guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

or it would if I had one.

I feel like I'm going crazy...global warming is a widely accepted thing, ya?  And it's link to greenhouse gases, esp CO2?

Dec 06 12 12:38 am Link

Photographer

Paolo Diavolo

Posts: 8799

Martinez, California, US

i got a soul to squeeze.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhak4rZVwv1qgi5aqo1_500.gif

Dec 06 12 02:43 am Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Paolo Diavolo wrote:
i got a soul to squeeze.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lhak4rZVwv1qgi5aqo1_500.gif

She sure loves that horse...

Seriously, I feel like I'm in the twilight zone

Dec 06 12 09:40 am Link

Photographer

MesmerEyes Photography

Posts: 3033

Tyler, Texas, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
or it would if I had one.

I feel like I'm going crazy...global warming is a widely accepted thing, ya?  And it's link to greenhouse gases, esp CO2?

So we should kill all the cows because they produce and excrete the most methane for a giant BBQ. Then we should stop buying imported goods because the ships used to get them here use the most diesel, not to mention the unemployment rate would drop like a rock. Then we should all smoke cigs to decrease the amount of oxygen we breath, added bonus the tobacco plants would use more of the CO2. Then we should plant trees where all the cattle used to be. After that we all get an iron deficiency and die younger so we use even less oxygen and fuel. Problem solved at least until we end up in an ice age.

Anybody else got an idea?

Dec 06 12 01:21 pm Link

Photographer

Toto Photo

Posts: 2792

Belmont, California, US

You sound sane to me, in a crazy world where people seem to be ignoring the problem. Maybe take a break, go lie prone on a horse.

Dec 06 12 04:57 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:

So we should kill all the cows because they produce and excrete the most methane for a giant BBQ. Then we should stop buying imported goods because the ships used to get them here use the most diesel, not to mention the unemployment rate would drop like a rock. Then we should all smoke cigs to decrease the amount of oxygen we breath, added bonus the tobacco plants would use more of the CO2. Then we should plant trees where all the cattle used to be. After that we all get an iron deficiency and die younger so we use even less oxygen and fuel. Problem solved at least until we end up in an ice age.

Anybody else got an idea?

You saw the thread, you know my suggestions and how I back it up.  If you want to debate it, go back there.  This thread is merely asking what the common accepted theory is.  Not what's the best form of energy is or how we fix the defaults of them.

Dec 06 12 05:01 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Toto Photo wrote:
You sound sane to me, in a crazy world where people seem to be ignoring the problem. Maybe take a break, go lie prone on a horse.

I talked to my colleagues and I feel better about my sanity now.  It's still widely accepted (at least in the scientific community), most people are aware of where the data and facts point.  I just didn't realize that there was anyone debating it.

Dec 06 12 05:05 pm Link

Photographer

MesmerEyes Photography

Posts: 3033

Tyler, Texas, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

You saw the thread, you know my suggestions and how I back it up.  If you want to debate it, go back there.  This thread is merely asking what the common accepted theory is.  Not what's the best form of energy is or how we fix the defaults of them.

You are in SF2. I was merely pointing to an absurd way of solving a problem that would most likely exist even if we didn't. Theories are just that theory.

Dec 07 12 08:15 am Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:

You are in SF2. I was merely pointing to an absurd way of solving a problem that would most likely exist even if we didn't. Theories are just that theory.

Yes, you are in SF2 and trying to duplicate a discussion that you are already involved in from OT.  I am not about to restate everything already said in that thread.

Dec 07 12 08:20 am Link

Photographer

MesmerEyes Photography

Posts: 3033

Tyler, Texas, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
Yes, you are in SF2 and trying to duplicate a discussion that you are already involved in from OT.  I am not about to restate everything already said in that thread.

So you took me for being serious? lol

Dec 07 12 08:34 am Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:

So you took me for being serious? lol

It sounded sarcastic in the approach but serious on your stance.

