Global warming program

Nos4r2 · 08 March 2007, 20:53

Who saw it? I'm just watching the last few minutes and it's providing quite a compelling argument against it being man-made.

Aidan · 08 March 2007, 21:26

Yes this is partly true in so far as they know. What they do not mention also is what they do not know. So its no greater or less an argument other than a person equi distant from land and does not know in what direction to swim.
They didnt factor the global dimming until 9/11 when all aircraft were grounded over usa.

I often wonder as to our arrogance that we believe that we are a greater force than teh sun (thinking Icarus).

We are no more than a complicated religeous blot on the landscape hoping that there is more to origin of man than a numbers game.
Failing that, then our future is in our genes and thus we should be anything but monogamus (Is that spelt correctly)

One ideas suggests that we remain loyal and single partner etc, the other is suggesting that the better we spread our seed then the greater chance we have of keeping our gene pool....

I am watching the program and thinking who the spin masters are...

In any event, the idea of recycling, energy conservation, Bio fuels etc, its all for the better. Not sure about the Fines of 278 million for failling to meet the Kyoto agreement when the biggest abusers didnt bother to sign up and pay nothing....

We risk being branded non believers...

Nos4r2 · 08 March 2007, 21:40

I'd rather be branded a non-believer and be right.

Aidan · 08 March 2007, 22:02

the way that i see it, we are only simple pawns in the bigger picture.

Anything from a Pandemic to Deep impact will change the focus.

There was a time that we thought 12k years was a very long time to have to keep nuclear waste and thus we should not be posioning our lanscape.
Now it seems so far away that its brought about the argument for us to have N.P on the agenda..

We are at the mercy of the spinmasters...

ian parkes · 08 March 2007, 22:53

I missed that
The Soup Dragon wanted to watch Graham Norton , with some poor sod having his back crack and sack waxed live on TV , sad git .

problem is there are so many different theories that nobody, including me ,seems to know what to believe , hence does nothing .

codprawn · 08 March 2007, 22:56

Global warming? From fossil records things like Hyenas and Rhinos used to wander around the plain that is now the Bristol Channel - then along came massive sea level rise and then an ice age - funnily enough it was a bit before we started using internal combustion engines.....

Nos4r2 · 08 March 2007, 22:57

You need to see it. It's a big eye-opener.

pathalla · 08 March 2007, 23:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

Global warming? From fossil records things like Hyenas and Rhinos used to wander around the plain that is now the Bristol Channel - then along came massive sea level rise and then an ice age - funnily enough it was a bit before we started using internal combustion engines.....

You cant't tell there is global warming by where I live, this last 8 weeks has been a bastard, cold and snowy typical winter weather...

Mark Halliday · 09 March 2007, 08:20

I watched it.

It did tend to follow my beliefs that there are greater forces at work on our planet than us parasites.
We exist on a "living" body, which I am sure has its own agenda, irrespective of our futile efforts to control it.
Also, why did they just pick Co2. There was no mention of methane (another naturally occuring gas), which some claim has more effect than Co2.

What did strike me was the distinct lack of Channel 4 news clips about Global Warming, with only BBC clips being shown. I am sure if Channel 4 dug around its own library they could have found similar clip. Perhaps the program was aimed more at BBC bashing than disproving the Co2/Global Warming issue.

jwalker · 09 March 2007, 09:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Halliday

Perhaps the program was aimed more at BBC bashing than disproving the Co2/Global Warming issue.

Nowt much wrong with that. The BBC research/reporting hasn't been the best recently. But it was nice to see some scientific data to support their case. I don't think I've seen anything scientific to support the CO2 case. However, it was only a telly program....

BogMonster · 09 March 2007, 09:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nos4r2

I'd rather be branded a non-believer and be right.

Me too

There is all this waffle about global warming and possibly sea level change of 30 or 50cm in the next 100 years or whatever. When I did my geology degree we visited "beaches" that were 100s of feet above sea level and sediments that were laid down 100s of feet below sea level, all on dry land. The UK has been both an icy waste and a tropical paradise (well if you exclude the big stompy things trying to eat you in "paradise").

I have my house on top of a hill. I don't care if the sea rises by a foot, in fact it will make the launching site for my boat better. And as we are just coming out of the wettest coldest most miserable summer I can remember, I don't think a bit of global warming would be a bad thing because I haven't seen any round here lately.

tim griffin · 09 March 2007, 10:28

I saw it and one like it a few months ago on Discovery .

I think I am leaning more towards the earth following the activity of the sun having the greatest effect on our weather and also the point made about the ocean currents going through phases of heating up and cooling down and the time period involved for this to take effect.I also remember back in the 70's about the warning of global cooling and a new ice age coming apperently we are now coming out of that and heading for a period of warming up . The graphs they used did point more in the programmes favour and as they said climate predicition models are only that and if you change one element then every thing else will change.

