Global Warming Nonsense - Firehouse Forums

Discussions Search

	Advanced Search

Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili (Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.

This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
[http://forums.firehouse.com/showthread.php?t=101909&mode=lin...]
Click here to search for discussions with Omgili discussions search engine.

Global Warming Nonsense - Firehouse Forums - Firefighting Discussion

Read this story closely and tell me if it passes scientific muster.

It appears to me that the press will print any story advancing global warming-even it is scientifically unsustainable. Quote: : Plasma, LCDs blamed for accelerating global warming Posted Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:41pm AEST Updated Thu Jul 3, 2008 1:52pm AEST Almost half of the televisions sold around the globe so far this year have been plasma or LCD TVs. But this boom could be coming at a huge environmental cost. The gas, widely used in the manufacture of flat screen TVs, is estimated to be 17,000 times as powerful as carbon dioxide. Ironically, NF3 is not covered by the Kyoto protocol as it was only produced in tiny amounts when the treaty was signed in 1997. Levels of this gas in the atmosphere have not been measured, but scientists say it is a concern and are calling for it to be included in any future emissions cutting agreement. Professor Michael Prather from the University of California has highlighted the issue in an article for the magazine New Scientist. He has told ABC's The World Today program that output of the gas needs to be measured. "One of my titles for this paper was Going Below Kyoto's Radar.

It's the kind of gas that's made in huge amounts," he said. "Not only is it not in the Kyoto Treaty but you don't even have to report it.

That's the part that worries me." He estimates 4,000 tons of NF3 will be produced in 2008 and that number is likely to double next year. "We don't know what's emitted, but what they're producing every year dwarfs these giant coal-fired power plants that are like the biggest in the world," he said. "And it dwarfs two of the Kyoto gases.

So the real question we don't know is how much is escaping and getting out." Dr Paul Fraser is the chief research scientist at the CSIRO's marine and atmospheric research centre, and an IPCC author. He says without measuring the quantity of NF3 in the atmosphere it is unclear what impact it will have on the climate. "We haven't observed it in the atmosphere.

It's probably there in very low concentrations," he said. "The key to whether it's a problem or not is how much is released to the atmosphere."

Sounds like Professor Prather is looking for a grant to waste more of our tax money.

If it was not for the Universities some people would actually have to work for a living.

You know like figuring out why people get mad while playing tennis, or some other worth while study. Stay Safe Bull

Just a further aside on global warming, Obama, a bunch of US Mayors and others on the tree hugger side now want to ban oil from Albertas Tar Sands as they have a bigger carbon footprint than "conventional oil" At this point in time, the tar sands contribute 13% to US oil imports, by 2015, it will be 25%.

Also you in the US don't have to worry about an unstable govt deciding to quit exporting to US.

Just imagine cost of a gallon of gas if Alberta has to ship oil to west coast and on to China instead of US.

Do some of these people live on the same planet as the rest of us? Keep in mind that conventional oil, be it from Mexico, Venezuela, Iraq or Saudi may have a smaller carbon footprint but it maybe that its mixed with blood.

Plasma, LCDs blamed for accelerating global warming Posted Thu Jul 3, 2008 12:41pm AEST Updated Thu Jul 3, 2008 1:52pm AEST Almost half of the televisions sold around the globe so far this year have been plasma or LCD TVs. But this boom could be coming at a huge environmental cost. The gas, widely used in the manufacture of flat screen TVs, is estimated to be 17,000 times as powerful as carbon dioxide.

. . .Levels of this gas in the atmosphere have not been measured, but scientists say it is a concern and are calling for it to be included in any future emissions cutting agreement. Professor Michael Prather from the University of California has highlighted the issue in an article for the magazine New Scientist. He has told ABC's The World Today program that output of the gas needs to be measured. "One of my titles for this paper was Going Below Kyoto's Radar.

It's the kind of gas that's made in huge amounts," he said. "Not only is it not in the Kyoto Treaty but you don't even have to report it.

That's the part that worries me." He estimates 4,000 tons of NF3 will be produced in 2008 and that number is likely to double next year. "We don't know what's emitted, but what they're producing every year dwarfs these giant coal-fired power plants that are like the biggest in the world," he said. "And it dwarfs two of the Kyoto gases.

So the real question we don't know is how much is escaping and getting out." Dr Paul Fraser is the chief research scientist at the CSIRO's marine and atmospheric research centre, and an IPCC author. He says without measuring the quantity of NF3 in the atmosphere it is unclear what impact it will have on the climate. "We haven't observed it in the atmosphere.

It's probably there in very low concentrations," he said. "The key to whether it's a problem or not is how much is released to the atmosphere."

I have been under the impression for years that all of the global warming, or "save the planet" supporters are actually trying to use the feeling of guilt created by these "problems" to make people feel better when they pay higher taxes, fines, or fees.

Of course, all of the increases in revenue from taxes, fines, and fees usually go towards funding more "research" by those who declared it a problem.

Al Gore's personal home is what is causing global warming!

Quote: : "We don't know what's emitted, but what they're producing every year dwarfs these giant coal-fired power plants that are like the biggest in the world," WTF? Calling Al Gore, where are you Al Gore.

I know burning of fossil fuels is killing the ozone, but the ice age ended before we started driving cars.

Quote: : 61 WTF? Calling Al Gore, where are you Al Gore. He is too busy fighting global warming by globe trotting in private jets to accept environmental awards.

He is also too busy criss-crossing our great nation in the same private jets stumping for Obama. One must love his continued hypocracy.