Dec 07 12 08:47 am Link

Photographer

MesmerEyes Photography

Posts: 3033

Tyler, Texas, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

It sounded sarcastic in the approach but serious on your stance.

I'm 99.99% sure I almost never post anything serious in SF2. It may happen but only when the OP needs a pick me up/compliment or I'm explaining that we are in SF2 and serious discussions belong elsewhere. So no harm no foul. big_smile

Dec 07 12 09:01 am Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:

I'm 99.99% sure I almost never post anything serious in SF2. It may happen but only when the OP needs a pick me up/compliment or I'm explaining that we are in SF2 and serious discussions belong elsewhere. So no harm no foul. big_smile

No worries.  The "anyone else got an idea?" just made it around a bit combative and I don't know your personality.

Dec 07 12 09:04 am Link

Photographer

MesmerEyes Photography

Posts: 3033

Tyler, Texas, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

No worries.  The "anyone else got an idea?" just made it around a bit combative and I don't know your personality.

It's hard to hear my voice in the forums too, but if you go outside you maybe be able to hear it better as long as you get there before the sound waves pass you. lol.

/thread jack big_smile

Dec 07 12 09:16 am Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:

It's hard to hear my voice in the forums too, but if you go outside you maybe be able to hear it better as long as you get there before the sound waves pass you. lol.

/thread jack big_smile

tongue

Dec 07 12 09:19 am Link

Photographer

David Weiss

Posts: 7130

Oshkosh, Wisconsin, US

The cows just replaced the buffalo for methane creation. 

If anything is screwing us it's volcanoes!  Kilauea is currently cranking 700 tons of sulphur dioxide a day, and people are bitching about a power plant that cranks out 230 tons a year.  The highest rate I've seen on that volcano was 12,000 tons per day during an new eruption phase.

That's just the sulphur dioxide, they don't even monitor how much CO2 it's spewing. And then there's the other 150+ volcanoes either in eruption or minor fumerolic activity adding to that.

Dec 07 12 09:34 am Link

Photographer

Toto Photo

Posts: 2792

Belmont, California, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

I talked to my colleagues and I feel better about my sanity now.  It's still widely accepted (at least in the scientific community), most people are aware of where the data and facts point.  I just didn't realize that there was anyone debating it.

Unfortunately we still have people on this planet who want to debate the "theory" of evolution. They don't understand there is more than enough evidence to prove it is fact. In the same small-minded way those who have a vested interest in burning carbons (oil companies, car owners) may have trouble accepting the fact that measured carbon (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere has been rising along with global temperatures.

Most people are reticent to change, especially if it is going to cost them something. I have hope that we won't poison ourselves to death as rats or bacteria will, but I am a bit of an optimist too.

Dec 07 12 11:35 am Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

David Weiss wrote:
The cows just replaced the buffalo for methane creation. 

If anything is screwing us it's volcanoes!  Kilauea is currently cranking 700 tons of sulphur dioxide a day, and people are bitching about a power plant that cranks out 230 tons a year.  The highest rate I've seen on that volcano was 12,000 tons per day during an new eruption phase.

That's just the sulphur dioxide, they don't even monitor how much CO2 it's spewing. And then there's the other 150+ volcanoes either in eruption or minor fumerolic activity adding to that.

It's true that the Earth goes through these periods on it's own but aren't we still speeding up the process?

Dec 07 12 12:13 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Toto Photo wrote:

Unfortunately we still have people on this planet who want to debate the "theory" of evolution. They don't understand there is more than enough evidence to prove it is fact. In the same small-minded way those who have a vested interest in burning carbons (oil companies, car owners) may have trouble accepting the fact that measured carbon (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere has been rising along with global temperatures.

Most people are reticent to change, especially if it is going to cost them something. I have hope that we won't poison ourselves to death as rats or bacteria will, but I am a bit of an optimist too.

Heh that's true...I really hope none of those people end up in here!

Dec 07 12 12:14 pm Link

Photographer

Toto Photo

Posts: 2792

Belmont, California, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
It's true that the Earth goes through these periods on it's own but aren't we still speeding up the process?