Still a good idea to recycle and reduce pollution but have we all been conned ???

GuyP · 09 March 2007, 11:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by tim griffin

Still a good idea to recycle and reduce pollution but have we all been conned ???

I see recycling and reducing pollution as seperate to the CO2 causes global warming debate. No one wants to live in a polluted environment and we can't keep on using landfill, so we should recycle etc but that is just good stewardship and caring for the countryside etc.

I learnt way back in GCSE Geography that the earth's temperatures are transitional and that it's always been that way (as Codprawn suggests, the UK was once tropical and the remains of tigers have been found here etc). As I went on to do A-level Geography and finally a degree in the subject, I found that the science got more and more twisted to confirm to the political push against CO2.

It was great to see the co-founder of Greenpeace on the program agreeing that global warming argument had been hijacked by the 'anti' brigade to use against capitalism.

codprawn · 09 March 2007, 11:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuyP

I see recycling and reducing pollution as seperate to the CO2 causes global warming debate. No one wants to live in a polluted environment and we can't keep on using landfill, so we should recycle etc but that is just good stewardship and caring for the countryside etc.

This is another can of worms - literally!!!

Why can't we keep using landfill? In Swansea the main landfill site used to be an old power station. It has been in use for over 20 years - it isn't that big a site - say about the same size as 2 Tesco stores and their car parks. They can always find more land to build hideous housing estates!!!

In it's bid to "care" about the environment Swansea council allowed an incinerator and waste compacting plant to be built. The smoke from the plant is "within EU limits" - maybe but it still gives me something like an asthma attack.

Even more ludicrous is that there are now EU laws regarding the volume of material that can go to landfill - so they send everything from black bags to a composting plant first. The material is allowed to rot for 6 months to reduce it's volume before going to landfill - and there's me thinking the stuff would rot in the ground anyway and reduce this totally uneccessary step - bonkers!!!

MikeCC · 09 March 2007, 11:27

The basic problem is that the whole system is far too complex to be modelled accurately.

There also should be a separation between 'killing the planet' and 'killing mankind'. Two different issues.

Personally, I think "we just don't know" at the moment. Keep the planet clean and tidy, do your thing and let Gaia sort it all out when mankind has self-destructed!

GuyP · 09 March 2007, 12:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by codprawn

This is another can of worms - literally!!!

Why can't we keep using landfill?

In it's bid to "care" about the environment Swansea council allowed an incinerator and waste compacting plant to be built. The smoke from the plant is "within EU limits" - maybe but it still gives me something like an asthma attack.

Leaching of chemicals from landfill contaminating the soil is one reason. Incineration is actually very clean these days, as there are complex filters in the chimneys, and it's a great way to generate electricity. The green lobby still hate the technology though.

jwalker · 09 March 2007, 15:43

When the Met Office can accurately tell me what the weather is going to be like tomorrow, I may start taking climate modelling more seriously. Maybe....

codprawn · 09 March 2007, 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuyP

Leaching of chemicals from landfill contaminating the soil is one reason. Incineration is actually very clean these days, as there are complex filters in the chimneys, and it's a great way to generate electricity. The green lobby still hate the technology though.

It may be considered "clean" still makes me sneeze and gives me chest problems!!! I know about the soil contamination problems but a lot depends on site location etc.

Aidan · 09 March 2007, 17:45

Poor Al Gore,

Just when he thought he had us in the palm of his hands.
Can you imagine the posibility of Pres Bush being right by default... just how deep is his insight

Thats Kyoto out the effin window, Burn it or bury it, thats my new slogan.
Whats next.... they tried to scare the uno out of us with Bird flu, then came Wayne Rooney`s ankle, followed quickly by a red card for Rooney and uk and ENgland going outof world cup (remember that!!!) followed by ????

I think, San Fran is next....... 6/4 the field I hear....

Dont know when, what do ye think, hope the response is better than New Orleans...

I give up, going out to buy 8 ltr ferrari with a tow bar...

Biggles · 09 March 2007, 18:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by GuyP

Leaching of chemicals from landfill contaminating the soil is one reason. Incineration is actually very clean these days, as there are complex filters in the chimneys, and it's a great way to generate electricity. The green lobby still hate the technology though.

Any idea what happens to the filters when they are all clogged up.

I've seen these filters taken out of the chimneys or whatever you call them, and just hosed down with a high pressure hose before being allowed to dry and then being used again.
That don't seem very sensible to me. But there again I'm no chemist so maybe it is safe.