshifter]

Before you do that daydreamer read this post http://www.recom.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=75438