Immensely!

Dec 07 12 12:35 pm Link

Model

Kitty LaRose

Posts: 12715

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

roll Psh. A bunch of liberal propaganda.































(just kidding. don't kill me.)

Dec 08 12 07:28 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Kitty LaRose wrote:
roll Psh. A bunch of liberal propaganda.































(just kidding. don't kill me.)

lol  Iz okay, I know you're smarter than that  tongue

Dec 08 12 10:39 pm Link

Model

Kitty LaRose

Posts: 12715

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
lol  Iz okay, I know you're smarter than that  tongue

tongue Well, I do think some of it is propaganda...but yes, it is a problem.

Dec 09 12 02:58 pm Link

Photographer

Svend

Posts: 25127

Boulder, Colorado, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

You saw the thread, you know my suggestions and how I back it up.  If you want to debate it, go back there.  This thread is merely asking what the common accepted theory is.  Not what's the best form of energy is or how we fix the defaults of them.

Common accepted theory among the scientific community...   the only community that matters in this case, the consensus is 13,950 to 24 (or, 0.17% disagreement)

SOURCE: Science Magazine December 2004, Vol. 306 no.5702 P.1686 Essays on Science and Society, BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER, The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change.

Dec 10 12 02:34 pm Link

Photographer

Svend

Posts: 25127

Boulder, Colorado, US

Toto Photo wrote:

Unfortunately we still have people on this planet who want to debate the "theory" of evolution. They don't understand there is more than enough evidence to prove it is fact. In the same small-minded way those who have a vested interest in burning carbons (oil companies, car owners) may have trouble accepting the fact that measured carbon (and other greenhouse gases) in the atmosphere has been rising along with global temperatures.

Most people are reticent to change, especially if it is going to cost them something. I have hope that we won't poison ourselves to death as rats or bacteria will, but I am a bit of an optimist too.

It's the raging case of anti-intellectualism that is spreading like herpes in this country.

Dec 10 12 02:36 pm Link

Photographer

udor

Posts: 22387

New York, New York, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
or it would if I had one.

I feel like I'm going crazy...global warming is a widely accepted thing, ya?  And it's link to greenhouse gases, esp CO2?

Biggest culprit of greenhouse gases, hands down, no contest is the meat producing industry... most inefficient use of resources including water... tremendous waste of energy producing one unit of animal protein, uses (wastes) 5 units of (valuable) plant protein etc.

Only way to reduce all that waste is if Americans cut down their meat consumption... starting at only 20% less. They eat anyway twice as much meat as the rest of the industrialized nations and even more than that considering world wide comparison.

It's a start!

Dec 11 12 03:31 pm Link

Photographer

Lawrence Guy

Posts: 17683

Spring Valley, California, US

MesmerEyes Photography wrote:
... Theories are just that theory.

Lovely.

Keep repeating that.

Maybe someday look up the scientific definition of theory.

Dec 11 12 03:36 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Svend wrote:

Common accepted theory among the scientific community...   the only community that matters in this case, the consensus is 13,950 to 24 (or, 0.17% disagreement)

SOURCE: Science Magazine December 2004, Vol. 306 no.5702 P.1686 Essays on Science and Society, BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER, The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change.

I didn't know they actually did that, awesome!

Know if there's a more current one?

Dec 11 12 05:11 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Svend wrote:
It's the raging case of anti-intellectualism that is spreading like herpes in this country.

I think the official term is "denialism".  We actually learned about it in bio...20 or so minutes of my life that I'll never get back.

Dec 11 12 05:12 pm Link

Photographer

scrymettet

Posts: 32268

Quebec, Quebec, Canada

my money is on Life.

Dec 11 12 05:22 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

udor wrote:

Biggest culprit of greenhouse gases, hands down, no contest is the meat producing industry... most inefficient use of resources including water... tremendous waste of energy producing one unit of animal protein, uses (wastes) 5 units of (valuable) plant protein etc.

