melting glaciers and thawing permafrost releasing methane

USFREEDOM911 said:
By saying "anything to do with", to what amount of responsibility are you assigning to "mankind's activities on this planet"?


You said this thread was not about Co2. :)
Click to expand...

you seemed to want to discuss co2, if not i will stop

as for how much mankind is contributing, i do not have a precise amount, but i would call it significant or enough to make a difference

still the increase in methane is also significant, man's and nature's - it seems that we are in a feedback loop concerning methane as the warmer it gets the more methane is released into the atmosphere

bummer
 
Don Quixote said:
you seemed to want to discuss co2, if not i will stop

Aren't we having fun yet?

as for how much mankind is contributing, i do not have a precise amount, but i would call it significant or enough to make a difference

But then, even 1% would be a difference; but you said significant, with no precise amount or degree.

still the increase in methane is also significant, man's and nature's - it seems that we are in a feedback loop concerning methane as the warmer it gets the more methane is released into the atmosphere

But what is being released, is also deteriorating; correct?
Do you have anything that would show any correlation between the release and the deterioration?

bummer
Click to expand...

But if it was greener and less frozen, a thousand years ago (refer to Tom's post), why would it be a good thing then and a bad thing now?
 
Don Quixote said:
because of the major disruption and displacement of various species and agriculture
Click to expand...

So you want nature to stay exactly the way it is now; regardless of the fact that species and agriculture has gone through any number of "major disruptions and displacement"!!
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
So you want nature to stay exactly the way it is now; regardless of the fact that species and agriculture has gone through any number of "major disruptions and displacement"!!
Click to expand...

not necessarily, nature will do as it chooses - but does man have to help those changes along to man's own detriment - we may be one of those species severely tested
 
Don Quixote said:
not necessarily, nature will do as it chooses - but does man have to help those changes along to man's own detriment - we may be one of those species severely tested
Click to expand...

This constant carping about CO2 and greenhouse gasses in general is just ridiculous and peripheral to the real debate. If you want to protect the Earth's resources then something has to be done about over population, everything else flows from that simple fact. It is just putting the cart before the horse otherwise.
 
Don Quixote said:
not necessarily, nature will do as it chooses - but does man have to help those changes along to man's own detriment - we may be one of those species severely tested
Click to expand...

You haven't shown that man is helping those changes.
Just because we may have an affect, doesn't mean that it's enough to influence.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
This constant carping about CO2 and greenhouse gasses in general is just ridiculous and peripheral to the real debate. If you want to protect the Earth's resources then something has to be done about over population, everything else flows from that simple fact. It is just putting the cart before the horse otherwise.
Click to expand...

Apple wants all poor people to abort their children; because they obviously can't provide for them and this means the children will suffer needlessly.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
This constant carping about CO2 and greenhouse gasses in general is just ridiculous and peripheral to the real debate. If you want to protect the Earth's resources then something has to be done about over population, everything else flows from that simple fact. It is just putting the cart before the horse otherwise.
Click to expand...

most of the population increase is in developing nations and beyond our control (the u s of a's that is) although the conservative fight against abortion and birth control does not help especially when applied to developing nations that the us is trying to aid

also, advances in reducing infant/child mortality are not helping - china alone has over 1 bln people and is still trying to reduce its population with limited success

seems that mankind is chock full of busy breeders - mostly low income people that cannot afford children but do not know how to stop or do not want to

oh well
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
You haven't shown that man is helping those changes.
Just because we may have an affect, doesn't mean that it's enough to influence.
Click to expand...

uncharacteristically, your last sentence makes no sense - how can you affect without influencing

if you prefer, imo, the amount of co2 produced by mankind is significant as to abetting global climate change/warming
 
Don Quixote said:
uncharacteristically, your last sentence makes no sense - how can you affect without influencing

if you prefer, imo, the amount of co2 produced by mankind is significant as to abetting global climate change/warming
Click to expand...

You probably don't understand; because you're in a bad mood.

And now much is that amount that is causing this "significant" change?
 
Don Quixote said:
the deniers are generally the members of the gop

they are denying that global climate change/warming could have anything to do with mankind's activities on this planet...as if you did not know

also, usually part of an offensive by the coal and oil industries to prevent regulation of co2
Click to expand...
fuck you and your strawman arguments. Tired of you idiots lying about the sceptic position that refutes human co2 a the climate driver
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top