Oh...right...absolutely no truth whatsoever to that whole 'global warming' thing.

Just those damn tree huggers spouting nonsensical nonsense. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080628...080 628162607 http://shakespearessister.blogspot.c...l-warming.html

Quote: : Oh...right...absolutely no truth whatsoever to that whole 'global warming' thing.

Just those damn tree huggers spouting nonsensical nonsense. http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080628...080 628162607 http://shakespearessister.blogspot.c...l-warming.html I agree with George.

How much is Human linked?

No way to be sure, probably a fair amount. For instance, bovine flatulence contributes a significant amount of "greenhouse gasses" to the environment.

Part of that from cattle in the western societies being fed corn which a bovine G.I.

System is not made to digest so it produces a lot more gas.

The almighty U.N.

Has released studies of this. China and India are two hugely growing economies which are dramatically increasing their own carbon emissions - with China having at least 1 new coal-fired power plant on line each week And China has little environmental policy or laws in place. Our own nation, who is supposedly full of environmentally friendly people decries "green" power when it is anywhere near them.

My case in point being Cape Wind off of Cape Cod, MA.

We have as many sof-professed tree-hugging hypocrites here showing their NIMBY attitude about putting wind turbines in the water because they might see the little strobe light on top of the turbine on a picture-perfect crystal-clear night.

So they have fought it in the courts for YEARS increasing the overall cost of the power plants.

So who might be against this?

The almoghty Senator Ted Kennedy, his nephew and supposed "ardent" environmentalist Robert Kennedy Jr., David MucCullough (the author of 1776 and several other historical novels), and a large contingent of extremely wealthy individuals who would rather have it put where their blue blood would not be offended. There is a combination of factors affecting the climate, but the environmental crowd will not seem to acknowledge this and it is all human based.

And the scientific community is not exactly at one might call a concensus on this matter either.

Quote: : I agree with George.

How much is Human linked?

No way to be sure, probably a fair amount. For instance, bovine flatulence contributes a significant amount of "greenhouse gasses" to the environment.

Part of that from cattle in the western societies being fed corn which a bovine G.I.

System is not made to digest so it produces a lot more gas.

The almighty U.N.

Has released studies of this. China and India are two hugely growing economies which are dramatically increasing their own carbon emissions - with China having at least 1 new coal-fired power plant on line each week And China has little environmental policy or laws in place. Our own nation, who is supposedly full of environmentally friendly people decries "green" power when it is anywhere near them.

My case in point being Cape Wind off of Cape Cod, MA.

We have as many sof-professed tree-hugging hypocrites here showing their NIMBY attitude about putting wind turbines in the water because they might see the little strobe light on top of the turbine on a picture-perfect crystal-clear night.

So they have fought it in the courts for YEARS increasing the overall cost of the power plants.

So who might be against this?

The almoghty Senator Ted Kennedy, his nephew and supposed "ardent" environmentalist Robert Kennedy Jr., David MucCullough (the author of 1776 and several other historical novels), and a large contingent of extremely wealthy individuals who would rather have it put where their blue blood would not be offended. There is a combination of factors affecting the climate, but the environmental crowd will not seem to acknowledge this and it is all human based.

And the scientific community is not exactly at one might call a concensus on this matter either.

The tree-huggers would have you believe that the scientific community is lock-step in agreement on this issue.

Nothing could be further from the truth. My favorite point in this debate when they start talking about a crisis is that the earth has been around for tens of thousands of years, at least.

Yet, we have only been collecting climatological data for a tiny fraction of that time.

Under any scientific standard, there is insufficient data to opine about anything. Kind of like investigating a house fire while sitting in your car.

Let's see....the world's total population in 1900 was 1.6 Billion.

Today's estimate is about 6.6 Billion.

I wonder what the carbon footprint for an additional 5 Billion exhaling and flatulent people would be? The UN study was faulty, Shark because while they considered the effect of bovine flatulence, they failed to consider the presence of the millions of bison that had been present prior to the surge in the bovine population.

I'd bet the difference wouldn't be all that much.

I'll also bet you could get some federal money to do a study though.

Yeah, but what was dinosaur flatulence like? Harve, weren't you around then?

Quote: : Harve, weren't you around then? Nice one George But you can't be all that far behind Harve Besides, Harve is still feeling shall we say FRISKAY as mentioned in a few other mildly hijacked threads.

Better keep up with the old man.

Quote: : Nice one George But you can't be all that far behind Harve Besides, Harve is still feeling shall we say FRISKAY as mentioned in a few other mildly hijacked threads.

Better keep up with the old man.

49 years young. And all my parts are working just fine, thank you.

Leave it to the left to declare anything that makes life easier, generates wealth, or is fun a global warming (ahh hem climate change) cause. It is all about taxes and control.

Well, taxes are control.

Quote: : I have been under the impression for years that all of the global warming, or "save the planet" supporters are actually trying to use the feeling of guilt created by these "problems" to make people feel better when they pay higher taxes, fines, or fees.

Of course, all of the increases in revenue from taxes, fines, and fees usually go towards funding more "research" by those who declared it a problem. EXACTLY!!!

Quote: : EXACTLY!!!

Even though I was in high school as recently as the early '90s, I still remember the notion that "Golbal Cooling" was going to destroy the earth because the pollution was going to block out the sun's energy.

Discussion Title: Global Warming Nonsense
Title Keywords: Global Warming Nonsense Firehouse Forums Firefighting Discussion

Omgili Home

About

FAQ

Plugins

Usenet