Only way to reduce all that waste is if Americans cut down their meat consumption... starting at only 20% less. They eat anyway twice as much meat as the rest of the industrialized nations and even more than that considering world wide comparison.

It's a start!

I've heard that the biggest contributor is animal waste (waste physically produced by an animal naturally) but it is impossible to find any concrete data!  Any of the official data collected that I can find is only based on those GH gases produced by people.

Dec 11 12 05:32 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Lawrence Guy wrote:

Lovely.

Keep repeating that.

Maybe someday look up the scientific definition of theory.

Depends how he's saying it...yes, it has been proven.  However, the nature of scientific experiments also means that it *can* be disproven.  It hasn't, but it's not impossible.

Dec 11 12 05:33 pm Link

Photographer

Lawrence Guy

Posts: 17683

Spring Valley, California, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
I've heard that the biggest contributor is animal waste (waste physically produced by an animal naturally) but it is impossible to find any concrete data!  Any of the official data collected that I can find is only based on those GH gases produced by people.

I don't see how animal waste can be an issue, since they're not putting anything into the environment that wasn't taken out in their food - unless they're eating fossil fuels or something. The food->excrement->soil->food cycle should be a closed loop.

Dec 11 12 05:35 pm Link

Photographer

Jerry Nemeth

Posts: 28000

Dearborn, Michigan, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:
or it would if I had one.

I feel like I'm going crazy...global warming is a widely accepted thing, ya?  And it's link to greenhouse gases, esp CO2?

"In essence, trees and other plants "inhale" CO2 and "exhale" oxygen, while we humans and other animals do the opposite. We literally couldn't survive without trees.

Next time you're in the woods think about all the trees "breathing" around you and remember that without them we wouldn't have the oxygen we need to breath.

So plant a tree today, then take a deep, satisfying breath and give yourself a pat on the back for helping keep our air fresh."

Dec 11 12 05:35 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Lawrence Guy wrote:

I don't see how animal waste can be an issue, since they're not putting anything into the environment that wasn't taken out in their food - unless they're eating fossil fuels or something. The food->excrement->soil->food cycle should be a closed loop.

They may mean captive animals that are fed food produced by humans...who the frick knows what chemicals they put in that?

Dec 11 12 05:37 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

"In essence, trees and other plants "inhale" CO2 and "exhale" oxygen, while we humans and other animals do the opposite. We literally couldn't survive without trees.

Next time you're in the woods think about all the trees "breathing" around you and remember that without them we wouldn't have the oxygen we need to breath.

So plant a tree today, then take a deep, satisfying breath and give yourself a pat on the back for helping keep our air fresh."

There are more Greenhouse gases than CO2.  I also, don't know the ratio of oxygen produced by photosynthesis vs CO2 produced by respiration...pretty sure that CO2 is in the lead on that.  Even if it's not, CO2 is the least of our problems.

Dec 11 12 05:41 pm Link

Photographer

Lawrence Guy

Posts: 17683

Spring Valley, California, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

They may mean captive animals that are fed food produced by humans...who the frick knows what chemicals they put in that?

The direct cause in that case wouldn't be the animal waste, but the non-organic feed.

Dec 11 12 05:42 pm Link

Photographer

udor

Posts: 22387

New York, New York, US

Sha-Lynne wrote:

I've heard that the biggest contributor is animal waste (waste physically produced by an animal naturally) but it is impossible to find any concrete data!  Any of the official data collected that I can find is only based on those GH gases produced by people.

No, those data are available!

I'll find them for you another time!

Dec 11 12 05:58 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

Lawrence Guy wrote:

The direct cause in that case wouldn't be the animal waste, but the non-organic feed.

Not if it becomes a GH gas during digestion.

Dec 11 12 07:50 pm Link

guide forum

Model

Sha-Lynne

Posts: 22681

Las Vegas, Nevada, US

udor wrote:

No, those data are available!

I'll find them for you another time!

Cool, thx.

Dec 11 12 07:51 pm Link